ADVERTISEMENT

Iowa TV Rev this Year: $42M (Down $12M). Deficit now $55-65M. Had planned on $75M Loan. July 16 Story: #14 in Total Rev (5th in B1G)

Franisdaman

HR King
Nov 3, 2012
82,235
104,201
113
Heaven, Iowa
April 7, 2021 Update:





Dec 21 Update:



Dec 16 Update:





Sep 23 Update:




Aug 24 Update:


As you can see, Iowa will be taking out a $75M loan.

The Story:




Aug 12 Update:

$70 MILLION will need to be borrowed from someone.



Original Post:

TOTAL 2018-2019 REVENUE & EXPENSES of 227 TEAMS ARE HERE: https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

Click on the team to get a breakdown of the REVENUE Total & EXPENSE Total.

For IOWA (as you can see):
$27,179,000--Ticket Sales
$38,627,000--Contributions
$71,006,000--Rights/Licencing
$14,514,000--Other
$.....650,000--Student Fees
.......................................................
$151,976,000 TOTAL REVENUE


Total Revenue Rankings:


#1 Texas, $223,880,000
#2 Texas A&M, $212,748,000

The B1G Teams:
#3 Ohio State, $210,548,000

#4 Michigan, $197,820,000
#6 Penn State, $164,529,000
#11 Wisconsin, $157,660,000
#14 Iowa, $151,976,000
#18 Michigan State, $140,011,000
#21 Nebraska, $136,233,000
#24 Minnesota, $130,456,000
#25 Indiana, $127,833,000
#29 Illinois, $118,565,000
#31 Purdue, $110,845,000
#33 Maryland, $108,796,000
#39 Rutgers, $103,251,000 (@MrsScrew )

OTHERS:
#44 Iowa State, $95,412,000

.........................................................

RELATED STORY:

 
Last edited:
Total Revenue Rankings:

#1 Texas, $223,880,000
#2 Texas A&M, $212,748,000

The B1G Teams:
#3 Ohio State, $210,548,000
#4 Michigan, $197,820,000
#6 Penn State, $164,529,000
#11 Wisconsin, $157,660,000
#14 Iowa, $151,976,000
#18 Michigan State, $140,011,000
#21 Nebraska, $136,233,000
#24 Minnesota, $130,456,000
#25 Indiana, $127,833,000
#29 Illinois, $118,565,000
#31 Purdue, $110,845,000
#33 Maryland, $108,796,000
#39 Rutgers, $103,251,000 (@MrsScrew )

OTHERS:
#44 Iowa State, $95,412,000


TOTAL REVENUE & EXPENSES of 227 TEAMS ARE HERE: https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
On a per-capita (number of students and alumnni) basis, possibly #1.
 
Nice having that Big 10 k. The entire conference in the top 40 in revenue. I assume in a couple years will be even higher (comparatively) as Rutgers and Maryland will move up and not at the expense of the other conference members.
 
Interesting how far Missouri, Mississippi, and Mississippi State are down the list compared to the rest of the SEC. In an era of schools cutting instead of adding sports it makes me wonder why many of their conference has such positive budget surpluses compared to other conferences. Did their tv contract pay out much more than expected?
 
They’re slipping. Last year they were 13th, I believe. 2 or 3 years ago, I thought I read they were 8th.
 
some will use this as evidence that the athletes should be paid
I can sort of see it with football players. 80 or so guys on football team are basically responsible for $100+ million in revenue, jobs for a few hundred, and almost every other sports quality of facilities.

if football is cancelled everybody is going to get a fast education on what football does for a athletic department at a power 5 school. Basically everything is the answer.
 
I can sort of see it with football players. 80 or so guys on football team are basically responsible for $100+ million in revenue, jobs for a few hundred, and almost every other sports quality of facilities.

if football is cancelled everybody is going to get a fast education on what football does for a athletic department at a power 5 school. Basically everything is the answer.

This is correct. If football doesn't exist, none of the rest of the sports (with perhaps exception of men's basketball) exist. There is no stomach from the public to use general university funds to pay for college sports. Football pays all the bills.

