Iowa Slips to 16th, still fourth in the Big Ten. The gaps are huge. Oregan up $86 Million Vs. Last year at $196M, Iowa at $102M.
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
2015 NCAA Top College Revenue
- Thread starter BigDelHawk
- Start date
How accurate is this? For Minnesota to make more money than Iowa and MSU seems really odd. Especially for MSU to actually be losing money in athletics? Minnesota to be breaking even and Iowa only up 3 million. Just seems weird to me.
That's because the donations jumped $80M!!!
They have more in donations than schools 10 & below do in total revenue :crazy:
All that sweat shop $
Iowa State ranks 6th to last among P5 teams. Further cementing their 'up in the air' status should the Big 12 break up.
As long as we value sports above all else, it is sustainable. When we realize that sports is only entertainment, and not "oxygen", these revenues will drop.
We've complained about spending too much on sports for 150 years. Europe has probably complained longer.
School funds, ticket sales and 'other' is where they make it up. Not sure why Iowa gets student fees for a profitable operation.
You have to be very careful about these things, because they all seem to count different things differently. Probably a fairly accurate overall impression, but might be skewed by major fund drives, that kind of thing. And I don't know what constitutes a subsidy....ISU and Iowa are both shown receiving one, but neither gets any state tax money. Maybe it refers to student activity fees.
It is not extremely difficult to filter the information and compare/contrast programs. This, 'oh, it is not the same...' excuse from you is stale.
As for the 'subsidy", each Iowa and isu utilize student fees to supplement revenues. In comparison, Nebraska does not derive income from student fees. Another item to be gleaned is when the state schools last received revenue via the general fund (state generated tax dollars) for athletic operations and to what degree (amounts) those funds were utilized.
Puts another spotlight on the school that we hear has surpassed Iowa in nearly every means imaginable (except for on the field, court, track and administratively). Other than that, it all looks good!
Another thing to consider is Iowa's athletic budget includes all things athletics-- tuition, medical, salaries, travel, insurance, utilities, and payments (including bond and loan) for buildings. Not all schools athletic programs are on the hook for all those same things so it's not necessarily an apples to apples comparison.
Yeah, that was the point I was trying to make. The reports required by the NCAA are pretty specific, so it's a fair approximation, but the big imponderable is major construction projects that can artificially inflate the numbers. You aren't going to renovate Kinnick every year.
Not just that, but quite often athletic facilities are paid for out of a general university budget, not an athletic department budget.
In other states, you mean, and you are no doubt correct. There are a lot of differences. Before CHA was built, the basketball team played in the Fieldhouse, but the AD didn't pay anything for utilities or maintenance there. Up until a few years ago, Hilton was a part of the ISU Center instead of the AD, so the AD had to pay rent every time it was used. It isn't that one way is necessarily better or worse than another; the point is that the expenses that all schools have are not handled the same way by the bean counters at every school.
Don't put faith in these numbers; Typically USA Today, like all Gannett newspapers, manages to simplify the truth away. It isn't even possible to determine what year the data is for---but probably FY 2012 given that is the last fiscal year that the NCAA has received the data & reviewed it. Also bear in mind that the reported data is the final figures required by the NCAA, not the numbers from raw data: the myriad eccentricities of NCAA rules allow more than a little creative accounting. For example, because donations etc result most years in black ink beyond expenditures for the U of Iowa athletic programs, the AD has been able to pay down future annual payments on the Kinnick upgrade and other capital expenditures of the 21st Century ahead of schedule (thus saving large amounts of interest); and, in consequence of this premature "expense", the actual revenue and profit are understated.
