2012 NCAA Total Revenue by Athletic Department

Harry · May 9, 2013

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/schools/finances/

Interesting to note it appears that Old Dominion has the biggest budget in C-USA...

KRAM1 · May 9, 2013

We need to somehow move way up that chart.

Harry · May 9, 2013

Found this interesting analysis posted by a UTEP fan:

Just for fun, here's the first and last place schools in their respective conferences:

Big XII
Texas $163 million
Iowa State $55 million

Big Ten
Ohio State $142 million
Rutgers $64 million

SEC
Alabama $124 million
Missouri $50 million

Pac-12
Oregon $94 million (although USC is #1 in the conference but since they're private they don't have to release any records)
Utah $40 million (they should be getting their full share of Pac-12 TV revenue starting this year)

ACC
Florida State $100 million
North Carolina State $59 million (probably Wake Forest or Boston College are in last place)

AAC
UConn $63 million
East Carolina $35 million (maybe Tulane would be in last place)

MWC
UNLV $58 million
Utah State $21 million

C-USA
Old Dominion $35 million
Louisiana Tech $18 million

MAC
UMass $29 million
Bowling Green $20 million

Sun Belt
New Mexico State $28 million
Louisiana-Monroe $11 million

Christopher Walker · May 9, 2013

Wow. 49% subsidized...

outoftown · May 9, 2013

Wow. 49% subsidized...

That is actually less than most schools at a comparable expense level show.

Also: NTdid move up the chart quite a bit: both revenues and axpenses are up about 8 million for 2012 compared to 2011, and most of what was additional on the expenses part comes from Buildings/Grounds.

Proud North Texan · May 9, 2013

Embarrassing......

PlummMeanGreen · May 9, 2013

Would someone please explain to me (if I missed it before) why TSU-San Marcos (an athletic program just out of an NCAA FCS classification) numbers are so much larger than UNT's? I know they've already passed us in their total endowment coffers but this athletic thing is a bitter pill, especially for many of us older alums. Sounds like our (eventual) new UNT president and BOR's need to have a number of come to Jesus meetings with a a whole bunch of UNT employees with these kind of developments.

meangreener · May 9, 2013

So very embarrassing. NMSU is higher. A school as large as us has that small of a budget. Embarrassing.

Eastern Michigan has a higher budget. E.M.U. A school that has never had success.

Edited May 9, 2013 by meangreener

KRAM1 · May 9, 2013

Anyone who thinks this is embarrassing knows exactly what they can do to help. What you see here has, in part, as much to do with the lack of support from UNT's fan base, such that it is, as it is to any BOR member or UNT staffer. Passing the buck and passing the blame without looking in the mirror first is not going to get it done.

This is, in part, due to years and years of neglect by fans, administration, BOR, alums, etc., etc. It will not be fixed overnight, but IT IS BEING FIXED! We will all know that day has arrived when people stop making lame excuses as to why they don't support UNT, and instead we start hearing about all the ways folks have started to support UNT.

And, yes, i plan on living long after I see that happen...good stuff is happening...jump aboard.

Edited May 9, 2013 by KRAM1

untjim1995 · May 9, 2013

Would someone please explain to me (if I missed it before) why TSU-San Marcos (an athletic program just out of an NCAA FCS classification) numbers are so much larger than UNT's? I know they've already passed us in their total endowment coffers but this athletic thing is a bitter pill, especially for many of us older alums. Sounds like our (eventual) new UNT president and BOR's need to have a number of come to Jesus meetings with a a whole bunch of UNT employees with these kind of developments.

The answer is very easy to understand, PMG. Both Texas State and UTSA have the full athletic fee per semester hour that is being charged ($20) to their students and it not set to ever end. Here, at UNT, we have a $10/hr athletics fee that can go higher if the leaders wanted it to, but they are content at the level it is at so that it keeps tuition at a level that equates to being a "value".

Also, those two schools never told their alumni and fans that FBS football doesn't matter that much, like we did for over 12 years. Not only did you lose a few generations of fans by doing this, the alumni who you lost back then are at points in their lives where they can give more back to the university, since they are in their 40s and 50s now. Instead, the large classed of graduates from 1982-1994 basically placed their fandom--and money--with the pro teams in the area or with other schools that are cool to be associated with. Neither Texas State, nor UTSA, have to deal with any of these issues. Their athletic coffers, particularly on the revenue side, show that an emphasis on sports is already helping their programs to move upward. Will it continue that way? Who knows. But the fact remains that their leaders want to build up their football programs and they are unapologetically chargin the full student fee for athletics to get it promoted faster.