As to why college athletic departments would build up cash reserves, they can't, legally and from a perception standpoint. They are non-profits (don't laugh). They can't stockpile a bunch of cash, they need to be putting it into their mission. They can't directly pay the players. They do have to pay for all the scholarships. Then it's a ton of overhead, all those administrators, support staff, coaches salaries, food for teams, travel for teams, recruiting, facilities, equipment, payments for non-conference FB games and pay games in basketball, security and game-day costs for all sports. I've left stuff out, but it all adds up.

Also if Iowa athletic department had built up some war chest of $100 million, the university would face immense pressure for the department to give that money to other areas.

Whole thing sucks. Not to get into a huge argument, but if football is not played this year it's not hyperbole to say that college sports as we know it may be over. Or at least not in it current form. Every university (including Iowa) would have to drop sports at a minimum and many athletic departments would cease to exist. The debt loads of many of these schools just can't handle a year with zero revenue.
 
I can sort of see it with football players. 80 or so guys on football team are basically responsible for $100+ million in revenue, jobs for a few hundred, and almost every other sports quality of facilities.

if football is cancelled everybody is going to get a fast education on what football does for a athletic department at a power 5 school. Basically everything is the answer.
Its been reported by Scott Dochterman that In 2019, Iowa's Football ticket revenue ($22.3M) nearly equaled all expenses for women's sports ($23M).

TV agreements that took effect at the start of the 2017-18 school year resulted in payments a year ago of roughly $54 million to each of the 14-team conference’s 12 longest-standing members.


From the Original Post,

TOTAL 2018-2019 REVENUE & EXPENSES of 227 TEAMS ARE HERE: https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

Click on the team to get a breakdown of the Total (for Iowa, $151,976,000).

For IOWA:
$27,179,000--Ticket Sales
$38,627,000--Contributions
$71,006,000--Rights/Licencing
$14,514,000--Other
$.....650,000--Student Fees
.....................................................
$151,976,000 TOTAL
 
Last edited:
They’re slipping. Last year they were 13th, I believe. 2 or 3 years ago, I thought I read they were 8th.

Crazy how 2005 total revenues compares to today.

2019: $151,976,026 ($71,006,102 in rights/licensing)
2018: $137,093,027
2017: $130,681,467
2016: $113,249,020
2015: $105,969,545
2014: $105,958,954
2013: $107,153,782
2012: $97,902,974
2011: $93,353,561
2010: $88,735,093
2009: $79,971,143
2008: $81,515,865
2007: $80,832,070
2006: $73,321,227
2005: $61,676,257 ($22,751,987 in rights/licensing)

In the link that follows, click on the team to get the history & the breakdown of the revenues & expense numbers.

LINK: https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
 
When looking at expenses:

$47,471,417--spent on coaching/staff in 2019
$17,869,652--spent on coaching/staff in 2005

$41,314,294--spent on facilities/overhead in 2019
$7,053,120--spent on facilities/overhead in 2005

These numbers are pretty amazing, indeed, to see the
Explo$ion. Very nice to see that some leaders, like
Bruce Harreld, are giving back some $alary, in these difficult times.

Bruce Harreld is President of the University of Iowa, for those in
Rio Linda.

#gohawks
 
Iowa used to be in the top 10 consistently. Iowa State has done an amazing job in catching up. It was maybe only a decade or so ago that Iowa was just over $100M and ISU was languishing around $35M and then it went to $65M and stayed there for a while. The Big12 sucks compared to all other Power Conferences except the PAC12, which has been severely mismanaged. The State Government has taken notice of the disparity of income though and favored ISU as of late in the distribution of funds. Socialism at its finest example got to make everyone equal you know.
 
Last edited:
Any idea what the $650,000 in "Student Fees" is for?

Is it students paying for student tickets?
 
Iowa used to be in the top 10 consistently. Iowa State has done an amazing job in catching up. It was maybe only a decade or so ago that Iowa was just over $100M and ISU was languishing around $35M and then it went to $65M and stayed there for a while. The Big12 sucks compared to all other Power Conferences except the PAC12, which has been severely mismanaged. The State Government has taken notice of the disparity of income though and favored ISU as of late in the distribution of funds. Socialism at its finest example got to make everyone equal you know.

Iowa has only been above $100M since 2013. The TV contracts have been a huge boon for everyone, but especially the non-big names. It has let teams like Purdue, Illinois, Minnesota, etc., invest into facilities and into non-revenue sports. That money is why Iowa can make significant investment in baseball, softball, soccer, all their non-revenue sports.

