Author Topic: USA Today Athletic Department Finances  (Read 11362 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline EMAWmeister

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 8957
  • Livin' it up
    • View Profile
USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« on: May 08, 2013, 10:15:25 AM »








A few things that stick out:

Contributions decreasing nearly $12m from '11 to '12.  I'm guessing this has a lot to do with donations towards the westside expansion in '11, but it's still a little strange.

The massive jump in expenses from '05 to '06 in coaching salaries and scholarships before leveling off. Hiring 2 new coaching staffs explains a portion of the coaching salaries, but scholarships going from $450k to $4.5m? And why do our 2012 expenses only increase slightly from '11 to '12?  Just capitalizing construction costs until the Westside is ready for use?  It just seems that a $75m project should increase expenses by more than $1.2m.

I know that these are just overly-simplified charts to show financial information, so maybe our financial statements would explain those a lot better.

Here is the link for other schools. Pretty interesting. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/


(Want to get rid of the ad? Register now for free!)

Offline Belvis Noland

  • Katpak'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ***
  • Posts: 3964
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2013, 10:26:35 AM »
I would imagine the contribution disparity between '11-'12 has to do with the privately funded BBTF. 

Offline scottwildcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16430
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2013, 10:27:12 AM »
Need to spend more. There are no shareholders to pass profits through to.

Offline Shacks

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1829
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #3 on: May 08, 2013, 10:31:06 AM »
Just a little bullshit to hit the students for $640K while they're pocketing nearly 13 million

Offline EMAWmeister

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 8957
  • Livin' it up
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #4 on: May 08, 2013, 10:32:57 AM »
Unless this info is wrong, the increase in expenses (05-06) is really WTF.  I can't find any other school that jumped like that.

Offline Shacks

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1829
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2013, 10:46:08 AM »
Unless this info is wrong, the increase in expenses (05-06) is really WTF.  I can't find any other school that jumped like that.

You mean 06-07?  Maybe it's the Beasley payment :dunno:

Offline CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38046
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #6 on: May 08, 2013, 10:49:27 AM »
I would imagine the contribution disparity between '11-'12 has to do with the privately funded BBTF.

#BID effect.

Offline EMAWmeister

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 8957
  • Livin' it up
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #7 on: May 08, 2013, 10:49:36 AM »
Unless this info is wrong, the increase in expenses (05-06) is really WTF.  I can't find any other school that jumped like that.

You mean 06-07?  Maybe it's the Beasley payment :dunno:

I meant the scholarship expense

Offline Brock Landers

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7239
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #8 on: May 08, 2013, 10:56:28 AM »
Unless this info is wrong, the increase in expenses (05-06) is really WTF.  I can't find any other school that jumped like that.

You mean 06-07?  Maybe it's the Beasley payment :dunno:

I meant the scholarship expense


Pretty sure it's just a typo, like our Total Revenues in 2006.

Offline Belvis Noland

  • Katpak'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ***
  • Posts: 3964
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #9 on: May 08, 2013, 11:06:17 AM »
Just a little bullshit to hit the students for $640K while they're pocketing nearly 13 million

I've got to think the AD isn't just "pocketing" any profits.  Obviously, ADJC and his staff aren't sharing the profits as bonuses or something. 

How do we account for the profits?  How are they itemized on the balance sheet?  I have no clue. 

It seems like ADJC is using this money on facility improvements.  or on coaching bonuses.   

Offline CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38046
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2013, 11:08:50 AM »
Coaching bonuses is a good point.  I mean, I hope we have learned our lesson and just start including a line item for Conference Championship Bonuses for all the sports.


Offline hjfklmor

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 303
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #11 on: May 08, 2013, 11:11:05 AM »

Contributions decreasing nearly $12m from '11 to '12.  I'm guessing this has a lot to do with donations towards the westside expansion in '11, but it's still a little strange.


I believe USA Today has this incorrect on their summary. For 2011 they are using the contributions line item from the financials plus the two separately stated contributions line items further down for the WSC and BBTF. For 2012 they are only using the contributions line item and they have apparently included the separately stated contributions somewhere else. I think this is why total revenue has not changed much while contributions have.

