CUSA 2016-17 revenues (per USA Today)

[Jeepers Creepers]

The athletic revenues for the 2016-17 school year have been published by USA Today. link:

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

Below are the totals (in $million) for the public schools in CUSA. (Private schools are not required to report finances.) The 'total' column is total athletic revenues. The 'subs' column is subsidies which includes student fees, tuition waivers, and state funding for athletics. The 'ath' column is the difference, which is the amount of money actually generated by the athletic department (ticket sales, TV money, donations, etc.). As you can see, while Marshall is ninth in total revenue, MU is behind only ODU and USM in terms of money actually generated by athletics.

.........................total.......subs.......ath
1 ODU................46.2......28.7......17.5
2 UNCC..............37.9......25.5......12.4
3 FAU.................34.5......24.0......10.5
4 MTSU..............34.0......22.4......11.6
5 FIU..................33.4......24.0........9.4
6 UNT.................32.2......21.4......10.8
7 UTEP...............31.8......18.5......13.3
8 WKU................30.4......16.9......13.5
9 MU...................29.3......14.3......15.0
10 UTSA.............28.8......17.4......11.4
11 UAB...............24.8......15.5........9.3
12 LaTech...........24.7......10.7......14.0
13 USM...............24.0........8.8......15.2

 

[TwolfHerdfan]

As I've said before, this fan base does a damn good job supporting the MU AD. Those that crap on the fans are out of their minds.

 

[pdbailey]

The athletic revenues for the 2016-17 school year have been published by USA Today. link:

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

Below are the totals (in $million) for the public schools in CUSA. (Private schools are not required to report finances.) The 'total' column is total athletic revenues. The 'subs' column is subsidies which includes student fees, tuition waivers, and state funding for athletics. The 'ath' column is the difference, which is the amount of money actually generated by the athletic department (ticket sales, TV money, donations, etc.). As you can see, while Marshall is ninth in total revenue, MU is behind only ODU and USM in terms of money actually generated by athletics.

.........................total.......subs.......ath
1 ODU................46.2......28.7......17.5
2 UNCC..............37.9......25.5......12.4
3 FAU.................34.5......24.0......10.5
4 MTSU..............34.0......22.4......11.6
5 FIU..................33.4......24.0........9.4
6 UNT.................32.2......21.4......10.8
7 UTEP...............31.8......18.5......13.3
8 WKU................30.4......16.9......13.5
9 MU...................29.3......14.3......15.0
10 UTSA.............28.8......17.4......11.4
11 UAB...............24.8......15.5........9.3
12 LaTech...........24.7......10.7......14.0
13 USM...............24.0........8.8......15.2

It is interesting that we have the 3rd lowest subsidy level of CUSA schools, yet we are accused of taking too much money from the State and students by a certain fan base. ODU has ridiculously high student fees from what I understand, but is obvious that they would be first choice on any realignment discussions in the G5 conferences because of their revenues and location and they also have additional sports that we do not that are attractive to other conferences. We could easily raise student fees to help generate more revenues as needed, since our fees pale in comparison to those charged by some of our conference mates, but I doubt the school goes that route unless the state subsidies are cut further. At this point, we are $2.1M in total revenue under the central mean average for the conference, but our subsidy level is 26% below the central mean while we are 23% above the central mean in athletic revenue so we are still doing pretty well despite our conference rank.

As a note, I suspect that ODU's revenue level for 2017-2018 will be much lower as they have taken a big drop in football and did not raise the student fees last year so they should be closer to the norm for the conference and not as big of an outlier.

 

[TwolfHerdfan]

On a related note, USA Today has a story about the Washington St AD who has a debt to the university of 67 Million dollars. OUCH! And they have an AD deficit of 7.5 Million.

Rutgers ranks first in subsidies with 33 Million, that includes almost 12 Million from student fees. With all that, they still had a 2.3 Million debt in the AD.

 

[Jeepers Creepers]

Rutgers ranks first in subsidies with 33 Million, that includes almost 12 Million from student fees. With all that, they still had a 2.3 Million debt in the AD.

Rutgers has the most subsidies among P5 schools, but there are four non-P5 schools with higher subsidies:
UConn...………...$42.2 million
James Madison...$39.1 million
UMass...…………$37.2 million
Air Force...……...$33.3 million

 

[dangerousdaneerfan]

27 West Virginia Big 12 $110,565,870 $89,196,193 $4,167,480 3.77

 

[oldeherd]

27 West Virginia Big 12 $110,565,870 $89,196,193 $4,167,480 3.77

neerfan, going strictly by your cited numbers, out of a total budget of $110 million plus, $89 million of WVU's athletic budget is "subsidized", per parameters in the OP, and the department only raised/netted about $4 million on its own, from tickets, contributions, etc. This just does not seem correct.

If correct, it certainly belies the incessant claims by many chickeneers that WVU's Athletic Department is "self sufficient" or self supporting with no significant state aid/funds to speak of.

May want to double check the figures you posted as to what they actually refer to.

 

[Bankerreturns]

Yep, funds from the school are lowest since 2010, ticket revenue highest since 2011. We had 4 times as much in ticket revenue than FAU, but their support from school funds has increased 500% over the last 5-6 years.

If you want a good laugh go look at FIU ticket sale revenue.

 

[oldeherd]

Rutgers has the most subsidies among P5 schools, but there are four non-P5 schools with higher subsidies:
UConn...………...$42.2 million
James Madison...$39.1 million
UMass...…………$37.2 million
Air Force...……...$33.3 million

Jeepers Creepers, your figures reflect one factor as it pertains to 2 schools: ODU and JMU. That factor is that the state of Virginia has some very well funded state colleges and universities. The state also has some very high in state (and out of state too) tuition rates at these schools.

