Printable View
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...ools/finances/
Where we rank: 125
Notable schools ranked above us: San Diego State (62), East Carolina (65), Texas State (84), Middle Tennessee (87), Western Kentucky (87), FIU (91), FAU (98), Southern Miss (105), Northh Texas (118), Louisiana Tech (121), Appalacian State (122).
The numbers show that we run slightly in the red, as do a few other schools on the list.
I am surprised at Southern Miss' ranking, but I guess that is what zero wins in a football season brings in.
Looks like a $17.5 million budget to me. I would think that would be calendar year 2012 revenues. That's not too far from the $20 mil budget we need to get to in the next 2 years. $25 mil by 2018.
I think I was most surprised by Tech. At first, the numbers looked cooked to me, but then I thought there is no way that a fine institution like Tech would fake their numbers, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by moorecajun
We will blow by Tech this year....
Poor UNO!
It needs to be done as quickly as possible. There are two potential FCS to FBS move ups in Delaware and James Madison that both have $30+ mil budgets.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeauCajun
Couple of interesting things:
First off since 2005 we improved our Revenue 57%
From 2011 to 2012 we improved our Revenue 22.5%
Ticket sales Revenue from 2011 to 2012 went from 1.3 to 2.3 Million
Contributions in the same year nearly doubled (that is you and I my freinds)
School funds went up 1.7 million from 2011 to 2012.
If we have a 22.5% increase in 2013 our budget will be at 21.4 Million. I increased my donation yesterday, who is with me.
I know that it is a factor but I can't quite explain it--but the tuition at these schools are in some way factored into the budget---For instance, our tuition is I think at about $5k per year where Tulane claims I think a plus $40K amount ----say UL is 300 athletes at $5K ($1,500,000) where Tulane 300 athletes at $40K ($12,000,000)----As you can see this creates a huge difference. Hope somebody can explain this in more detail!!!
We are always a little in the red. Nothing new there. I'm sure this was expected but it's nice to see that our budget increased by about 3.5 million from last year. That's a great selling point to other conferences. Our budget may not be where we want it right now, but it is growing, and growing fast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexhead
I think the subsidies for each school are interesting.
Interesting data. I am amazed at how much some states subsidize their school's athletic budgets. Really, if no school's received any subsidies it would make us look a little better when comparing moneys raised just from donors and ticket prices. Some schools like UNLV and Rutgers are really not that self-supporting and have huge subsidies compared to similar schools where the states are not so generous. I wonder what the best choices are for continued growth i.e. more contributions, more subsidies (probably not) or other ideas?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexhead
I was thinking the same thing. Such as, "Why is Tech's subsidy over 2 million more than UL's??" What is driving that?Quote:
Originally Posted by CajunAmos
The diffference may be in assessed student athletic fees.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedBug58
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...idies/2142443/
http://www.insidehighered.com/views/...spending-essay
Additional interesting numbers (UL is not listed here). Note that LSUA&M's library spending is comparable to that of UC Riverside. Embarassing for them.
As it should be. Riverside is an academic institution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexhead
http://i1186.photobucket.com/albums/...psdfa10671.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by BeauCajun
Yeah, I am not sure what his point was on this. UC Riverside is part of the UC system in California and my wife got her undergrad from UC Riverside and Masters from UC Irvine.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeauCajun
The only difference between UC Riverside and LSUA&M, is that UC Riverside is a "FINE" academic institution.
Yes, we are E-V-I-L.....we are the villains. Remember the '08 IBowl?...we kept you out! We cook the books, we lied to get into USA. We're not even a Tier 1 school.... We faked that too. Does that make you feel better?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexhead
The sky is blue, the grass is green, the sun rises in the east and Tech is a bunch of skalawagsQuote:
Originally Posted by BlueDawg
As far as the budget goes I know damn well it wasn't factual----NO audit!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueDawg
Good stuff Dave. Numbers are certainly on the upQuote:
Originally Posted by RaginDave
It is ABOUT TIME that at least ONE Redneckie is willing to admit all of that publicly!Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueDawg
FIFYQuote:
Originally Posted by Lexhead
Here's a piece telling us what many of us already knew, or at least suspected: Head to head financial comparisons are nearly worthless because of the many different ways that universities handle these numbers.
http://www.teamspeedkills.com/2013/5...=articlebottom
What is interesting was the remark that "The USA Today also makes a big deal about subsidies, but if you read beyond the first couple of paragraphs, you find that "subsidies" can vary wildly from school to school. Florida public schools must follow an arcane state law about sales tax and spending on women's sports that results in a "subsidy". Texas A&M athletics' "subsidy" was an interest-free loan from the school to bridge the gap spanning from when it lost Big 12 payouts to when it received its first SEC payouts. For most schools with a subsidy, a student fee is part or all of it. Those are typically voted on by student governments, so they don't happen without the students' consent on some level."
Also, the remark that some universities take a percentage of athletic donations for the academic side put a new light on T-Joe's alleged theft of $1M from the UL athletinc budget. That isn't to say that I am OK with that move, only that it is apparantly more common than I originally believed.