I could be wrong though.  :dunno:

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 59352
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #12 on: May 08, 2013, 11:13:30 AM »
I think I may have read that they changed accounting policy on capital contributions in 2012.   I seem to recall ADJC saying that last year we had $28 million in cash contributions, but that they weren't counting contributions towards capital projects as athletic department operating revenue.

But don't hold me to that.


Offline scottwildcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16430
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #13 on: May 08, 2013, 11:34:29 AM »
I think I may have read that they changed accounting policy on capital contributions in 2012.   I seem to recall ADJC saying that last year we had $28 million in cash contributions, but that they weren't counting contributions towards capital projects as athletic department operating revenue.

But don't hold me to that.

I think I remember that in one of his weekly emails.

Offline Pete

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 30944
  • T-Shirt KSU Football Fan, Loves Lawrence and KU
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #14 on: May 08, 2013, 11:39:45 AM »
Does "Right Licensing" go up because of exit fees paid by aTm and Mizzou?

Offline cfbandyman

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 11025
  • To da 'ville.
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #15 on: May 08, 2013, 12:33:39 PM »
Our profit is still crazy good ($12,276,830) good for 9th (profit second to right, profit rank far right column)

RR     School       Revenue             Expense             Subsidy    %Sub  Profit         Profit Rank     
6   Texas A&M   $119,702,222    $81,792,118    $5,200,000    4.34   $37,910,104    1
1   Texas           $163,295,115    $138,269,710    $0            0   $25,025,405    2
3   Michigan   $140,131,187    $115,200,187    $258,885    0.18   $24,931,000    3
2   Ohio State   $142,043,057    $124,419,412    $0            0   $17,623,645    4
14   Arkansas   $99,757,482    $82,470,473    $1,949,180    1.95   $17,287,009    5
4   Alabama   $124,899,945    $108,204,867    $5,461,200    4.37   $16,695,078    6
5   Florida   $120,772,106    $105,102,198    $4,356,457    3.61   $15,669,908    7
7   LSU           $114,787,786    $101,989,116    $0            0   $12,798,670    8
43   Kansas State   $63,271,615    $50,994,785    $2,735,933    4.32   $12,276,830    9
9   Oklahoma   $106,456,616    $96,250,328    $0            0   $10,206,288    10
.
.
.
40   Texas Tech   $67,928,350    $60,346,836    $3,753,979    5.53   $7,581,514    14
.
.
.
50   Iowa State   $55,151,017    $55,113,720    $1,721,449    3.12   $37,297    122
.
.
.
Last 4 in terms of profit:
36   Kansas   $70,228,913    $78,973,441    $2,850,173    4.06   ($8,744,528)   225
22   Oklahoma State   $87,270,598    $96,782,619    $6,284,687    7.2   ($9,512,021)   226
28   West Virginia   $80,064,869    $92,968,960    $4,491,240    5.61   ($12,904,091)   227
52   Missouri   $50,719,665    $66,980,889    $1,935,944    3.82   ($16,261,224)   228


Baylor and TCU are not in the list since they are private schools and do not have to divulge their finances. Also, just wanted to include mizzou in for fun.

A&M Style: 1/19/13 Co-Champion of THE ED's College Basketball Challenge

The art of the deal with it poors

OG Elon hater


Offline Pete

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 30944
  • T-Shirt KSU Football Fan, Loves Lawrence and KU
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #16 on: May 08, 2013, 12:38:44 PM »
Others may do this as well, but someone pointed out that we count pledges as revenue.

All of those lists are rough ridin' horse crap.  Show me a statement of cash flows, or GTFOOMF.

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 47939
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #17 on: May 08, 2013, 12:43:33 PM »
Just a little bullshit to hit the students for $640K while they're pocketing nearly 13 million

gmafb.  eat a dick and pay the $30, it should be a lot higher.


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline cfbandyman

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 11025
  • To da 'ville.
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #18 on: May 08, 2013, 12:47:15 PM »
Others may do this as well, but someone pointed out that we count pledges as revenue.

All of those lists are rough ridin' horse crap.  Show me a statement of cash flows, or GTFOOMF.

