Athletic Budget

[ZippyRulz]

1 hour ago, Hilltopper said:

Nice story, but Akron isn’t  brimming with alumni who are oil field billionaires.

 

I know of at least 1 billionaire from Akron who is heavily involved in sports.

 

[ziptrumpet87]

I know Drum Corps International 🎶🎺 and or Canton Bluecoats has had events at Info in the past.

[johnnyzip84]

6 hours ago, Hilltopper said:

Nice story, but Akron isn’t  brimming with alumni who are oil field billionaires.

Certainly never meant to imply that (but I thought that would have been obvious). It just struck me as funny and a bit ironic that the program most cited as corrupt back in the day is now doing the very same things, but this time it's on the up and up.

 

Here's a wild idea for additional Info utilization. How about a UFL expansion team?

Edited September 7 by johnnyzip84

[GP1]

6 hours ago, johnnyzip84 said:

 

Here's a wild idea for additional Info utilization. How about a UFL expansion team?

Or, field a competitive team, play at a time and day of the week where they can attract students alumni fans and the general community to games. The University doesn't maximize the opportunities for the primary purpose of the stadium. There is no evidence they could do concerts well. In fact, many stadium concerts were cancelled this year because of lack of interest and prices. 

[Zippy87]

16 hours ago, LZIp said:

What are some creative things other schools are doing?

 

Look down the road to Canal Park and see what the Rubberducks are doing every summer. It isn't perfect, but there's at least an effort.

[ZipCat]

On 9/5/2024 at 12:44 PM, Captain Kangaroo said:

Every so often someone will post on the drain the football team is on the athletic department. Just doing some basic math on the 2024 season -

 

1.8 million for Ohio State

1.0 million for Rutgers

1.5 million for South Carolina

$750,000 for the Kentucky buyout

$670,000 ESPN contract

 

Total revenue: $5,720,000 (plus whatever donations, ticket sales etc. are generated)

 

While pulling in all that cash for UA, football lost their training table and have had severe limitations put on the recruiting budget. Grad assistants are another cut someone'd mentioned earlier.

 

How are we supposed to compete? 

 

Next do Expenditures. Most of the Revenue barely covers the operating budget of the Football program:

 

-$1.2 million for 62 Full-Scholarships (assuming basic tuition, room and board)
-$1.4 million for coaches

-$1 million at least a year for travel (The BIG-10 pays $7-million a year alone in travel expenses).

-$5-million a year in debt servicing for the White Elephant (based on old data, but I can't imagine it's far from $3-5million)

 

That's AT LEAST $8.6 million College football at UA costs. And even if we want to write-off the White-Elephant as "Infrastructure Capital Investment" (which would be an absolute, hysterical, joke) the basic operating expenses of the program are all that revenue covers. You could cut the Football program tomorrow, and thus lose all of it's revenue, and you either basically break-even, or completely come out with a net gain because you no longer have the looses.

 

How are we supposed to compete? How are we supposed to be an actual university when we're dumping resources down the drain on a White Elephant program that's kept only because a very small alumni base expect it, and the administrative state wants to keep it because it's good 6-figure jobs they can use to springboard to other, better things by building their resume. 

 

What physical, tangible, benefit does Akron Football have to the Students of the University Akron (who subsidize the entire athletic departments $30-million budget  to the tune of $19-million through student debt. 

 

There is none. Stop pretending Akron Football is something UA is neglecting and if only we spent a little more money we'd be able to compete. No, we won't. That ship sailed when you fired a named coach, with a college football pedigree in the same year the program beat it's first BIG-10 team ever, while the guy still had several years left on his contract.

 

Enough is enough. Akron Football is never going to be competitive, especially in the years of the NIL.

 

Takes like this are completely delusional of the reality of college athletics in 2024. They were clueless in 2012, and they're even more clueless today.

Edited September 8 by ZipCat

[exit322]

2 hours ago, ZipCat said:

 

Next do Expenditures. Most of the Revenue barely covers the operating budget of the Football program:

 

-$1.2 million for 62 Full-Scholarships (assuming basic tuition, room and board)
-$1.4 million for coaches

-$1 million at least a year for travel (The BIG-10 pays $7-million a year alone in travel expenses).

-$5-million a year in debt servicing for the White Elephant (based on old data, but I can't imagine it's far from $3-5million)

 

That's AT LEAST $8.6 million College football at UA costs. And even if we want to write-off the White-Elephant as "Infrastructure Capital Investment" (which would be an absolute, hysterical, joke) the basic operating expenses of the program are all that revenue covers. You could cut the Football program tomorrow, and thus lose all of it's revenue, and you either basically break-even, or completely come out with a net gain because you no longer have the looses.

 

How are we supposed to compete? How are we supposed to be an actual university when we're dumping resources down the drain on a White Elephant program that's kept only because a very small alumni base expect it, and the administrative state wants to keep it because it's good 6-figure jobs they can use to springboard to other, better things by building their resume. 