Green Crazy · May 9, 2013

Why is it that our expenses are so much more than our revenue? The only other schools close to this are Arizona, Kansas, West Virginia and okie st. Is some of the stadium included in this?

While the majority of this issue lies in the athletics fee, we will see an increase in revenue from the new tv contracts and increased attendance (I'm anticipating more opponent's fans traveling and a slight increase in our attendance). Plus, our expenses will also drop due to the proximity of our opponents (travel costs). This however is a drop in the bucket compared to where we really need to be and while Kram is right about the alum giving more (especially those untapped alum), in a year or two we need to increase the athletic's fee again. I think the bor is afraid of student numbers dropping if our tuition increases. The university just needs to bite the bullet and increase the fee. We shouldn't be at the bottom of the state in regards to this fee.

GMG!

MeanGreenTexan · May 9, 2013

Anyone who thinks this is embarrassing knows exactly what they can do to help. What you see here has, in part, as much to do with the lack of support from UNT's fan base, such that it is, as it is to any BOR member or UNT staffer. Passing the buck and passing the blame without looking in the mirror first is not going to get it done.

This is, in part, due to years and years of neglect by fans, administration, BOR, alums, etc., etc. It will not be fixed overnight, but IT IS BEING FIXED! We will all know that day has arrived when people stop making lame excuses as to why they don't support UNT, and instead we start hearing about all the ways folks have started to support UNT.

And, yes, i plan on living long after I see that happen...good stuff is happening...jump aboard.

GMG.com is the wrong audience KRAM. Just about all of us here are already helping, and it's still embarrassing.

Need to get the City of Denton involved. Need to get DFW alumni interested. Can't do either without winning first.

But, the Athletic Department and the University as a whole need to have a plan in place before we do start winning.

GL2Greatness · May 9, 2013

The answer is very easy to understand, PMG. Both Texas State and UTSA have the full athletic fee per semester hour that is being charged ($20) to their students and it not set to ever end. Here, at UNT, we have a $10/hr athletics fee that can go higher if the leaders wanted it to, but they are content at the level it is at so that it keeps tuition at a level that equates to being a "value".

Also, those two schools never told their alumni and fans that FBS football doesn't matter that much, like we did for over 12 years. Not only did you lose a few generations of fans by doing this, the alumni who you lost back then are at points in their lives where they can give more back to the university, since they are in their 40s and 50s now. Instead, the large classed of graduates from 1982-1994 basically placed their fandom--and money--with the pro teams in the area or with other schools that are cool to be associated with. Neither Texas State, nor UTSA, have to deal with any of these issues. Their athletic coffers, particularly on the revenue side, show that an emphasis on sports is already helping their programs to move upward. Will it continue that way? Who knows. But the fact remains that their leaders want to build up their football programs and they are unapologetically chargin the full student fee for athletics to get it promoted faster.

this is incorrect in relation to the dollar figures listed on the above link

Texas State will not be charging a full $20 until this year so the figures listed do not include a full $20 dollar fee

http://www.txstate.edu/news/news_releases/news_archive/2008/02/referendumpasses021308.html

the Texas state fee started in 2008 at $10 and goes up $2 per year and does not become the full $20 until 2013 so the 2012 numbers are not with a full $20 dollar fee

2013 for Texas State should see about $1.5 million more from the additional $2 for the final raise of the student fee it will probably show up $750,000 in the 2012-13 year and then an additional $750,000 in the 2013-14 year where it will be totaled out

and while UTSA caps their fee at $240 which would be $20 per credit hour for 12 credit hours a full time student is considered 15 hours and most schools cap their fees that are per credit hout at 15 hours so if UTSA was charging a full fee it would be $300 for a 15 hour student and capped there VS being capped at 12 hours no matter if the student takes 15 hours or not

http://utsa.edu/today/2007/09/athleticsfee.cfm

PlummMeanGreen · May 9, 2013

The answer is very easy to understand, PMG. Both Texas State and UTSA have the full athletic fee per semester hour that is being charged ($20) to their students and it not set to ever end. Here, at UNT, we have a $10/hr athletics fee that can go higher if the leaders wanted it to, but they are content at the level it is at so that it keeps tuition at a level that equates to being a "value".

