http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
Texas no 1, A$M No 2.
Why would UT support Big 12 expansion? Financially they would have to benefit $10 million+ (or 5% increase) A year for expansion to be worth it to them. Good luck finding any program, let alone G5 ones that’ll add that much valued
So does that show that we are in the black a little bit?
PUF sure does help
This is not a complete list of schools.
Did not see Notre Dame, Stanford, Baylor, Rice, etc.
Obviously private institutions do not make revenue in athletics public.
| Connecticut | AAC | $83,374,223.00 | $83,121,820.00 | $252,403.00 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cincinnati | AAC | $60,458,195.00 | $62,804,292.00 | -$2,346,097.00 |
| Houston | AAC | $57,174,900.00 | $55,277,308.00 | $1,897,592.00 |
| Central Florida | AAC | $56,327,225.00 | $56,327,225.00 | $0.00 |
| South Florida | AAC | $49,960,338.00 | $48,227,500.00 | $1,732,838.00 |
| Memphis | AAC | $48,716,830.00 | $48,443,158.00 | $273,672.00 |
| East Carolina | AAC | $48,312,311.00 | $48,387,287.00 | -$74,976.00 |
| Wichita State | Mo. Valley | $27,791,259.00 | $26,182,954.00 | $1,608,305.00 |
I took the list and put it into a spreadsheet (all 230 reported) but they have an ’ in front of every single number so Im gonna just break it down for now into the top 25 and the MWC.
Top 25;
| 1 | Texas | Big 12 | $214,830,647.00 | $207,022,323.00 | $7,808,324.00 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | Texas A&M | SEC | $211,960,034.00 | $146,546,229.00 | $65,413,805.00 |
| 3 | Ohio State | Big Ten | $185,409,602.00 | $173,507,435.00 | $11,902,167.00 |
| 4 | Michigan | Big Ten | $185,173,187.00 | $175,425,392.00 | $9,747,795.00 |
| 5 | Alabama | SEC | $174,307,419.00 | $158,646,962.00 | $15,660,457.00 |
| 6 | Georgia | SEC | $157,852,479.00 | $119,218,908.00 | $38,633,571.00 |
| 7 | Oklahoma | Big 12 | $155,238,481.00 | $132,910,780.00 | $22,327,701.00 |
| 8 | Florida | SEC | $149,165,475.00 | $131,789,499.00 | $17,375,976.00 |
| 9 | LSU | SEC | $147,744,233.00 | $131,717,421.00 | $16,026,812.00 |
| 10 | Auburn | SEC | $147,511,034.00 | $132,885,979.00 | $14,625,055.00 |
| 11 | Tennessee | SEC | $145,653,191.00 | $134,880,229.00 | $10,772,962.00 |
| 12 | Oregon | Pac-12 | $145,417,315.00 | $119,945,650.00 | $25,471,665.00 |
| 13 | Florida State | ACC | $144,514,413.00 | $143,373,261.00 | $1,141,152.00 |
| 14 | Penn State | Big Ten | $144,017,055.00 | $138,724,055.00 | $5,293,000.00 |
| 15 | Wisconsin | Big Ten | $143,420,668.00 | $142,930,591.00 | $490,077.00 |
| 16 | South Carolina | SEC | $136,032,845.00 | $129,317,382.00 | $6,715,463.00 |
| 17 | Kentucky | SEC | $130,706,744.00 | $125,333,866.00 | $5,372,878.00 |
| 18 | Iowa | Big Ten | $130,681,467.00 | $128,869,211.00 | $1,812,256.00 |
| 19 | Arkansas | SEC | $129,680,808.00 | $112,902,474.00 | $16,778,334.00 |
| 20 | Washington | Pac-12 | $128,745,183.00 | $123,503,513.00 | $5,241,670.00 |
| 21 | Michigan State | Big Ten | $126,021,377.00 | $117,506,272.00 | $8,515,105.00 |
| 22 | Louisville | ACC | $120,445,303.00 | $118,383,769.00 | $2,061,534.00 |
| 23 | Nebraska | Big Ten | $120,205,090.00 | $112,571,632.00 | $7,633,458.00 |
| 24 | Mississippi | SEC | $117,834,511.00 | $108,885,512.00 | $8,948,999.00 |
| 25 | Minnesota | Big Ten | $116,376,862.00 | $114,201,678.00 | $2,175,184.00 |
According to this we made more profit than; FSU, Wisconsin and Iowa
MWC;
| San Diego State | Mt. West | $52,454,787.00 | $51,569,852.00 | $884,935.00 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Air Force | Mt. West | $59,577,780.00 | $50,112,617.00 | $9,465,163.00 |
