Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 14,668
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 504
I Root For: CinCity Pride
Location:
Post: #1
USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
https://t.co/os8Ag0CFS1

The annual report of NCAA Finances came out today (public schools only). UC athletics $61,778,960 in revenue and $64,755,303 in expenses. 47% of our athletic department budget is being financed through subsidies. I suspect to see the annual editorial from a UC Faculty member in the Enquirer in the few days.

Couple thoughts: Obviously this data is from FY 2018, which means was CLF's first year (4-8) and hoops was playing at NKU. This resulted in some additional expenses and a decrease in ticket sales. I expect the numbers for FY19 to look world's better. I still think UC needs to consider a revenue drive, ala the 1819 campaign we did a decade again (everyone donate $18.19). Second, I think the school should consider raising ticket prices for both FB and hoops. We need additional streams of revenue.
 
08-13-2019 08:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

BearcatMan Offline
Kicking Connoisseur/Occasional Man Crush
*

Posts: 13,831
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 202
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #2
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 08:35 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  https://t.co/os8Ag0CFS1

The annual report of NCAA Finances came out today (public schools only). UC athletics $61,778,960 in revenue and $64,755,303 in expenses. 47% of our athletic department budget is being financed through subsidies. I suspect to see the annual editorial from a UC Faculty member in the Enquirer in the few days.

Couple thoughts: Obviously this data is from FY 2018, which means was CLF's first year (4-8) and hoops was playing at NKU. This resulted in some additional expenses and a decrease in ticket sales. I expect the numbers for FY19 to look world's better. I still think UC needs to consider a revenue drive, ala the 1819 campaign we did a decade again (everyone donate $18.19). Second, I think the school should consider raising ticket prices for both FB and hoops. We need additional streams of revenue.

I brought this up in another thread and think it makes tons of sense...an additional $5-$10 a ticket won't turn people away, but has the potential to add $350,000/game in football and $100,000 in basketball. Across a year of games, and even subjecting the estimates to some melt from loss of attendance, we'd be looking at another ~$3,000,000 in ticket revenue across two sports, which doesn't sound like a lot given the numbers above, but it would cut away about 5% of the general fund subsidy. With continued success, that isn't a hard ask, as the tickets will become more sought after as well. I agree however...these numbers will look worlds better in the 18-19 FY report.
 
08-13-2019 08:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BearcatMan Offline
Kicking Connoisseur/Occasional Man Crush
*

Posts: 13,831
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 202
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #3
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
Every time I look at a report like this, it further solidifies my belief that the MAC will be the first FBS conference to fall. Just way too many warning signs...
 
08-13-2019 08:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 14,668
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 504
I Root For: CinCity Pride
Location:
Post: #4
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 08:55 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Every time I look at a report like this, it further solidifies my belief that the MAC will be the first FBS conference to fall. Just way too many warning signs...

You and I have discussed this before but within our borders Wright State, Cleveland State, Akron and BGSU are Dead Men Walking. They won't exist in their current form 15 years from now. Those schools have money issues that extend beyond their athletic departments.

Wright State will be the first domino to fall.
 
08-13-2019 09:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BearcatMan Offline
Kicking Connoisseur/Occasional Man Crush
*

Posts: 13,831
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 202
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #5
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 09:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 08:55 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Every time I look at a report like this, it further solidifies my belief that the MAC will be the first FBS conference to fall. Just way too many warning signs...

You and I have discussed this before but within our borders Wright State, Cleveland State, Akron and BGSU are Dead Men Walking. They won't exist in their current form 15 years from now. Those schools have money issues that extend beyond their athletic departments.

Wright State will be the first domino to fall.

I foresee Wright State and Cleveland State falling WELL before any other institutions, and I'm with you on Wright State. If they weren't tied into the research programming at WPAFB they'd be gone already with all of the budgetary issues along with the H1 immigration problems they've had in the recent past. The other will likely consolidate into regional educational consortia and I don't know if Toledo or BGSU will be the reason behind that in NW Ohio honestly. Toledo does bring in tons more overhead from research heavy areas and has more invested in future driven educational areas (engineering, medicine, health/human sciences, pharmacy, and nursing), but there are going to be huge bumps in the road for both...sooner rather than later. Luckily the state bumped the SSI for all institutions and allowed schools to increase tuition for the first time in 6 years for both this year as a part of the approved budget, but that probably won't balance off the enrollment losses you're going to see reported from most of the secondary institutions in the state this fall.