It'll be interesting when the statements come out in a few months what the numbers are. Would be nice to have the cash flows to see how we are being financed. Statement of owner's equity statement would be also interesting to see what we spend things on (even if it'll be vague in some area).
A&M Style: 1/19/13 Co-Champion of THE ED's College Basketball Challenge

The art of the deal with it poors

OG Elon hater


Offline Shacks

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1829
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #19 on: May 08, 2013, 12:50:56 PM »
Just a little bullshit to hit the students for $640K while they're pocketing nearly 13 million

gmafb.  eat a dick and pay the $30, it should be a lot higher.

Wouldn't have a problem with it if KSU's athletic budget was barely breaking even, but when they're profiting over 10 million it is bullshit to nickel and dime a group that is already paying thousands every semester to the university

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 47939
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #20 on: May 08, 2013, 12:54:28 PM »
Just a little bullshit to hit the students for $640K while they're pocketing nearly 13 million

gmafb.  eat a dick and pay the $30, it should be a lot higher.

Wouldn't have a problem with it if KSU's athletic budget was barely breaking even, but when they're profiting over 10 million it is bullshit to nickel and dime a group that is already paying thousands every semester to the university

the "university" is separate from the AD though.  and students aren't being nickled and dimed.  how any student can complain about the small amount of athletic fees they pay, given everything that is going on within the AD, is insane. 

i guess titletown, WSC, BTF, oscar's buyout, it should all be free.  a little perspective wouldn't hurt.


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline scottwildcat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 16430
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #21 on: May 08, 2013, 12:56:53 PM »
Just a little bullshit to hit the students for $640K while they're pocketing nearly 13 million

gmafb.  eat a dick and pay the $30, it should be a lot higher.

Wouldn't have a problem with it if KSU's athletic budget was barely breaking even, but when they're profiting over 10 million it is bullshit to nickel and dime a group that is already paying thousands every semester to the university

the "university" is separate from the AD though.  and students aren't being nickled and dimed.  how any student can complain about the small amount of athletic fees they pay, given everything that is going on within the AD, is insane. 

i guess titletown, WSC, BTF, oscar's buyout, it should all be free.  a little perspective wouldn't hurt.

This.

Offline Shacks

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1829
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #22 on: May 08, 2013, 12:59:35 PM »
Just a little bullshit to hit the students for $640K while they're pocketing nearly 13 million

gmafb.  eat a dick and pay the $30, it should be a lot higher.

Wouldn't have a problem with it if KSU's athletic budget was barely breaking even, but when they're profiting over 10 million it is bullshit to nickel and dime a group that is already paying thousands every semester to the university

the "university" is separate from the AD though.  and students aren't being nickled and dimed.  how any student can complain about the small amount of athletic fees they pay, given everything that is going on within the AD, is insane. 

i guess titletown, WSC, BTF, oscar's buyout, it should all be free.  a little perspective wouldn't hurt.

I thought the AD, although cutting back, was still receiving money from the university fund.  If I'm right about that why should they also charge student fees, considering tuition goes to the university's bank account?

Offline pissclams

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 47939
  • (worst non-premium poster at goEMAW.com)
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #23 on: May 08, 2013, 01:06:05 PM »
because crap is expensive. 


Cheesy Mustache QB might make an appearance.

New warning: Don't get in a fight with someone who doesn't even need to bother to buy ink.

Offline EMAWmeister

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 8957
  • Livin' it up
    • View Profile
Re: USA Today Athletic Department Finances
« Reply #24 on: May 08, 2013, 01:07:57 PM »
Just a little bullshit to hit the students for $640K while they're pocketing nearly 13 million

gmafb.  eat a dick and pay the $30, it should be a lot higher.

Wouldn't have a problem with it if KSU's athletic budget was barely breaking even, but when they're profiting over 10 million it is bullshit to nickel and dime a group that is already paying thousands every semester to the university

the "university" is separate from the AD though.  and students aren't being nickled and dimed.  how any student can complain about the small amount of athletic fees they pay, given everything that is going on within the AD, is insane. 

i guess titletown, WSC, BTF, oscar's buyout, it should all be free.  a little perspective wouldn't hurt.

Texas charges students $0 and look where it's gotten them! :o