| Nevada-Las Vegas | Mt. West | $47,327,478.00 | $47,476,606.00 | -$149,128.00 |
| Fresno State | Mt. West | $46,215,249.00 | $44,119,522.00 | $2,095,727.00 |
| Boise State | Mt. West | $45,486,486.00 | $45,456,789.00 | $29,697.00 |
| Colorado State | Mt. West | $44,672,317.00 | $43,965,622.00 | $706,695.00 |
| New Mexico | Mt. West | $44,421,019.00 | $44,356,217.00 | $64,802.00 |
| Wyoming | Mt. West | $40,372,222.00 | $38,669,544.00 | $1,702,678.00 |
| Nevada | Mt. West | $36,955,558.00 | $38,982,774.00 | -$2,027,216.00 |
| Utah State | Mt. West | $34,398,296.00 | $34,213,406.00 | $184,890.00 |
| San Jose State | Mt. West | $31,252,553.00 | $30,676,330.00 | $576,223.00 |
I don’t think PUF monies can be used for athletic purposes. The link just shows total revenue earned by various athletic departments.
So again, are we in the black?
No, the school is subsidizing our athletics program. I’m pretty sure that amount is included in the revenue number.
$214 million = 6-7, 5-7, 5-7, and 7-6. I wasn’t a business or economics student but quick math doesn’t calculate efficiency or success.
IF we ever get into a “power” conference and make even twice our current revenue, we will become a powerhouse and absolutely CRUSH our opponents.
Click on Houston. See the “school funds?” Not exactly.
We aren’t crushing our conference opponents now and they are in the same boat (most are worse off).
This has always been the key and we now have the infrastructure. Our exclusion from a P5 is by design. This is why we have not been invited. As soon as we will we will contend. I have no doubts that within five years of getting in we will rival with the Alabama’s or USC’s.
It is very telling:
uta & atm spend how much?
U of H spends how much?
How good have uta & atm been? Sure they are making money. Did someone say trophies? Nope.
The a$m number seems inflated.
Aggie math ?
You can’t compare aTm and Alabama expenditures and say we will knock it out of the park with more money. Schools with less money do even better than we do and more money to us will not result in commensurate efficiency.
Past history doesn’t support the view since we sucked teet the latter half of our time in the SWC
Revenue earned vs. expenses. You know what the PUF does? Offsets money for the school so donations/etc can be moved to other university expenses. It is no coincidence that Ut and A&M are 1 and 2. And that the only other public P5 school in Texas, Tech, is breaking even.
Offsets money so that students don’t have to cover athletics with fees, buys fancy swimming pools for sorority-rush type recruiting videos, head coach offices that look like like night clubs etc.
While I agreed with what you said before, that more money doesn’t make us better always and wouldn’t necessarily make us a competitor at P5, we have a bigger budget than G5 schools and still don’t dominate every year. Our later years in the SWC were mostly due with going cheap on everything from recruiting to coaching hires to facility upkeep.
Think i broke my record for typos and grammar errors on that one.
Considering how awful our administration was from the mid 1980’s on, ill completely agree with you. With our current administration, more money would propel us a lot farther
Fair enough. However as I understand it, UTs athletic fundraising is done specifically for athletic purposes. With the amount of revenue they earn, it’s highly unlikely they need offsets.
©Copyright 2017 Coogfans.com