I posted this in the Toledo forum because I'm also a fan (among other things) of that University...but here are the net losses from each MAC AD last year (alphabetically).

Akron: ($24,561,565)
Ball State: ($20,570,246)
Bowling Green: ($13,739,315)
Buffalo: ($30,741,575)
Central Michigan: ($22,929,107)
Eastern Michigan: ($21,908,659)
Kent State: ($21,511,752)
Northern Illinois: ($15,606,856)
Miami (Ohio): ($25,840,399)
Ohio: ($22,391,704)
Toledo: ($20,883,227)
Western Michigan: ($26,296,565)

Now those numbers alone are crazy to think about, but when you couple that with the FACT that 7 of those institutions operate at a yearly loss, and all but one of those institutions operate with a net "profit" AS AN INSTITUTION of less than $500,000/year, you're going to have huge issues trying to justify continued operation of a department that loses you that much money per year. As a measure of expenses, the athletics departments at most of these institutions contribute anywhere between 3%-6% while only contributing around .2%-.4% to their institution's operating revenue. It's a complete loss and something that needs to start being looked at more thoroughly as cuts are made at multiple institutions without affecting the ADs there.

Luckily schools like UC, UCF, USF, Houston, etc. have the benefit of seeing continued increases in tuition revenue and giving from increased enrollment or smart financial moves, but schools in the MAC are running into issues because those values are dropping as well since most have seen contraction of student bodies and alumni bases. It's a zero sum game for them, and I don't see the current state of things lasting much more than a decade. The issue we run into now is that education isn't a re-electable policy platform when you're talking about reorganization at the fundamental level that I think our state needs. Most of the educators will rally against you from one side, and the other side will wonder why you're worrying about education reform to begin with, and that's all our politicians care about. The BOR for the state don't care because most, if not all, are tied in some way to the Goliath and don't want to lose their position for fear of reducing their 5 Year Average for OPERS/STERS.
 
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2019 09:53 AM by BearcatMan.)
08-13-2019 09:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OKIcat Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,206
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #6
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 09:48 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 09:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 08:55 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Every time I look at a report like this, it further solidifies my belief that the MAC will be the first FBS conference to fall. Just way too many warning signs...

You and I have discussed this before but within our borders Wright State, Cleveland State, Akron and BGSU are Dead Men Walking. They won't exist in their current form 15 years from now. Those schools have money issues that extend beyond their athletic departments.

Wright State will be the first domino to fall.

I foresee Wright State and Cleveland State falling WELL before any other institutions, and I'm with you on Wright State. If they weren't tied into the research programming at WPAFB they'd be gone already with all of the budgetary issues along with the H1 immigration problems they've had in the recent past. The other will likely consolidate into regional educational consortia and I don't know if Toledo or BGSU will be the reason behind that in NW Ohio honestly. Toledo does bring in tons more overhead from research heavy areas and has more invested in future driven educational areas (engineering, medicine, health/human sciences, pharmacy, and nursing), but there are going to be huge bumps in the road for both...sooner rather than later. Luckily the state bumped the SSI for all institutions and allowed schools to increase tuition for the first time in 6 years for both this year as a part of the approved budget, but that probably won't balance off the enrollment losses you're going to see reported from most of the secondary institutions in the state this fall.

I posted this in the Toledo forum because I'm also a fan (among other things) of that University...but here are the net losses from each MAC AD last year (alphabetically).

Akron: ($24,561,565)
Ball State: ($20,570,246)
Bowling Green: ($13,739,315)
Buffalo: ($30,741,575)
Central Michigan: ($22,929,107)
Eastern Michigan: ($21,908,659)
Kent State: ($21,511,752)
Northern Illinois: ($15,606,856)
Miami (Ohio): ($25,840,399)
Ohio: ($22,391,704)
Toledo: ($20,883,227)
Western Michigan: ($26,296,565)

Now those numbers alone are crazy to think about, but when you couple that with the FACT that 7 of those institutions operate at a yearly loss, and all but one of those institutions operate with a net "profit" AS AN INSTITUTION of less than $500,000/year, you're going to have huge issues trying to justify continued operation of a department that loses you that much money per year. As a measure of expenses, the athletics departments at most of these institutions contribute anywhere between 3%-6% while only contributing around .2%-.4% to their institution's operating revenue. It's a complete loss and something that needs to start being looked at more thoroughly as cuts are made at multiple institutions without affecting the ADs there.

