Daily Campus: Athletic Department Spending Analysis

[PoconoPony]

Without getting too far into the accounting games Univerities play with their books, does anyone know if our scholarships are endowed? I would imagine that after all of these years, at least the football scholarships would be, does anyone know for sure?

Men's swimming has a number of endowed scholarships dating back to the mid 70s. I do not know the status today of the total endowments.

[Digetydog]

Without getting too far into the accounting games Univerities play with their books, does anyone know if our scholarships are endowed? I would imagine that after all of these years, at least the football scholarships would be, does anyone know for sure?

Men's swimming has a number of endowed scholarships dating back to the mid 70s. I do not know the status today of the total endowments.

Not to pick on Swimming, but do the have ANY revenue? Does Golf, Equestrian, Rowing, Tennis? Probably Not. Is that a problem? NO

With the exception of FB and Men's BB, every college sport program is an amenity for the students. Even the Ivy League schools spend a lot of money on non-revenue sports.

http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2015/02/0 ... cs-budget/
"According to data published by the U.S. Department of Education, the Athletics Department spent $37,624,262, second only to Penn’s $41,814,447 and far above the Ivy League average of $27,129,322. Of that total, Yale spent $17,479,117 directly on teams."
(Note - they claim to run a "surplus," but that figure includes recreation program revenues, annual giving and annual yield on its endowments.)

[footballdad]

TCU spends around 70 Million, while SMU Spends around 55 Million...revenues for TCU are 52 million while SMU's are 25 million. The 20 million dollar P5 gap is clear. And that is SMU with the current state of affairs...

"Hart says getting into a Power Five conference is not one of the goals of the university."

Mic drop! I accept your apology now.

[Stallion]

Total revenue for TCU athletic department was around 77 Million in 2014 -and I believe it was supposed to jump because they had phase in period in which they didn't get a full Big 12 conference split of revenue. Looks like Big 12 revenue share was about 60% in 2014, then reported to be escalating to 85% in 2015 and then 100% some time thereafter. I'd expect the gap is much bigger than reported here-maybe 40 Million per year

http://www.frogsowar.com/2015/1/10/7458 ... 14-edition

[Digetydog]

TCU spends around 70 Million, while SMU Spends around 55 Million...revenues for TCU are 52 million while SMU's are 25 million. The 20 million dollar P5 gap is clear. And that is SMU with the current state of affairs...

"Hart says getting into a Power Five conference is not one of the goals of the university."

Mic drop! I accept your apology now.

And yet I am 100% positive (based upon discussions with people not affiliated with SMU) that we have made the appropriate inquiries into joining a P5 conference?

Why the discrepancy?

1) A conference is like your job. You don't trash your current employer until you have a better one lined up.

2) We are NOT getting in to the B12 unless UT and OU leave. Everyone knows it. Campaigning for a third runner up is stupid. Frankly, if the B12 does expand, Memphis/UConn/UH are risking looking like rejects.

3) The ACC/B10/P12/SEC aren't expanding right now (if ever). Until they start adding members, our campaign to join a P5 conference needs to be low key and private.

[footballdad]

TCU spends around 70 Million, while SMU Spends around 55 Million...revenues for TCU are 52 million while SMU's are 25 million. The 20 million dollar P5 gap is clear. And that is SMU with the current state of affairs...

"Hart says getting into a Power Five conference is not one of the goals of the university."

Mic drop! I accept your apology now.

And yet I am 100% positive (based upon discussions with people not affiliated with SMU) that we have made the appropriate inquiries into joining a P5 conference?

Why the discrepancy?

1) A conference is like your job. You don't trash your current employer until you have a better one lined up.

2) We are NOT getting in to the B12 unless UT and OU leave. Everyone knows it. Campaigning for a third runner up is stupid. Frankly, if the B12 does expand, Memphis/UConn/UH are risking looking like rejects.

3) The ACC/B10/P12/SEC aren't expanding right now (if ever). Until they start adding members, our campaign to join a P5 conference needs to be low key and private.

People have a habit of inventing fictions they will believe wholeheartedly in order to ignore the truth they cannot accept.

[East Coast Mustang]

People have a habit of inventing fictions they will believe wholeheartedly in order to ignore the truth they cannot accept.

Like your son being good at football?

[footballdad]

People have a habit of inventing fictions they will believe wholeheartedly in order to ignore the truth they cannot accept.

Like your son being good at football?

"Hart says getting into a Power Five conference is not one of the goals of the university"

Straight forward, from the AD, out in public. How much more clearly would you like him to telegraph the future of SMU athletics:

“Our goal is to be the best program in the American Athletic Conference,” he says. “We don’t feel like conference affiliation is a hindrance to our goal to compete at a national level.”

