Big East TV Deal with FOX, TNT, and NBC | Page 9 | The Boneyard

Big East TV Deal with FOX, TNT, and NBC

Joined
Jul 10, 2023
Messages
469
Reaction Score
1,192
One of the first things you learn as a financial analyst is that financial statements don't tell the real story. You have to look closely at allocated expenses and in many cases restate them and reallocate them. I once worked for a business that applied a flat overhead rate to product lines which made a small product line look unprofitable so they sold the product line. Then they figured out there really was very little overhead actually used by the product line and it was actually very profitable. They changed their cost accounting after that and made a better effort to determine actual overhead costs per product line.

UConn's athletic accounting has many bad assumptions although I think they have been making adjustments. Think about this. If you recruit an athlete from CT, UConn says the scholarship cost is x. If the student is from out of state, the scholarship cost is 2x (+/-). Does that really make sense? Things like student intramurals, etc fall under the athletic budget. There are many other examples I could site, but we have gone through this many times before. The biggest revenue opportunity for UConn is from football and that requires turning around performance. And, ultimately, an invite to the P4 and higher revenues will come from having respectable football.
Sincere thanks for your post. But I have been waiting 60 years for this university to have a respectable football program. I’m still waiting. Yes, entry into a P4 would solve many financial problems but even with 2 elite basketball programs we will never get a whiff of a P4 due to the football. Someone needs to tell me how that’s going to happen.
 

CL82

NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions - Again!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
57,844
Reaction Score
213,466
It generates no revenue so yes if it did, we would get closer to a balanced budget. But to say it doesn’t contribute to the deficit is wrong.
Yes, that would be wrong, but that's not what you said, right?

What you said was we have two choices to achieve solvency, either drop football or join the P4.

My reply was to say a you're not really talking about solvency and B if you're talking about breakeven or profitability the athletic department operates at a loss with or without football.

The Boneyard is a bad place to try moving the goal posts.

IMG_3005.jpeg

It's OK, you got confused about solvency, and you really didn't have a good handle on the athletic departments finances. It's all good.
 

CL82

NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions - Again!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
57,844
Reaction Score
213,466
MBB is helping put UConn in the red too. They lost 4 million in FY2023
And yet the same posters who talk about shutting down football never talk about shutting down men's basketball. I mean if profitability is the criteria, then I guess they should be making the argument for both sports.

Golly, now that I think about it, the entire university doesn't turn a profit without state subsidy. I guess we should shutter the place.
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2023
Messages
469
Reaction Score
1,192
Yes, that would be wrong, but that's not what you said, right?

UConn Football generates millions in revenue annually - it just doesn’t currently generate enough revenue to cover expenses. There is a difference.

Win and they will come…
Much better phased than what I posted. Simply put, it’s not self sustaining.
 

CL82

NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions - Again!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
57,844
Reaction Score
213,466
Much better phased than what I posted. Simply put, it’s not self sustaining.
But no Connecticut sport is self sustaining, right? Should all sports be canceled if we don't join a P4 conference?
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2011
Messages
4,946
Reaction Score
20,530
Yes, entry into a P4 would solve many financial problems but even with 2 elite basketball programs we will never get a whiff of a P4 due to the football. Someone needs to tell me how that’s going to happen.
Suggest you read the Conference Realignment board.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,437
Reaction Score
47,061
One of the first things you learn as a financial analyst is that financial statements don't tell the real story. You have to look closely at allocated expenses and in many cases restate them and reallocate them. I once worked for a business that applied a flat overhead rate to product lines which made a small product line look unprofitable so they sold the product line. Then they figured out there really was very little overhead actually used by the product line and it was actually very profitable. They changed their cost accounting after that and made a better effort to determine actual overhead costs per product line.

UConn's athletic accounting has many bad assumptions although I think they have been making adjustments. Think about this. If you recruit an athlete from CT, UConn says the scholarship cost is x. If the student is from out of state, the scholarship cost is 2x (+/-). Does that really make sense? Things like student intramurals, etc fall under the athletic budget. There are many other examples I could site, but we have gone through this many times before. The biggest revenue opportunity for UConn is from football and that requires turning around performance. And, ultimately, an invite to the P4 and higher revenues will come from having respectable football.
You have athletics budget accounting totally reversed.

The goal is to hide the amounts sunk into athletics from the parents of non-athlete students. Many people have thought the idea was to hide athletic costs.

As for your question about the recruited athlete from Connecticut versus elsewhere being accounted for differently, the answer to your question is YES it does make sense, since the expenditure for both students are closer to the tuition cost for the out of stater. The in-stater is supposedly subsidized, but as subsidies drop, the perverse incentive is created for schools to admit out of staters more easily into the school than vice versa.

It used to be that the goal of each department was to nurture as many students as possible into majors so that the department would be rewarded. Those days are long past at many schools since in-state students are considered losses to the bottom line. And they are.

Here are some of the major things hidden by the schools so others can't understand the costs associated:

1. Debt on stadium and facilities building. For instance, U. Michigan has bonded over $450m in the last decade on the stadium and arenas. The debt is held and accounted for by the university, not the AD. Penn State is considering $750m bond deal for stadium improvements right now.

2. Branding. All royalties are considered athletics income. I know athletics drive branding, but even at schools with no big time athletics, kids are going to buy hoodies with, for instance, NYU on the front.

3. Donations. It's been proven that many people that donate to universities do not realize that their donations are earmarked for athletics. For instance, they surveyed people who gave large $$ at a social event at the Longhorn Club at U. Texas. Most of the donors were unaware they were giving money to sports and not U. Texas.