Luckily schools like UC, UCF, USF, Houston, etc. have the benefit of seeing continued increases in tuition revenue and giving from increased enrollment or smart financial moves, but schools in the MAC are running into issues because those values are dropping as well since most have seen contraction of student bodies and alumni bases. It's a zero sum game for them, and I don't see the current state of things lasting much more than a decade. The issue we run into now is that education isn't a re-electable policy platform when you're talking about reorganization at the fundamental level that I think our state needs. Most of the educators will rally against you from one side, and the other side will wonder why you're worrying about education reform to begin with, and that's all our politicians care about. The BOR for the state don't care because most, if not all, are tied in some way to the Goliath and don't want to lose their position for fear of reducing their 5 Year Average for OPERS/STERS.

Your analysis is excellent and I agree with your conclusion. Every citizen says we should cut spending--except for that military base down the road from my house, or that highway that needs resurfacing, or, in this case, the "local" university. There will tremendous blowback when it's suggested that Shawnee State no longer needs to exist and even more when some of the old lions in Ohio such as BG or Akron close or consolidate. It will take courageous leadership which is often in short supply in state governments.
 
08-13-2019 11:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

MickMack Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,858
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 247
I Root For: UC!
Location:
Post: #7
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 09:48 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 09:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 08:55 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Every time I look at a report like this, it further solidifies my belief that the MAC will be the first FBS conference to fall. Just way too many warning signs...

You and I have discussed this before but within our borders Wright State, Cleveland State, Akron and BGSU are Dead Men Walking. They won't exist in their current form 15 years from now. Those schools have money issues that extend beyond their athletic departments.

Wright State will be the first domino to fall.

I foresee Wright State and Cleveland State falling WELL before any other institutions, and I'm with you on Wright State. If they weren't tied into the research programming at WPAFB they'd be gone already with all of the budgetary issues along with the H1 immigration problems they've had in the recent past. The other will likely consolidate into regional educational consortia and I don't know if Toledo or BGSU will be the reason behind that in NW Ohio honestly. Toledo does bring in tons more overhead from research heavy areas and has more invested in future driven educational areas (engineering, medicine, health/human sciences, pharmacy, and nursing), but there are going to be huge bumps in the road for both...sooner rather than later. Luckily the state bumped the SSI for all institutions and allowed schools to increase tuition for the first time in 6 years for both this year as a part of the approved budget, but that probably won't balance off the enrollment losses you're going to see reported from most of the secondary institutions in the state this fall.

I posted this in the Toledo forum because I'm also a fan (among other things) of that University...but here are the net losses from each MAC AD last year (alphabetically).

Akron: ($24,561,565)
Ball State: ($20,570,246)
Bowling Green: ($13,739,315)
Buffalo: ($30,741,575)
Central Michigan: ($22,929,107)
Eastern Michigan: ($21,908,659)
Kent State: ($21,511,752)
Northern Illinois: ($15,606,856)
Miami (Ohio): ($25,840,399)
Ohio: ($22,391,704)
Toledo: ($20,883,227)
Western Michigan: ($26,296,565)

Now those numbers alone are crazy to think about, but when you couple that with the FACT that 7 of those institutions operate at a yearly loss, and all but one of those institutions operate with a net "profit" AS AN INSTITUTION of less than $500,000/year, you're going to have huge issues trying to justify continued operation of a department that loses you that much money per year. As a measure of expenses, the athletics departments at most of these institutions contribute anywhere between 3%-6% while only contributing around .2%-.4% to their institution's operating revenue. It's a complete loss and something that needs to start being looked at more thoroughly as cuts are made at multiple institutions without affecting the ADs there.

Luckily schools like UC, UCF, USF, Houston, etc. have the benefit of seeing continued increases in tuition revenue and giving from increased enrollment or smart financial moves, but schools in the MAC are running into issues because those values are dropping as well since most have seen contraction of student bodies and alumni bases. It's a zero sum game for them, and I don't see the current state of things lasting much more than a decade. The issue we run into now is that education isn't a re-electable policy platform when you're talking about reorganization at the fundamental level that I think our state needs. Most of the educators will rally against you from one side, and the other side will wonder why you're worrying about education reform to begin with, and that's all our politicians care about. The BOR for the state don't care because most, if not all, are tied in some way to the Goliath and don't want to lose their position for fear of reducing their 5 Year Average for OPERS/STERS.