I won't get into the state government issue of Iowa vs ISU. Don't know enough about that one.
 
Iowa has only been above $100M since 2013. The TV contracts have been a huge boon for everyone, but especially the non-big names. It has let teams like Purdue, Illinois, Minnesota, etc., invest into facilities and into non-revenue sports. That money is why Iowa can make significant investment in baseball, softball, soccer, all their non-revenue sports.

I won't get into the state government issue of Iowa vs ISU. Don't know enough about that one.
The State of Iowa does not like the ratio of in State students vs. out of State students compared to ISU, so they reduced Iowa's funding. Which is bullshit, because those out of State students pay full boat tuition and spend boatloads of money that pay sales tax to the State. In reality though, I think it was ISU homer jealousy that prompted the issue in the Statehouse.

You are correct about the revenue. I was rounding up a little. Iowa was hovering around $95-$98M for a while around 2010.

That said, what kind of difference in facilities will a $55M gap make year on year on year. This is why we have one of the jewel football stadiums in the country, and ISU has that concrete monstrosity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BirdistheWord
USC is private just as Notre Dame is private. They won't release any information since they don't have to. Throw Brigham Young into that group as well.
 
The State of Iowa does not like the ratio of in State students vs. out of State students compared to ISU, so they reduced Iowa's funding. Which is bullshit, because those out of State students pay full boat tuition and spend boatloads of money that pay sales tax to the State. In reality though, I think it was ISU homer jealousy that prompted the issue in the Statehouse.

You are correct about the revenue. I was rounding up a little. Iowa was hovering around $95-$98M for a while around 2010.

That said, what kind of difference in facilities will a $55M gap make year on year on year. This is why we have one of the jewel football stadiums in the country, and ISU has that concrete monstrosity.

Iowa has done a decent job with finances, all told. They have invested a lot of $ in the other sports too, which has made a difference.
 
TOTAL 2018-2019 REVENUE & EXPENSES of 227 TEAMS ARE HERE: https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

Click on the team to get a breakdown of the Total.

For IOWA (as you can see):
$27,179,000--Ticket Sales
$38,627,000--Contributions
$71,006,000--Rights/Licencing
$14,514,000--Other
$.....650,000--Student Fees
............................................
$151,976,000 TOTAL


Total Revenue Rankings:

#1 Texas, $223,880,000
#2 Texas A&M, $212,748,000

The B1G Teams:
#3 Ohio State, $210,548,000

#4 Michigan, $197,820,000
#6 Penn State, $164,529,000
#11 Wisconsin, $157,660,000
#14 Iowa, $151,976,000
#18 Michigan State, $140,011,000
#21 Nebraska, $136,233,000
#24 Minnesota, $130,456,000
#25 Indiana, $127,833,000
#29 Illinois, $118,565,000
#31 Purdue, $110,845,000
#33 Maryland, $108,796,000
#39 Rutgers, $103,251,000 (@MrsScrew )

OTHERS:
#44 Iowa State, $95,412,000

.........................................................

RELATED STORY:



Little brother down there at # 44.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Franisdaman
Look closer at Nebraska’s contributions...a little less than $7 million - yikes.

Meanwhile Iowa is making bank off of the new North end zone ($38 million plus in contributions, about $8 million more than last year) and despite having 20,000 less capacity is within about $7 million of matching ticket sales too. Nebraska is lucky to be making as much as they are with Adidas or they’d be even further behind Iowa in the revenue race than they are.

They also lost two of their 2020 4 stars before taking a snap. I would guess a lot more are gonna flame out in the end. Womp womp
 
Also, look at teams ahead of Iowa in the rankings like Auburn, Florida St, Alabama, and Wisconsin. Most of these schools are taking many millions - FSU in particular {Tens of millions} in money from student fees and school funds via direct institutional support. That paints Iowa in a very favorable light when it comes to fan support of the team - this Hawkeye team truly has a top 10 fanbase. My guess is that a lot of these schools will likely see a lot less institutional support than they had in the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: naturalmwa
TOTAL 2018-2019 REVENUE & EXPENSES of 227 TEAMS ARE HERE: https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

Click on the team to get a breakdown of the Total.