The students in addition to tuition monies also pay some pretty stiff fees which, I'm sure go to various school related activities, also help fund facilities at those school. I'm fairly familiar with 2 or 3 Virginia universities which are in some quarters are not the primary name state schools (VA Tech and UVA): Radford U., JMU and George Mason. I can tell you that these schools have had campus building booms ongoing that dwarf anything MU has planned or can dream of. Worked in DC area when their BB team went to the Final Four. Their then head coach, now at Miami, Fl., Jim Larranaga, did TV spots, promos, etc., touting a building boom at the Fairfax, VA, campus totaling a $Billion plus!!. Go to JMU's web site and check out info on a $85 million basketball arena, Convo Center, that they just broke ground on. Both JMU and ODU have enrollments over 20,000 and constantly growing. And George Mason and VCU, in Richmond, are even larger, with enrollments over 30,000 and growing, with similar capital building booms at both campus locations. In fact, I believe both of these schools are larger than both Tech and UVA in enrollment.

Virginia students may pay through the nose but they get world class facilities and a high quality education in return.

 

[dangerousdaneerfan]

neerfan, going strictly by your cited numbers, out of a total budget of $110 million plus, $89 million of WVU's athletic budget is "subsidized", per parameters in the OP, and the department only raised/netted about $4 million on its own, from tickets, contributions, etc. This just does not seem correct.

If correct, it certainly belies the incessant claims by many chickeneers that WVU's Athletic Department is "self sufficient" or self supporting with no significant state aid/funds to speak of.

May want to double check the figures you posted as to what they actually refer to.

$110 million is revenue. $89 million is expenses. $4.1 million is allotted. 4% is percentage allotted. That is 27th of all NCAA schools for 16-17 per the USA Today link that the OP provided.

 

[Jeepers Creepers]

neerfan, going strictly by your cited numbers, out of a total budget of $110 million plus, $89 million of WVU's athletic budget is "subsidized", per parameters in the OP, and the department only raised/netted about $4 million on its own, from tickets, contributions, etc. This just does not seem correct.

Dan's columns aren't the same as mine. WVU's subsidized amount was $4.2 million. So the amount generated thru athletics was $106.4 million.

 

[Jeepers Creepers]

Jeepers Creepers, your figures reflect one factor as it pertains to 2 schools: ODU and JMU. That factor is that the state of Virginia has some very well funded state colleges and universities. The state also has some very high in state (and out of state too) tuition rates at these schools.

Yes, the subsidies column includes tuition waivers, which is the bulk of the total for that column (for schools that have tuition waivers). WVU does not grant tuition waivers to the athletic dept; that is why WVU's subsidized total is so much lower than MU's.

 

[Bankerreturns]

Wait, I was told for years that wvu was self sufficient, and that was when their revenue was $40 million less than it is now. So now, with $40 million more in revenue, they are no longer self sufficient?

 

[Ninegate]

Wait, I was told for years that wvu was self sufficient, and that was when their revenue was $40 million less than it is now. So now, with $40 million more in revenue, they are no longer self sufficient?

They have never been self sufficient. They have always had student fees for athletics, and continue charging students while making a fortune today. In my opinion that’s not being self sufficient. But they will argue otherwise. You’ll be much happier when you stop chasing the white whale which is WVU. There is no need for us to every play them in any sport. They do what they do and we do what we do. End of story.

 

[exHerdSID]

I recall that the subsidized numbers for ODU and JMU will be going down in the future due to the legislature passing a phased in cap on student fees.

 

[Bankerreturns]

In 2019 they fall under a 55% max subsidy.

 

[The Real SamC]

Wait, I was told for years that wvu was self sufficient, and that was when their revenue was $40 million less than it is now. So now, with $40 million more in revenue, they are no longer self sufficient?

You were lied to. WVU has NEVER been "self-supporting". Other WVU lies over the years have come and gone (and this year's lie often contradicts those from a previous generation) but the "we are self-supporting" lie has been the one constant.

I recall the full lie, told by Crap-ridi, for years is "we are self-supporting and we gave back (pulls a number out of his a**) to the school and there are (pulls another number out of his a**, usually about 20) self supporting programs."

USA Today has been doing this report for years, and it always comes out to the same.

I have never understood the value of this lie to WVU. You have to be nearly retarded to actually believe that a small school that has never won ANYTHING in the second smallest and third poorest state to have a P5 program, which (while improved in the last 8 - 10 years) has nothing like the 100% sell outs with huge donations required that you see in truly great places is self-sufficient.

If WVU just admitted that, like most athletic programs, it uses state money, five Herd fans would laugh, five far lefts would spew about how that money could be yet another give away program, five far rights would spew about taxes, and the rest of the state could not care less.

 

[bklyneer]

Almost all of the 4.2 million (which represents about 4% of total revenue so this is a ridiculous conversation to start with) is generated through student fees. The claim of self sufficiency has always been based on the fact that WVU athletics receives almost $0 from state tax subsidies.

There is about $450k that WVU athletics receives from tax payer money and that is mostly to pay for the rifle team because when WVU was going to cut the program in a cost saving measure, the whole state lost their shit.

Even if you don't by this explanation and want to say "see, WVU gets <4.2 million from subsidies", that is still a pretty good return on investment. 4.2 invested to get >102 vs 14.3 invested in order to get back 15. Which math major is going to argue which University is the better investment?