Wow. Just wow. I knew it was dire at that level. I had no idea it was this bad.
 
08-13-2019 01:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OKIcat Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,206
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #8
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 01:26 PM)MickMack Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 09:48 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 09:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 08:55 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Every time I look at a report like this, it further solidifies my belief that the MAC will be the first FBS conference to fall. Just way too many warning signs...

You and I have discussed this before but within our borders Wright State, Cleveland State, Akron and BGSU are Dead Men Walking. They won't exist in their current form 15 years from now. Those schools have money issues that extend beyond their athletic departments.

Wright State will be the first domino to fall.

I foresee Wright State and Cleveland State falling WELL before any other institutions, and I'm with you on Wright State. If they weren't tied into the research programming at WPAFB they'd be gone already with all of the budgetary issues along with the H1 immigration problems they've had in the recent past. The other will likely consolidate into regional educational consortia and I don't know if Toledo or BGSU will be the reason behind that in NW Ohio honestly. Toledo does bring in tons more overhead from research heavy areas and has more invested in future driven educational areas (engineering, medicine, health/human sciences, pharmacy, and nursing), but there are going to be huge bumps in the road for both...sooner rather than later. Luckily the state bumped the SSI for all institutions and allowed schools to increase tuition for the first time in 6 years for both this year as a part of the approved budget, but that probably won't balance off the enrollment losses you're going to see reported from most of the secondary institutions in the state this fall.

I posted this in the Toledo forum because I'm also a fan (among other things) of that University...but here are the net losses from each MAC AD last year (alphabetically).

Akron: ($24,561,565)
Ball State: ($20,570,246)
Bowling Green: ($13,739,315)
Buffalo: ($30,741,575)
Central Michigan: ($22,929,107)
Eastern Michigan: ($21,908,659)
Kent State: ($21,511,752)
Northern Illinois: ($15,606,856)
Miami (Ohio): ($25,840,399)
Ohio: ($22,391,704)
Toledo: ($20,883,227)
Western Michigan: ($26,296,565)

Now those numbers alone are crazy to think about, but when you couple that with the FACT that 7 of those institutions operate at a yearly loss, and all but one of those institutions operate with a net "profit" AS AN INSTITUTION of less than $500,000/year, you're going to have huge issues trying to justify continued operation of a department that loses you that much money per year. As a measure of expenses, the athletics departments at most of these institutions contribute anywhere between 3%-6% while only contributing around .2%-.4% to their institution's operating revenue. It's a complete loss and something that needs to start being looked at more thoroughly as cuts are made at multiple institutions without affecting the ADs there.

Luckily schools like UC, UCF, USF, Houston, etc. have the benefit of seeing continued increases in tuition revenue and giving from increased enrollment or smart financial moves, but schools in the MAC are running into issues because those values are dropping as well since most have seen contraction of student bodies and alumni bases. It's a zero sum game for them, and I don't see the current state of things lasting much more than a decade. The issue we run into now is that education isn't a re-electable policy platform when you're talking about reorganization at the fundamental level that I think our state needs. Most of the educators will rally against you from one side, and the other side will wonder why you're worrying about education reform to begin with, and that's all our politicians care about. The BOR for the state don't care because most, if not all, are tied in some way to the Goliath and don't want to lose their position for fear of reducing their 5 Year Average for OPERS/STERS.

Wow. Just wow. I knew it was dire at that level. I had no idea it was this bad.


Yep. As this applies to athletics, the American Conference sits squarely on the fault line where the next big quake will send many G5 programs into the abyss. If (when) that happens, I think only the top tier of the American will move up the ladder to whatever iteration of the P5 exists at that point.
 
08-13-2019 01:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BearcatMan Offline
Kicking Connoisseur/Occasional Man Crush
*

Posts: 13,831
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 202
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #9
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 01:42 PM)OKIcat Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 01:26 PM)MickMack Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 09:48 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 09:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 08:55 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Every time I look at a report like this, it further solidifies my belief that the MAC will be the first FBS conference to fall. Just way too many warning signs...