Throw your hate at Hart, Turner, the Board, etc......not me, haha

[Pony Boss]

If that is the case (which I highly doubt) then the 1800 will drop down to 300 or less in the next 10 years. I won't be around supporting a sub .500 program and I'm sure many wont either. That is what you want though footballdad. What is your forecast for the future of America? I'm guessing you will surely include that the US will lose superpower status and eventually become a third world country by the end of the 21st century?
Go away and never come back trollbag

[One Trick Pony]

People have a habit of inventing fictions they will believe wholeheartedly in order to ignore the truth they cannot accept.

Like your son being good at football?

A☆

[CenTXpony]

People have a habit of inventing fictions they will believe wholeheartedly in order to ignore the truth they cannot accept.

Like your son being good at football?

[EastStang]

We shot ourselves in the foot 30 years ago when we put in rules that limited our rebound from the death penalty. We were tone deaf to the realignment chatter from Arkansas. We got into a conference after the death penalty that was as shaky as Don Knotts (WAC#1) and then ended up in the toaster leavin's conference (WAC #2), then yet another shaky conference (CUSA), then the best of the rest the AAC. Our football program despite being in several mediocre conferences has not excelled or dominated those conferences. Thus, each time a beauty pagent occurred, we were left behind. Add in our not very good home attendance and we are not a great fit for a P5 conference. Hoops may yet redeem us (which oddly was Pye's vision for our athletics). Right now we are in probably the best of the rest. We have Navy, Cincy, Temple, USF, ourselves, and UH as former P5 type programs. We have some good parts and pieces including UCF, Memphis, ECU and Tulsa. We simply need to start winning on the field and on the Court and maybe we'll catch a break.

[footballdad]

If that is the case (which I highly doubt) then the 1800 will drop down to 300 or less in the next 10 years. I won't be around supporting a sub .500 program and I'm sure many wont either. That is what you want though footballdad. What is your forecast for the future of America? I'm guessing you will surely include that the US will lose superpower status and eventually become a third world country by the end of the 21st century?
Go away and never come back trollbag

Hart is the one that just trolled you, in the SMU campus weekly no less. Haha

And the truth finally comes out. You won't be around supporting anything other than a P5 program playing against the TCU's and Baylor's of the world....because that is what you 'deserve' dammit! Tone down the arrogant and elitist attitude and just be the best AAC fan you can be.

If it's FCS, ECU, Navy, Tulane, Temple, Tulsa, etc.....you'll pout and take your ball and go home.

[JasonB]

10M deficit is not that bad, considering the return you get on advertising and the increased applicant rate.

The additional scholarship costs you can't really compare against other universities because they are so much cheaper... and some of them don't include that as part of the deficit ca.culations. It is an apples to oranges comparison and misleading.

Additionally, without athletics SMU have to lower the cost of attendance in order to attract more applications. Lost revenue from free scholarships versus the additional revenue gained by higher tuition... so hard to say whether or not the economic equation is a net zero, positive, or negative. If you have to drop the tuition by 5K because the number of applicants drops significantly, that is a $50M loss in revenue.

The most important quote in there is "the University doesn't view athletic spending as a deficit". It is a cost of doing business. That infers a proper commitment to athletics. The school certainly did not have that perspective in the 90s.

I don't see anything wrong with this quote: “Our goal is to be the best program in the American Athletic Conference,” he says. “We don’t feel like conference affiliation is a hindrance to our goal to compete at a national level.” It is absolutely true. Houston showed last year that you can be recognized at the national level in football, and we are nationally known in Basketball. UConn won the basketball championship. The conference doesn't hinder our goals Competing at a national level comes before P5 affiliation, not after. It shows me that the school has their goals set correctly.

[Digetydog]

10M deficit is not that bad, considering the return you get on advertising and the increased applicant rate.

The additional scholarship costs you can't really compare against other universities because they are so much cheaper... and some of them don't include that as part of the deficit ca.culations. It is an apples to oranges comparison and misleading.

Additionally, without athletics SMU have to lower the cost of attendance in order to attract more applications. Lost revenue from free scholarships versus the additional revenue gained by higher tuition... so hard to say whether or not the economic equation is a net zero, positive, or negative. If you have to drop the tuition by 5K because the number of applicants drops significantly, that is a $50M loss in revenue.

The most important quote in there is "the University doesn't view athletic spending as a deficit". It is a cost of doing business. That infers a proper commitment to athletics. The school certainly did not have that perspective in the 90s.

I don't see anything wrong with this quote: “Our goal is to be the best program in the American Athletic Conference,” he says. “We don’t feel like conference affiliation is a hindrance to our goal to compete at a national level.” It is absolutely true. Houston showed last year that you can be recognized at the national level in football, and we are nationally known in Basketball. UConn won the basketball championship. The conference doesn't hinder our goals Competing at a national level comes before P5 affiliation, not after. It shows me that the school has their goals set correctly.

I wonder how much the ROI is not n the golf program With DeChambeau's TV time figured into the equation.