How do you read this?

[Patch]

I think the article should have mentioned that much of the jump in funding related also to the move to DI

[dslyank]

When I read the article, I felt the usual between the lines below the belt tu hit. I was unsure why he chose to write such an article and why now??

 

Also, I am sure I am showing my ignorance here but does the Knight commission number reflect income? When they say the university spends X dollars on athletes, is that before or after incoming money [gate receipts etc.]? Also, I would guess and have no facts to prove it, but I bet athletes and fans donate to universities at a greater % and probably a greater amount than graduates that are not involved or do not follow sports.

 

Lastly, Saturday night in totally awful weather 1821 people found "ENTERTAINMENT" @ the SEFCU. For convenience say $20 per seat (probably high but counting concessions) that is over $36,000 coming into UA coffers. I do not know what it cost to open/run the SEFCU for the night, but I bet we made a profit. Consider 7000avg per game for football, not counting schollies at least, sounds like a nice source of revenue.

Edited December 16, 2013 by dslyank

[danefan]

When I read the article, I felt the usual between the lines below the belt tu hit. I was unsure why he chose to write such an article and why now??

 

Also, I am sure I am showing my ignorance here but does the Knight commission number reflect income? When they say the university spends X dollars on athletes, is that before or after incoming money [gate receipts etc.]? Also, I would guess and have no facts to prove it, but I bet athletes and fans donate to universities at a greater % and probably a greater amount than graduates that are not involved or do not follow sports.

 

Lastly, Saturday night in totally awful weather 1821 people found "ENTERTAINMENT" @ the SEFCU. For convenience say $20 per seat (probably high but counting concessions) that is over $36,000 coming into UA coffers. I do not know what it cost to open/run the SEFCU for the night, but I bet we made a profit. Consider 7000avg per game for football, not counting schollies at least, sounds like a nice source of revenue.

 

Standards of accounting and NCAA athletics are like oil and water. The Knight Commission numbers are based on self-reported figures that the schools provide to the Department of Education. You can see every school (public and private) here: http://www.ope.ed.gov/athletics/Index.aspx?DB_OEM_ID=15800

 

They are extremely misleading, in my opinion. For one, most schools (but not all) count funding provided by the university as "revenue". Meaning they all generally break even. Simple example:

 

Costs University Athletic Department X $100 to run a program.

They generate $50 from guarantee games and ticket sales.

The remaining $50 comes from the University operation budget.

They will report $100 expenses and $100 revenue on the EADA report.

 

From one hand to the other.

[UAalum72]

Aren't scholarship 'costs' calculated as if all athletes were from out-of-state? And he just compares expenses to all FCS, not accounting for the differences between public and private colleges. Many of these expenses are not 'costs' as much as 'lost revenue opportunity', assuming an athlete would be replaced by a full-paying non-athlete.

 

A lot of numbers, but be careful what you read into them.