You and I have discussed this before but within our borders Wright State, Cleveland State, Akron and BGSU are Dead Men Walking. They won't exist in their current form 15 years from now. Those schools have money issues that extend beyond their athletic departments.

Wright State will be the first domino to fall.

I foresee Wright State and Cleveland State falling WELL before any other institutions, and I'm with you on Wright State. If they weren't tied into the research programming at WPAFB they'd be gone already with all of the budgetary issues along with the H1 immigration problems they've had in the recent past. The other will likely consolidate into regional educational consortia and I don't know if Toledo or BGSU will be the reason behind that in NW Ohio honestly. Toledo does bring in tons more overhead from research heavy areas and has more invested in future driven educational areas (engineering, medicine, health/human sciences, pharmacy, and nursing), but there are going to be huge bumps in the road for both...sooner rather than later. Luckily the state bumped the SSI for all institutions and allowed schools to increase tuition for the first time in 6 years for both this year as a part of the approved budget, but that probably won't balance off the enrollment losses you're going to see reported from most of the secondary institutions in the state this fall.

I posted this in the Toledo forum because I'm also a fan (among other things) of that University...but here are the net losses from each MAC AD last year (alphabetically).

Akron: ($24,561,565)
Ball State: ($20,570,246)
Bowling Green: ($13,739,315)
Buffalo: ($30,741,575)
Central Michigan: ($22,929,107)
Eastern Michigan: ($21,908,659)
Kent State: ($21,511,752)
Northern Illinois: ($15,606,856)
Miami (Ohio): ($25,840,399)
Ohio: ($22,391,704)
Toledo: ($20,883,227)
Western Michigan: ($26,296,565)

Now those numbers alone are crazy to think about, but when you couple that with the FACT that 7 of those institutions operate at a yearly loss, and all but one of those institutions operate with a net "profit" AS AN INSTITUTION of less than $500,000/year, you're going to have huge issues trying to justify continued operation of a department that loses you that much money per year. As a measure of expenses, the athletics departments at most of these institutions contribute anywhere between 3%-6% while only contributing around .2%-.4% to their institution's operating revenue. It's a complete loss and something that needs to start being looked at more thoroughly as cuts are made at multiple institutions without affecting the ADs there.

Luckily schools like UC, UCF, USF, Houston, etc. have the benefit of seeing continued increases in tuition revenue and giving from increased enrollment or smart financial moves, but schools in the MAC are running into issues because those values are dropping as well since most have seen contraction of student bodies and alumni bases. It's a zero sum game for them, and I don't see the current state of things lasting much more than a decade. The issue we run into now is that education isn't a re-electable policy platform when you're talking about reorganization at the fundamental level that I think our state needs. Most of the educators will rally against you from one side, and the other side will wonder why you're worrying about education reform to begin with, and that's all our politicians care about. The BOR for the state don't care because most, if not all, are tied in some way to the Goliath and don't want to lose their position for fear of reducing their 5 Year Average for OPERS/STERS.

Wow. Just wow. I knew it was dire at that level. I had no idea it was this bad.


Yep. As this applies to athletics, the American Conference sits squarely on the fault line where the next big quake will send many G5 programs into the abyss. If (when) that happens, I think only the top tier of the American will move up the ladder to whatever iteration of the P5 exists at that point.

Yep...I really don't see a world where the current model is sustainable for most schools in FBS. I could see whole conferences shifting down in the next decade or two into FCS to allow for reduced scholarship and overall expenses for football, or to just drop sports entirely. I've heard some advocate in serious discussions for clearing out all mens sports outside of football and basketball with football going to FCS, then balancing funds for Title IX compliance on the side of women's sports. Doing something like that would probably cut $10MM-$15MM off the bottom line of many Universities in a snap, and that's without re-assessing salaries for coaches and administrators.

The biggest issue is that no one has done it and no one wants to be the first to do it for fear of failure. I really do mean it when I say about 50 athletic departments and University presidents are likely looking at UConn's financial statements in the coming decade with an electron microscope. If it (specifically dropping to FCS should they actually do it) doesn't affect their enrollment numbers or overall University financial health, there will be a lot of schools following suit. Using the previous example you could make a pretty solid football conference just by moving the MAC down without Buffalo with Ball State and NIU likely joining the MO Valley or Pioneer Conference and adding Dayton, Youngstown State, and seeing if GVSU wants to move up.