Similarly, the roughly 300 PUBLIC colleges & universities in the report clearly do not calculate in the same manner or to the same extent: it is my understanding that Iowa & Iowa State report both revenue & expenditures that relate to such matters as athletic staff who teach or treat, etc non-athletes, as well as janitorial, technical, clerical, etc services (for example, when Iowa AD Bump Elliott had U telephone servicemen install wiretap devices on Bruce Pearl's home phone 25 years ago,so he could record the details of U of Illinois huge cash to HS kids, I'm sure the Iowa Business Office billed the Athletic Dept for it). Anyway, such are the current money transfers between Iowa/Iowa State universities & their respective athletic programs. Iowa used to collect a fee for athletics from all students, but the U shut off the tap five years ago or thereabouts. Moo did too.
Mi took a hit because of buying out Hoke and his staff contracts, prob other reasons but it shows that any given yr can be a downer.
Isn't the owner of a major uniform mfg an alum and w deep pockets?That's because the donations jumped $80M!!!
They have more in donations than schools 10 & below do in total revenue :crazy:
All that sweat shop $
Maybe I'm missing something, but aren't these rankings based on revenue? Even if the expenses are managed differently, that would only effect the net income, which isn't the focus of the list. Just my two cents.
But it doesn't define "subsdidy." And we don't know what the private schools get.
Right on! I totally agree. There is very little college in college athletics anymore. They should just remove the sporting programs from the Universities and make them minor league programs whom are loosely affiliated with the schools. That's really what they are now. I'm sick to my stomach that the AD and frickin' football coaches make so much more than anyone else at the University.....it's sports and at the end of the day not very important. If you ask me, they should be treated like the pastimes they are and much less like the businesses they have become.
I concur, not-so insanehawk.
Your solution makes sense, except what do you do with the facilities? I suppose you could rent them to the "team". But, I would like to see someone try to figure it out.
Another possible answer is for the General Fund to charge a "tax" on athletic department revenues. For example, once the athletic dept gets to, say, $50 million, 10% of the revenues go to the general fund. At $75 million it goes to 15%, and at $100 million it goes to 20%.
I would also put a cap on the total comp of a Head Coach - say $2.5 million. If they want to make more they can go to the pros.
I would also like to see viable minor league options in FB and BB for kids out of HS to go directly to the pros. If you decide to co to college you're in for at least 3 years. This would, hopefully, keep some of the kids that have no interest in a college education out of college athletics. Yes, the "quality" of FB and BB would go down.
However, none of these things will actually happen.
Wait,
Michigan
OSU
Wisconsin
PSU
Minnesota
Iowa
I'm seeing them as 6th, unless I'm looking at something incorrectly.
Who the heck goes to Gooph's events? And PSU must be all football and wrestling, because they can't average more than a couple thousand at basketball games
So they generate enough money to cover the entire athletic department and we should limit them? Get rid of the tuition they pay to the school, get rid of the students who attend the school because of the name recognition created by sports. There is a name for that.....yeah it's Div 3 athletics.
Good point. Some very good Iowa newspapers have decreased in quality after Gannett bought them.
They get student fee due for athletics if they attend any events or not because they are still part of the entire college experiences. Even for the bookworms.
With Iowa consistently top 20 on these lists, it seems wrong that we can't find the funds for a hockey team.
I don't know nor do I care. Just get it done. If I was king I'd make Iowa the first gender blind university and refuse to separate the sexes for anything. Down with segregation. If that's too radical, I understand the females of the species can play hockey too.
They are worth it. The "arms race" requires them to never stop working. Football (and Basketball for some schools) fund every other sport on campus. They (coaches) make a small % of what they generate. That's the bottom line they are paid to generate big money and that's what the P5 coaches do, generate big money. There's nothin easy about bein a college coach @ any level. And the good news is, at least for a little while longer, You are free to pursue the same kind of job and make that kind of money if you can stand the stress. Good for them, Go for it!!
I just thought with Title 9, that if you add a men's sport, you have to add a women's sport. I don't know if it is accurate or not
We need to spend more on Theater and especially getting Oscar awards for our students.
Maybe we could just pay college tuition for everyone, yeah, that's the ticket
No