Also, those two schools never told their alumni and fans that FBS football doesn't matter that much, like we did for over 12 years. Not only did you lose a few generations of fans by doing this, the alumni who you lost back then are at points in their lives where they can give more back to the university, since they are in their 40s and 50s now. Instead, the large classed of graduates from 1982-1994 basically placed their fandom--and money--with the pro teams in the area or with other schools that are cool to be associated with. Neither Texas State, nor UTSA, have to deal with any of these issues. Their athletic coffers, particularly on the revenue side, show that an emphasis on sports is already helping their programs to move upward. Will it continue that way? Who knows. But the fact remains that their leaders want to build up their football programs and they are unapologetically chargin the full student fee for athletics to get it promoted faster.

Thank you, untjim1995.

meangreener · May 9, 2013

this is incorrect in relation to the dollar figures listed on the above link

Texas State will not be charging a full $20 until this year so the figures listed do not include a full $20 dollar fee

http://www.txstate.edu/news/news_releases/news_archive/2008/02/referendumpasses021308.html

the Texas state fee started in 2008 at $10 and goes up $2 per year and does not become the full $20 until 2013 so the 2012 numbers are not with a full $20 dollar fee

2013 for Texas State should see about $1.5 million more from the additional $2 for the final raise of the student fee it will probably show up $750,000 in the 2012-13 year and then an additional $750,000 in the 2013-14 year where it will be totaled out

and while UTSA caps their fee at $240 which would be $20 per credit hour for 12 credit hours a full time student is considered 15 hours and most schools cap their fees that are per credit hout at 15 hours so if UTSA was charging a full fee it would be $300 for a 15 hour student and capped there VS being capped at 12 hours no matter if the student takes 15 hours or not

http://utsa.edu/today/2007/09/athleticsfee.cfm

Nobody cares.

DallasGreen · May 9, 2013

Enrollment will not be hurt by increasing the fee each year as can be done by BOR @ $ 1/ hour per year. Where else are the students going to go? They can't get the same quality of education for this price anywhere else! UT and T$M certainly do not let their students hold them hostage when It comes to athletic fees. They don't want to be the cheapest. They want to be the best. Until this attitude prevails with the students, the administration, and the jerk water town of little "d" problems will continue with funding. Alums must be proud of their alma mater for more than just jazz heads. Things to inspire pride are engineering, business, medicine, pharmacy, & law.

meangreener · May 9, 2013

Enrollment will not be hurt by increasing the fee each year as can be done by BOR @ $ 1/ hour per year. Where else are the students going to go? They can't get the same quality of education for this price anywhere else! UT and T$M certainly do not let their students hold them hostage when It comes to athletic fees. They don't want to be the cheapest. They want to be the best. Until this attitude prevails with the students, the administration, and the jerk water town of little "d" problems will continue with funding. Alums must be proud of their alma mater for more than just jazz heads. Things to inspire pride are engineering, business, medicine, pharmacy, & law.

I don't think UNT will ever be that good at engineering, business, medicine, pharmacy or law. We're a liberal arts college, flat out. A public liberal arts school. I think there's plenty pride among the graduates now. But I do think this whole "We need to be the cheapest" needs to go away.

DallasGreen · May 9, 2013

I don't think UNT will ever be that good at engineering, business, medicine, pharmacy or law. We're a liberal arts college, flat out. A public liberal arts school. I think there's plenty pride among the graduates now. But I do think this whole "We need to be the cheapest" needs to go away.

That attitude keeps us at status quo. Look at the big donors and their commitments are much greater than anything in music or education. Business and the professions give back and liberal arts don't. That is fact not pontification.

untjim1995 · May 9, 2013

That attitude keeps us at status quo. Look at the big donors and their commitments are much greater than anything in music or education. Business and the professions give back and liberal arts don't. That is fact not pontification.

I wouldn't hold your breath, DallasGreen. I don't see how youre gonna change 100 years of mindset anytime soon, especially if that FBS split occurs within the next 5-10 years and we are not included. The folks who got the new stadium fee passed are going to have to answer big time if we get knocked back down to a new i-aa level after spending 78+million on Apogee, much of which was built on the students fees. I can only imagine the outcry from the anti-athletics crowd if that scenario plays out. You wait and see how many letters to the editor and how many verbal complaints will come in from all over Denton on how much money could have been saved and put toward their pet issues (education, arts, and music). I'll tell you what, I wouldn't want to be on the other end of the microphone having to answer to that crowd.

meangreener · May 10, 2013

That attitude keeps us at status quo. Look at the big donors and their commitments are much greater than anything in music or education. Business and the professions give back and liberal arts don't. That is fact not pontification.