The thing to think about in comparison to UC is that schools like Akron and Miami lost about as much money as our AD did, however, they only brought in around 30% of what ours did to the University...that's completely unsustainable. Hell, were I a voter in Virginia I'd be all over my elected officials about the mis-management of resources at James Madison. They spent nearly 10% of their budget to subsidize their athletic department ($502M Budget to $41M subsidy) for a department that has an FCS football team and plays in the CAA. That's fiscal irresponsibility of the highest order.
 
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2019 01:57 PM by BearcatMan.)
08-13-2019 01:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nachoman91 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,280
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 45
I Root For: UC Bearcats
Location:
Post: #10
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
James Madison.....WTF? $51M budget. That's crazy.
 
08-13-2019 02:33 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MickMack Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,858
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 247
I Root For: UC!
Location:
Post: #11
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 01:48 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 01:42 PM)OKIcat Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 01:26 PM)MickMack Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 09:48 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 09:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  You and I have discussed this before but within our borders Wright State, Cleveland State, Akron and BGSU are Dead Men Walking. They won't exist in their current form 15 years from now. Those schools have money issues that extend beyond their athletic departments.

Wright State will be the first domino to fall.

I foresee Wright State and Cleveland State falling WELL before any other institutions, and I'm with you on Wright State. If they weren't tied into the research programming at WPAFB they'd be gone already with all of the budgetary issues along with the H1 immigration problems they've had in the recent past. The other will likely consolidate into regional educational consortia and I don't know if Toledo or BGSU will be the reason behind that in NW Ohio honestly. Toledo does bring in tons more overhead from research heavy areas and has more invested in future driven educational areas (engineering, medicine, health/human sciences, pharmacy, and nursing), but there are going to be huge bumps in the road for both...sooner rather than later. Luckily the state bumped the SSI for all institutions and allowed schools to increase tuition for the first time in 6 years for both this year as a part of the approved budget, but that probably won't balance off the enrollment losses you're going to see reported from most of the secondary institutions in the state this fall.

I posted this in the Toledo forum because I'm also a fan (among other things) of that University...but here are the net losses from each MAC AD last year (alphabetically).

Akron: ($24,561,565)
Ball State: ($20,570,246)
Bowling Green: ($13,739,315)
Buffalo: ($30,741,575)
Central Michigan: ($22,929,107)
Eastern Michigan: ($21,908,659)
Kent State: ($21,511,752)
Northern Illinois: ($15,606,856)
Miami (Ohio): ($25,840,399)
Ohio: ($22,391,704)
Toledo: ($20,883,227)
Western Michigan: ($26,296,565)

Now those numbers alone are crazy to think about, but when you couple that with the FACT that 7 of those institutions operate at a yearly loss, and all but one of those institutions operate with a net "profit" AS AN INSTITUTION of less than $500,000/year, you're going to have huge issues trying to justify continued operation of a department that loses you that much money per year. As a measure of expenses, the athletics departments at most of these institutions contribute anywhere between 3%-6% while only contributing around .2%-.4% to their institution's operating revenue. It's a complete loss and something that needs to start being looked at more thoroughly as cuts are made at multiple institutions without affecting the ADs there.

Luckily schools like UC, UCF, USF, Houston, etc. have the benefit of seeing continued increases in tuition revenue and giving from increased enrollment or smart financial moves, but schools in the MAC are running into issues because those values are dropping as well since most have seen contraction of student bodies and alumni bases. It's a zero sum game for them, and I don't see the current state of things lasting much more than a decade. The issue we run into now is that education isn't a re-electable policy platform when you're talking about reorganization at the fundamental level that I think our state needs. Most of the educators will rally against you from one side, and the other side will wonder why you're worrying about education reform to begin with, and that's all our politicians care about. The BOR for the state don't care because most, if not all, are tied in some way to the Goliath and don't want to lose their position for fear of reducing their 5 Year Average for OPERS/STERS.

Wow. Just wow. I knew it was dire at that level. I had no idea it was this bad.


Yep. As this applies to athletics, the American Conference sits squarely on the fault line where the next big quake will send many G5 programs into the abyss. If (when) that happens, I think only the top tier of the American will move up the ladder to whatever iteration of the P5 exists at that point.