 

What physical, tangible, benefit does Akron Football have to the Students of the University Akron (who subsidize the entire athletic departments $30-million budget  to the tune of $19-million through student debt. 

 

There is none. Stop pretending Akron Football is something UA is neglecting and if only we spent a little more money we'd be able to compete. No, we won't. That ship sailed when you fired a named coach, with a college football pedigree in the same year the program beat it's first BIG-10 team ever, while the guy still had several years left on his contract.

 

Enough is enough. Akron Football is never going to be competitive, especially in the years of the NIL.

 

Takes like this are completely delusional of the reality of college athletics in 2024. They were clueless in 2012, and they're even more clueless today.

You pose good information here, and pretty well explain why Akron (and, really, the rest of the MAC) needs to drop to FCS if they're going to keep the facade of a "legitimate" football program around.

 

49 FCS teams outdrew what Akron announced in attendance last year.  It's not like a drop in level is going to hurt attendance any.

[ZipCat]

4 minutes ago, exit322 said:

You pose good information here, and pretty well explain why Akron (and, really, the rest of the MAC) needs to drop to FCS if they're going to keep the facade of a "legitimate" football program around.

 

49 FCS teams outdrew what Akron announced in attendance last year.  It's not like a drop in level is going to hurt attendance any.

 

I'm as much a diehard zip as anyone. But somebody has got to be the canary in the coalmine. It's 2024. The answer for a Mid-Major isn't "spend more" in NIL 2024. Hell, if we're going to spend more put it into Soccer and Basketball where we stand a chance of being competitive at 1/10th the price of trying to be competitive in College Football.

[zippy5]

Scholarships are a paper expense. Money from one pocket to the other 

[zippy5]

1 hour ago, exit322 said:

You pose good information here, and pretty well explain why Akron (and, really, the rest of the MAC) needs to drop to FCS if they're going to keep the facade of a "legitimate" football program around.

 

49 FCS teams outdrew what Akron announced in attendance last year.  It's not like a drop in level is going to hurt attendance any.

What does dropping to FCS accomplish money wise? The stadium debt is still there. Save a few hundred grand a year on salaries?

[MangoZip]

D1 gives 85 scholarships 

[zipsrule]

1 hour ago, exit322 said:

Akron (and, really, the rest of the MAC) needs to drop to FCS

MAC Commish to NIU AD:  "Hey I know you've just beaten the #5 team in the country, but we're going FCS next year."

 

I'd love to hear the laughter on the other side of that phone call.

[exit322]

2 hours ago, zippy5 said:

What does dropping to FCS accomplish money wise? The stadium debt is still there. Save a few hundred grand a year on salaries?

Sunk costs are already sunk.  Save every penny possible when it creates no difference in on-field quality.

[exit322]

2 hours ago, zipsrule said:

MAC Commish to NIU AD:  "Hey I know you've just beaten the #5 team in the country, but we're going FCS next year."

 

I'd love to hear the laughter on the other side of that phone call.

NIU can stay FBS and be independent if that's what they want to throw their money away on.

[zippy5]

58 minutes ago, exit322 said:

Sunk costs are already sunk.  Save every penny possible when it creates no difference in on-field quality.

What expenses do you cut that exceed the revenues we'll forgo?

[BlueGold Zip]

11 hours ago, zippy5 said:

What does dropping to FCS accomplish money wise? The stadium debt is still there. Save a few hundred grand a year on salaries?

Dropping to FCS would mean leaving the MAC. Losing any TV revenue and postseason tournament opportunities as we would be independent then. Might be more expensive in travel costs to send our teams traveling over the country to fill schedule

[kreed5120]

13 hours ago, ZipCat said:

 

I'm as much a diehard zip as anyone. But somebody has got to be the canary in the coalmine. It's 2024. The answer for a Mid-Major isn't "spend more" in NIL 2024. Hell, if we're going to spend more put it into Soccer and Basketball where we stand a chance of being competitive at 1/10th the price of trying to be competitive in College Football.

This is kind of where I stand. Financially we're kind of constrained as a University. We simply can't out spend all MAC schools in everything. At least not without some billionaire alumni magically coming forward to fund the athletic department as part of a vanity project.

 

We could theoretically strip funding from basketball and soccer to use towards football, but that's what other MAC schools have already done. Instead of having 2 great programs and 1 bad, we'd have 3 mediocre ones. The reality is our dollars go further funding basketball or soccer than they do football because you have fewer schools spending to compete in those sports.

 

I'm sure hearing this won't be a popular take on the football board in northeast Ohio, where football is supreme, but it's the sad reality.

[ZipCat]

5 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

At least not without some billionaire alumni magically coming forward to fund the athletic department as part of a vanity project.

 

And even then, we shouldn't want that. I'd rather a Billionaire fund the ACTUAL University, to help build it's profile for the students who come, and make the U more sustainable in it's goal of academics, rather than athletics. I've always wanted athletics to be a valuable avenue for Alumni to reconnect with the U ... but let's just be real here, the majority don't. We are the few.