It doesn't keep us at the status quo. Our excellence at liberal arts keeps us from being a school for UT rejects. Most of our liberal arts students are here as a first choice, I'd estimate. Our problem is not our liberal art majors. We've never been a business or engineering based school, and I hope we never do. Because then that just makes us a school for UT rejects, like UH.

We can have success in athletics and have success in liberal arts.

I'm an English major. I came for Journalism. If I came for business or engineering, I would not be here, that's for sure, even if UNT was trying to make it better because of the label as this as a liberal art school. UNT has a weird, funky vibe that would be quite boring and plain if we stopped focusing our academic efforts on liberal arts, teaching, etc

Instead of emulating UT like about 4 other schools try and fail to, focus on what makes UNT great. Keep these programs, but don't put all the eggs in one basket, because trying to emulate UT doesn't work. I don't think having a huge endowment is necessary for our success. I'd rather be a school full of people who go to school for an education than a school for people who go to get a job.

Edited May 10, 2013 by meangreener

MeanMag · May 10, 2013

It doesn't keep us at the status quo. Our excellence at liberal arts keeps us from being a school for UT rejects. Most of our liberal arts students are here as a first choice, I'd estimate. Our problem is not our liberal art majors. We've never been a business or engineering based school, and I hope we never do. Because then that just makes us a school for UT rejects, like UH.
We can have success in athletics and have success in liberal arts.
I'm an English major. I came for Journalism. If I came for business or engineering, I would not be here, that's for sure, even if UNT was trying to make it better because of the label as this as a liberal art school. UNT has a weird, funky vibe that would be quite boring and plain if we stopped focusing our academic efforts on liberal arts, teaching, etc
Instead of emulating UT like about 4 other schools try and fail to, focus on what makes UNT great. Keep these programs, but don't put all the eggs in one basket, because trying to emulate UT doesn't work. I don't think having a huge endowment is necessary for our success. I'd rather be a school full of people who go to school for an education than a school for people who go to get a job.

The people in the Accounting and Logistics departments of business will disagree with you. Add computer and environmental sciences. Many notable and wealthy alumns come from those areas.

If you're going to school for the experience and education, you're missing the most important part. It's about getting and creating jobs. The State funded university model wouldn't exist otherwise. Much talk has been given to discontinuing subsidies for liberal arts degrees. Many feel that subsidies should go to STEM degrees, (science, tech, engineering, math). These are focuses of the future and the nation. There is a large gap coming for qualified individuals in the engineering and math fields in this country.

Edited May 10, 2013 by MeanMag

meangreener · May 10, 2013

The people in the Accounting and Logistics departments of business will disagree with you. Add computer and environmental sciences. Many notable and wealthy alumns come from those areas.

If you're going to school for the experience and education, you're missing the most important part. It's about getting and creating jobs. The State funded university model wouldn't exist otherwise. Much talk has been given to discontinuing subsidies for liberal arts degrees. Many feel that subsidies should go to STEM degrees, (science, tech, engineering, math). These are focuses of the future and the nation. There is a large gap coming for qualified individuals in the engineering and math fields in this country.

People at UNT won't just stand by as this school becomes a school for UT rejects, so you can wish that UNT was a UH or TSSM replica, but it's not happening for a school with a reputation based off of education and liberal arts degrees. I'm not going to get into a "School's for jobs and not learning," argument.

MeanMag · May 10, 2013

People at UNT won't just stand by as this school becomes a school for UT rejects, so you can wish that UNT was a UH or TSSM replica, but it's not happening for a school with a reputation based off of education and liberal arts degrees. I'm not going to get into a "School's for jobs and not learning," argument.

There's plenty of need for people with stem degrees from universities other than UT and ATM. This state is going to need more than those schools can produce in the future. Unt is already very similar to tssm in that it too has a reputation for education. Like it or not it is changing. Unt is not going to be just a liberal arts school going forward, although it may always be world class at it. Look at where the research clusters are: http://research.unt.edu/clusters/. This isn't an accident. Edited May 10, 2013 by MeanMag

KRAM1 · May 10, 2013

GMG.com is the wrong audience KRAM. Just about all of us here are already helping, and it's still embarrassing.

Need to get the City of Denton involved. Need to get DFW alumni interested. Can't do either without winning first.

But, the Athletic Department and the University as a whole need to have a plan in place before we do start winning.

Oh, how I truly wish you were correct about the forum.