Yep...I really don't see a world where the current model is sustainable for most schools in FBS. I could see whole conferences shifting down in the next decade or two into FCS to allow for reduced scholarship and overall expenses for football, or to just drop sports entirely. I've heard some advocate in serious discussions for clearing out all mens sports outside of football and basketball with football going to FCS, then balancing funds for Title IX compliance on the side of women's sports. Doing something like that would probably cut $10MM-$15MM off the bottom line of many Universities in a snap, and that's without re-assessing salaries for coaches and administrators.

The biggest issue is that no one has done it and no one wants to be the first to do it for fear of failure. I really do mean it when I say about 50 athletic departments and University presidents are likely looking at UConn's financial statements in the coming decade with an electron microscope. If it (specifically dropping to FCS should they actually do it) doesn't affect their enrollment numbers or overall University financial health, there will be a lot of schools following suit. Using the previous example you could make a pretty solid football conference just by moving the MAC down without Buffalo with Ball State and NIU likely joining the MO Valley or Pioneer Conference and adding Dayton, Youngstown State, and seeing if GVSU wants to move up.

The thing to think about in comparison to UC is that schools like Akron and Miami lost about as much money as our AD did, however, they only brought in around 30% of what ours did to the University...that's completely unsustainable. Hell, were I a voter in Virginia I'd be all over my elected officials about the mis-management of resources at James Madison. They spent nearly 10% of their budget to subsidize their athletic department ($502M Budget to $41M subsidy) for a department that has an FCS football team and plays in the CAA. That's fiscal irresponsibility of the highest order.

To me the grim reality of all this is that they would have never been able to do this in the years before college tuition loans were handed out in a seemingly limitless fashion. Take away the gravy train and there's no way schools could get away with a subsidy in the range of 10% of the entire university budget.
 
08-13-2019 02:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

BearcatMan Offline
Kicking Connoisseur/Occasional Man Crush
*

Posts: 13,831
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 202
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #12
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 02:40 PM)MickMack Wrote:  To me the grim reality of all this is that they would have never been able to do this in the years before college tuition loans were handed out in a seemingly limitless fashion. Take away the gravy train and there's no way schools could get away with a subsidy in the range of 10% of the entire university budget.

Just for my own clarity, are you suggesting that the schools wouldnt need to do that or that they would not have been able to do that? If it's the former, I think that's a very flawed argument, as the media rights escalations are the reason for the arms race and budget explosions in middling ADs. If it's the latter, I agree to a certain extent, as it would be much harder to hide a $500 fee on a $2000 bill instead of a $12000 bill, however much of the rise in tuition can be attributed to the decrease in state educational funding and increase of administrative bloat...not the loan system that has existed for decades prior to the precipitous rise in tuition.
 
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2019 03:15 PM by BearcatMan.)
08-13-2019 03:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearcat 1985 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 357
Joined: Oct 2016
Reputation: 33
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #13
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 02:40 PM)MickMack Wrote:  To me the grim reality of all this is that they would have never been able to do this in the years before college tuition loans were handed out in a seemingly limitless fashion. Take away the gravy train and there's no way schools could get away with a subsidy in the range of 10% of the entire university budget.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the maximum amount that an undergraduate can take out in student loans either on an annual basis or overall during their undergraduate years is, adjusted for inflation, roughly the same as it was in the 60s and 70s. If that is the case, then clearly tuition isn't rising to meet and sop up this pool of student loan money burning through a student's pockets. There has to be other reasons such as a decline in state support, massive administrative and executive bloat, an arms race in student facilities (see what Miami of Ohio is doing to maintain their attractiveness as Chicago's safety school) and--yes--athletic subsidies..

Now the overall amount of total student loan dollars has risen greatly beyond the rate of inflation, but that's due to more people taking loans out, and that's primarily directed to community colleges, trade schools and for-profit "loan mills" like Phoenix.
 
08-13-2019 03:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MickMack Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,858
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 247
I Root For: UC!
Location:
Post: #14
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 03:13 PM)BearcatMan Wrote:  
(08-13-2019 02:40 PM)MickMack Wrote:  To me the grim reality of all this is that they would have never been able to do this in the years before college tuition loans were handed out in a seemingly limitless fashion. Take away the gravy train and there's no way schools could get away with a subsidy in the range of 10% of the entire university budget.