For IOWA (as you can see):
$27,179,000--Ticket Sales
$38,627,000--Contributions
$71,006,000--Rights/Licencing
$14,514,000--Other
$.....650,000--Student Fees
............................................
$151,976,000 TOTAL


Total Revenue Rankings:

#1 Texas, $223,880,000
#2 Texas A&M, $212,748,000

The B1G Teams:
#3 Ohio State, $210,548,000

#4 Michigan, $197,820,000
#6 Penn State, $164,529,000
#11 Wisconsin, $157,660,000
#14 Iowa, $151,976,000
#18 Michigan State, $140,011,000
#21 Nebraska, $136,233,000
#24 Minnesota, $130,456,000
#25 Indiana, $127,833,000
#29 Illinois, $118,565,000
#31 Purdue, $110,845,000
#33 Maryland, $108,796,000
#39 Rutgers, $103,251,000 (@MrsScrew )

OTHERS:
#44 Iowa State, $95,412,000

.........................................................

RELATED STORY:


Pretty strong correlation between this and team conference standings over the past few years (outside of NW).
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Franisdaman
Look closer at Nebraska’s contributions...a little less than $7 million - yikes.

Meanwhile Iowa is making bank off of the new North end zone ($38 million plus in contributions, about $8 million more than last year) and despite having 20,000 less capacity is within about $7 million of matching ticket sales too. Nebraska is lucky to be making as much as they are with Adidas or they’d be even further behind Iowa in the revenue race than they are.

They also lost two of their 2020 4 stars before taking a snap. I would guess a lot more are gonna flame out in the end. Womp womp

Meh, it's just accounting. Nebraska is building a $155 million football facility using private donations. Was supposed to start building this summer, but was postponed due to COVID.

Every season ticket at Nebraska also has a "donation" value attached to it per seat. These range from $150 to $2500 per seat. I dont know how those are factored in.

Nebraska_Football_Donation_Map_cropped.jpg
 
Wait what? Iowa is penalized for attracting way more out of state students than ISU? That is ass backwards. So the State is giving more money to ISU to help students pay in-state tuition than to an institution that attracts more out of staters (and 3-4 times the money per student). I mean I know we make way more than ISU but why is the State helping to bail them out?! So Iowa is being penalized for getting more out of State students and way more in athletics?
 
  • Like
Reactions: naturalmwa
This story is several years old. I don't know whether it's more accurate to say ISU is being rewarded for educating more Iowans or Iowa is being punished for not educating enough of them. Lots of arguments both directions, anyway. Not sure of the relevance to athletics, as neither school gets a state subsidy for that.
 
Well LC if they are rewarding ISU for more in-state residents enrolling to ISU that is a huge problem. The athletics reference is only because the State should not be “helping” ISU simply cause Iowa makes way more. It is simple. They are both state schools. Iowa brings in way more revenue and the fact they have way more out of state residents that pay a ton more should not be a negative on what the state pays to the schools. That was my point.
 
This story is several years old. I don't know whether it's more accurate to say ISU is being rewarded for educating more Iowans or Iowa is being punished for not educating enough of them. Lots of arguments both directions, anyway. Not sure of the relevance to athletics, as neither school gets a state subsidy for that.
uh, the story is not several years old; it is dated July 16, 2020.

you're losing it, man
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kinnick.At.Night
Meh, it's just accounting. Nebraska is building a $155 million football facility using private donations. Was supposed to start building this summer, but was postponed due to COVID.

Every season ticket at Nebraska also has a "donation" value attached to it per seat. These range from $150 to $2500 per seat. I dont know how those are factored in.

Nebraska_Football_Donation_Map_cropped.jpg
meh, I will go with the "accounting" that USA Today went with.

Now, go away Little Debbie, and play.

230d1dfd3a494edbacbd7f6f28a02b19_md.jpg
 
The “educating” more Iowans is sad on so many levels. So where is the money for UNI? And how do you differentiate between “Iowans” who stay in the State that you educated? Just dumb. Iowa brings so much more money to the state in terms of undergrads than ISU ever will. I know ISU will have a higher enrollment (of course easy to figure why) but the revenue is not even close. So no reason the state gives ISU a break. So maybe Iowa should let anyone in to catch up on state money?!
 
uh, the story is not several years old; it is dated July 16, 2020.

you're losing it, man
No, I just forgot the level of readership here. By "story" I meant the controversy over the funding and in-state enrollments. I wasn't referring to the specific article cited here. I should have made that easier to understand, I guess. My bad.
 
ADVERTISEMENT