[kreed5120]

2 hours ago, ZipCat said:

 

And even then, we shouldn't want that. I'd rather a Billionaire fund the ACTUAL University, to help build it's profile for the students who come, and make the U more sustainable in it's goal of academics, rather than athletics. I've always wanted athletics to be a valuable avenue for Alumni to reconnect with the U ... but let's just be real here, the majority don't. We are the few.

 

I don't feel it would be my place to tell anyone how they should spend their money. Theoretically it would still help the University if it meant the University no longer had to subsidize the cost of athletics.

[GP1]

On 9/8/2024 at 8:00 AM, ZipCat said:

How are we supposed to compete? How are we supposed to be an actual university when we're dumping resources down the drain on a White Elephant program that's kept only because a very small alumni base expect it, and the administrative state wants to keep it because it's good 6-figure jobs they can use to springboard to other, better things by building their resume. 

 

What physical, tangible, benefit does Akron Football have to the Students of the University Akron (who subsidize the entire athletic departments $30-million budget  to the tune of $19-million through student debt. 

Very spirited post. 

 

My perspective is the University is publicly funded up to one third of annual revenues, approximately. Should we be more competitive, of course. 

 

I'm of the opinion that the money being spent by the taxpayers of Ohio to fund MAC schools and athletic departments is well spent. I'm not sure every taxpayer would agree with me. Most probably wouldn't. In total, it's a lot of money. Spread out over all of the taxpaying citizens, it isn't. Therefore, the schools need to do something to get ahead the taxpayers discovering this. The taxpayers might feel different if for their tax dollars, they got four free general admission tickets to two MAC events annually. The taxpayers get a benefit and the universities get to show off their schools and make MAC athletics a benefit to the athletes students alumni fans and general communities around their schools. 

[kreed5120]

41 minutes ago, GP1 said:

Very spirited post. 

 

My perspective is the University is publicly funded up to one third of annual revenues, approximately. Should we be more competitive, of course. 

 

I'm of the opinion that the money being spent by the taxpayers of Ohio to fund MAC schools and athletic departments is well spent. I'm not sure every taxpayer would agree with me. Most probably wouldn't. In total, it's a lot of money. Spread out over all of the taxpaying citizens, it isn't. Therefore, the schools need to do something to get ahead the taxpayers discovering this. The taxpayers might feel different if for their tax dollars, they got four free general admission tickets to two MAC events annually. The taxpayers get a benefit and the universities get to show off their schools and make MAC athletics a benefit to the athletes students alumni fans and general communities around their schools. 

 

I don't really think it's the taxpayers funding athletics. The institutional support athletics receives from the University comes from student fees. The students already receive free admission.

 

Edit: Ohio already ranks near the bottom in state funding per full time student. We're currently 44th out of 50 states. It's hard for taxpayers to make a justifiable complaint considering we're already getting shown up by much poorer states like West Virginia, Alabama, Mississippi, etc.

 

https://ncses.nsf.gov/indicators/states/indicator/state-support-for-higher-education-per-fte-student

Edited September 9 by kreed5120

[GP1]

40 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

 

I don't really think it's the taxpayers funding athletics. The institutional support athletics receives from the University comes from student fees. The students already receive free admission.

 

Edit: Ohio already ranks near the bottom in state funding per full time student. We're currently 44th out of 50 states. It's hard for taxpayers to make a justifiable complaint considering we're already getting shown up by much poorer states like West Virginia, Alabama, Mississippi, etc.

 

https://ncses.nsf.gov/indicators/states/indicator/state-support-for-higher-education-per-fte-student

I hear this a lot. Technically, yes. In reality, the schools and athletic departments could not exist without taxpayer money. 

[kreed5120]

4 hours ago, GP1 said:

I hear this a lot. Technically, yes. In reality, the schools and athletic departments could not exist without taxpayer money. 

If you want to use that logic then OSU and Cincinnati athletic departments are also taxpayer funded therefore us taxpayers should be eligible to free tickets for those events as well. After all those schools athletic programs wouldn't exist if the school didn't. 

 

I'll go ahead and take my free tickets for the OSU-Michigan game. That way I can sell them and pocket the money.

Edited September 9 by kreed5120

[kreed5120]

I stumbled on this today. It's the MAC'S most recent tax filing. If you go to form 990 you can see the MAC distribution to each MAC school. Akron received just over $2 million. Ohio and Toledo received the most money at ~2.8 million. I presume this was based off of performance incentives for football and Ohio earning the MAC an extra NCAA tournament credit when they made the round of 32 a few years back.

 

https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/310682486/202411369349308926/full

Edited September 9 by kreed5120

[GP1]

23 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

If you want to use that logic then OSU and Cincinnati athletic departments are also taxpayer funded therefore us taxpayers should be eligible to free tickets for those events as well. After all those schools athletic programs wouldn't exist if the school didn't. 

 

I'll go ahead and take my free tickets for the OSU-Michigan game. That way I can sell them and pocket the money.

In recent years, OSU didn't sell out a couple of games. I'm all for taxpayers getting tickets for the remainder.