Just for my own clarity, are you suggesting that the schools wouldnt need to do that or that they would not have been able to do that? If it's the former, I think that's a very flawed argument, as the media rights escalations are the reason for the arms race and budget explosions in middling ADs. If it's the latter, I agree to a certain extent, as it would be much harder to hide a $500 fee on a $2000 bill instead of a $12000 bill, however much of the rise in tuition can be attributed to the decrease in state educational funding and increase of administrative bloat...not the loan system that has existed for decades prior to the precipitous rise in tuition.

The latter.
 
08-13-2019 04:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bruce Monnin Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,049
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 73
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location: Minster, Ohio
Post: #15
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
All these numbers are useless anyway.

If there are a few UC alumni who give a total of $30,000,000 to the school, but would not give anything if there were no sports, then the university is making a profit.

Does anyone know how much of university donations would go away if there was no athletic department? I do not, but I would have no reason to remain connected to the university if not for the athletic department.
 
08-13-2019 04:37 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dsquare Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,772
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Cincy
Location:
Post: #16
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
Does anyone know if the value of a player's scholarship(tuition) is included with the expense number and if so how they cost it? I only ask because if it's the charge to a normal student that is obviously not real out of pocket cost for a variety of reasons.
 
(This post was last modified: 08-13-2019 04:43 PM by dsquare.)
08-13-2019 04:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

QSECOFR Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,347
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation: 75
I Root For: Walter Williams
Location:
Post: #17
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 04:42 PM)dsquare Wrote:  Does anyone know if the value of a player's scholarship(tuition) is included with the expense number and if so how they cost it? I only ask because if it's the charge to a normal student that is obviously not real out of pocket cost for a variety of reasons.

All public institutions use Fund Accounting as opposed to Accrual Accounting that most people are used to because of the Ohio Revised Code.

The tuition expense of someone on scholarship (athletic or otherwise) is the list price of a student attending the school. If UC recruits a player who is a legal resident of Ohio, the expense is the same as so-called "in state tuition". If UC recruits an athlete who is a legal resident outside of Ohio, the expense is the same as "out of state tuition" except in cases where there is some sort of reciprocity agreement.

Therein lies the rub. Under fund accounting, the school shows a "deficit" as there is no concept of profit/loss under fund accounting. If the books were restated to use accrual accounting, schools might make a profit. It is hard to tell since accrual accounting would depreciate the value of buildings, equipment, etc. Under fund accounting, the expense is 100% recognized in the year that the asset is placed in service.

Excluding the depreciation of assets, the vast majority of schools are making a very handsome profit if the results were stated using accrual GAAP.
 
08-13-2019 04:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearcat 1985 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 357
Joined: Oct 2016
Reputation: 33
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #18
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-13-2019 04:37 PM)Bruce Monnin Wrote:  All these numbers are useless anyway.

If there are a few UC alumni who give a total of $30,000,000 to the school, but would not give anything if there were no sports, then the university is making a profit.

Does anyone know how much of university donations would go away if there was no athletic department? I do not, but I would have no reason to remain connected to the university if not for the athletic department.

But do we know that's the case? Most people who donate large sums to academics do so to support academics, and sports has nothing to do with it.
 
08-14-2019 06:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoCats1994 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 108
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Bearcats
Location:
Post: #19
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
The issue is broader than athletics. The need for brick and mortar is being reduced/going away in every industry - this includes education. Universities have built vast expanses of facilities that are not sustainable going forward. AD's are an easy target when talking about deficits... but the current/old model of higher education will be going the way of the dodo bird.
 
08-14-2019 06:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bearcat 1985 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 357
Joined: Oct 2016
Reputation: 33
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #20
RE: USA TODAY 2017-18 NCAA l Finances
(08-14-2019 06:26 AM)GoCats1994 Wrote:  The issue is broader than athletics. The need for brick and mortar is being reduced/going away in every industry - this includes education. Universities have built vast expanses of facilities that are not sustainable going forward. AD's are an easy target when talking about deficits... but the current/old model of higher education will be going the way of the dodo bird.

Kids who can, academically and financially, go to a real college will always do so. One can see that in the current admissions mania of parents to get their kids into the best possible college. Now that doesn't mean that there won't be losers, particularly in Ohio with its over built, redundant system and challenging demographics. But selective privates and big ten type flagships will still be going strong fifty years from now. The question for a school like UC is what decisions need to be made now to ensure that we're among the group of winners.
 
08-14-2019 07:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.