PAC 12 Schools Rely Heavily On Budget Help
- By Devil Dust
- Devils' Huddle
- 3 Replies
From Jon Wilner's PAC-12 Hotline today in the Daily Star...
According to Wilner, the 10 PAC public schools experienced an $81M shortfall last year and it gets worse when you subtract the support schools give to their athletic depts that take two primary forms...
1) direct transfers from central campus to athletic depts, and...
2) money from student fees that's allocated to athletics...
If you remove that support money, the shortfall for those schools and Stanford totaled $252.8M that is a huge chuck of change...
This has lead David Carter, a professor of sports business at USC and founder of the Sports Business Group, to conclude...
"Schools need to soberly address the role sports is intended to play on campus, and, as a result, schools need to measure both the return on investment and the return on objective associated with funding athletic departments"...
The context for this conclusion is based on these observations...
1) Typically, only men's football and basketball turn a profit or generate income for the athletic dept...
2) This means that over a dozen or so Olympic sports, that include ladies sports, lose money in every athletic dept...
3) On average each PAC school receives around almost $14M from direct transfer funds and student fees to help support all sports at any school...
4) Oregon is the only conference school that generates a profit ($3.8M) within its athletic dept that does not receive any support from central campus...
"Oregon's situation stands in stark contrast to ASU, Cal, Colorado, Stanford and UCLA which have deficits in excess of $30M when campus support and student fees are subtracted from their budgets"...
This leads to this question..."So, how much campus support is too much"..??
"That's a complicated question," says Smith College economics professor Andrew Zimbalist in his 2017 book..."Unwinding Madness: What Went Wrong with College Sports and How to Fix It"...
"Schools subsidize a lot of activities at universities. The question is whether the size is proportionate to the importance."
Athletics is considered by many to be the "front porch" where competitive success in athletics engenders all sorts of positive identification for the school...
For instance, Colorado, after hiring Deion Sanders, has seen a significant increase in students wanting to go there and has received millions of dollars in media attention to the school and Boulder where it is located...
It might be worth as much as $25M or more in branding or marketing exposure and even more if players and coaches are considered "ambassadors" to the university...
But, the bottom line is that college sports are now being viewed as becoming more and more professionalized which is viewed by many administrators as not what student-athletes was meant to be about...
And, IMHO, that is where president Crow is these days when in comes to making sure that Sun Devil athletics knows its proper place in the overall scope of things related to the schools primary mission that is not athletics...
Relatedly, from another Wilner article (UA Budget shortfall big but not hardly an outlier) today, he points out that Sun Devil athletics reported an operating shortfall $27.1M that included $16.6M in direct campus support...
Remove that figure and ASU's athletic dept booked $98M in revenue and $141.7M in expenses or a hole of $43.7M which was bigger than that at AU with all of its current financial problems...
And, from that perspective, it might shed some light on why ASU has not hurried in naming a new AD yet and why both Crow and Rossini have re-designed how the Sun Devil do business following the tenure of the former AD at the school...
Go Devils!!!
According to Wilner, the 10 PAC public schools experienced an $81M shortfall last year and it gets worse when you subtract the support schools give to their athletic depts that take two primary forms...
1) direct transfers from central campus to athletic depts, and...
2) money from student fees that's allocated to athletics...
If you remove that support money, the shortfall for those schools and Stanford totaled $252.8M that is a huge chuck of change...
This has lead David Carter, a professor of sports business at USC and founder of the Sports Business Group, to conclude...
"Schools need to soberly address the role sports is intended to play on campus, and, as a result, schools need to measure both the return on investment and the return on objective associated with funding athletic departments"...
The context for this conclusion is based on these observations...
1) Typically, only men's football and basketball turn a profit or generate income for the athletic dept...
2) This means that over a dozen or so Olympic sports, that include ladies sports, lose money in every athletic dept...
3) On average each PAC school receives around almost $14M from direct transfer funds and student fees to help support all sports at any school...
4) Oregon is the only conference school that generates a profit ($3.8M) within its athletic dept that does not receive any support from central campus...
"Oregon's situation stands in stark contrast to ASU, Cal, Colorado, Stanford and UCLA which have deficits in excess of $30M when campus support and student fees are subtracted from their budgets"...
This leads to this question..."So, how much campus support is too much"..??
"That's a complicated question," says Smith College economics professor Andrew Zimbalist in his 2017 book..."Unwinding Madness: What Went Wrong with College Sports and How to Fix It"...
"Schools subsidize a lot of activities at universities. The question is whether the size is proportionate to the importance."
Athletics is considered by many to be the "front porch" where competitive success in athletics engenders all sorts of positive identification for the school...
For instance, Colorado, after hiring Deion Sanders, has seen a significant increase in students wanting to go there and has received millions of dollars in media attention to the school and Boulder where it is located...
It might be worth as much as $25M or more in branding or marketing exposure and even more if players and coaches are considered "ambassadors" to the university...
But, the bottom line is that college sports are now being viewed as becoming more and more professionalized which is viewed by many administrators as not what student-athletes was meant to be about...
And, IMHO, that is where president Crow is these days when in comes to making sure that Sun Devil athletics knows its proper place in the overall scope of things related to the schools primary mission that is not athletics...
Relatedly, from another Wilner article (UA Budget shortfall big but not hardly an outlier) today, he points out that Sun Devil athletics reported an operating shortfall $27.1M that included $16.6M in direct campus support...
Remove that figure and ASU's athletic dept booked $98M in revenue and $141.7M in expenses or a hole of $43.7M which was bigger than that at AU with all of its current financial problems...
And, from that perspective, it might shed some light on why ASU has not hurried in naming a new AD yet and why both Crow and Rossini have re-designed how the Sun Devil do business following the tenure of the former AD at the school...
Go Devils!!!