If you really want to compare the cost of football, it would be interesting to see how much, say, Villanova spends on sports versus UConn. I know UConn has a lot more sports and spends a lot more for that reason, but I've seen athletic budgets at mid-majors skyrocket once football was added. Schools went from losing $10m to losing $35m overnight.

The colleges really are doing their best to hide these costs from parents, who seem largely unaware they are subsidizing sports each year with considerable amounts of money. Worse, if you're heavy on student loans, the student will end up paying for sports for the next 20 yrs.

The national media never discusses budgets when they make arguments for student athletes getting paid. If they did, there would be a national outcry. I have to think that someone is going to break this story now that athletes are getting paid a huge amount of money while students are subsidizing the AD at so many P4 schools. Especially with the price of tuition these days. This is a story that's just sitting on the T waiting for a little league reporter to knock it through the infield.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2015
Messages
1,060
Reaction Score
3,292
Sincere thanks for your post. But I have been waiting 60 years for this university to have a respectable football program. I’m still waiting. Yes, entry into a P4 would solve many financial problems but even with 2 elite basketball programs we will never get a whiff of a P4 due to the football. Someone needs to tell me how that’s going to happen.
Win
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,437
Reaction Score
47,061
And yet the same posters who talk about shutting down football never talk about shutting down men's basketball. I mean if profitability is the criteria, then I guess they should be making the argument for both sports.

Golly, now that I think about it, the entire university doesn't turn a profit without state subsidy. I guess we should shutter the place.
Even D3 schools lose money on sports, the Ivy leagues lose money.

So, to answer this question, there is a difference between losing a LOT of money and losing some money.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,437
Reaction Score
47,061
UConn is in a really tough spot here.

The state has cut funding and it has forced academic departments to downsize. This will have an adverse impact on education there.

The AD is not being asked to cut at the same time that the AD deficit is several times larger than the deficit at any of the schools inside the university...? Well this is a problem. And this problem will only get worse, in terms of optics, when it's understood that the school is now paying athletes huge amounts of money.

The best thing for UConn basketball was the outside NIL structure, because no one could complain.
 

Waquoit

Mr. Positive
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
32,817
Reaction Score
84,958
It appears the answer to this is "no". Every thread on the Boneyard about the Big East or UConn finances has to turn Apocalyptic.
Rightly so, though. We're still adrift. I think it will go away if we get pulled in to the lifeboat.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,437
Reaction Score
47,061

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,298
Reaction Score
33,463
Rightly so, though. We're still adrift. I think it will go away if we get pulled in to the lifeboat.

Wait, UConn has a revenue problem? Really? When did this happen?

Fun fact: EVERY REGULAR POSTER ON THIS BOARD GETS THAT UCONN HAS A REVENUE PROBLEM. Some of us just choose not to rain misery on every thread.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
5,610
Reaction Score
13,617
What is your point?
We love our women’s team
almost as much as we love our men’s . However from zn objective business
prospective. Just pretend they‘re three different productd you produce.
X is a great product but in a market that’s limited
Y another great product with a larger market but also limited
Z is in the huge market however the quality of our product has restricted our potential market share
if I were a consulting firm hired by a company concerned with ROI , increasing the quality of Z would be a top priority.

X. Men’s basketball
Y. Women’s basketball
Z Footbzll
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,298
Reaction Score
33,463
We love our women’s team
almost as much as we love our men’s . However from zn objective business
prospective. Just pretend they‘re three different productd you produce.
X is a great product but in a market that’s limited
Y another great product with a larger market but also limited
Z is in the huge market however the quality of our product has restricted our potential market share
if I were a consulting firm hired by a company concerned with ROI , increasing the quality of Z would be a top priority.

X. Men’s basketball
Y. Women’s basketball
Z Footbzll

People continue to confuse revenue and profit.

X and Y have very low overhead and manageable costs (even post-House), and are general profitable when done at a high level.

Z has a huge overhead cost that just got a lot worse with the House Settlement. Many major conference programs were already losing money on Z before their costs went up $20 million/season with House.
 

Waquoit

Mr. Positive
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
32,817
Reaction Score
84,958
"What do the numbers say? According to the National Science Foundation, per student state support for higher education in Connecticut — when adjusted for inflationdecreased from $16,075 in 2001 to $12,344 by 2021. That is a decline of 23 percent."
That doesn't mean the state cut funding.
 

CL82

NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions - Again!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
57,844
Reaction Score
213,466
Even D3 schools lose money on sports, the Ivy leagues lose money.

So, to answer this question, there is a difference between losing a LOT of money and losing some money.
What's the cut off line in your view? Because if it's millions of dollars then we ought to terminate both men and women's basketball in addition to football.
 

Waquoit

Mr. Positive
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
32,817
Reaction Score
84,958
Wait, UConn has a revenue problem? Really? When did this happen?

Fun fact: EVERY REGULAR POSTER ON THIS BOARD GETS THAT UCONN HAS A REVENUE PROBLEM. Some of us just choose not to rain misery on every thread.
I answered the question you asked. If you don't like the answer, go yell at someone else.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2021
Messages
924
Reaction Score
3,586
So we should jeopardize our basketball team’s success by having our teams travel all over the country.. have to recruit players for a southern conference while we are a north east school.. and to top it off..play our conference championship in Kansas… for what?.. more money.. we might have the greatest men’s basketball team in the history of college basketball now.. why take the chance and throw it a way
 

CL82

NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions - Again!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
57,844
Reaction Score
213,466
From where it was. Yes.

I thought the "cut" was merely not maintaining the subsidies that the state provided during Covid? Terminating subsidies which were designed to support the university during the pandemic isn't a cut.

Full disclosure though, I didn't click on the link I'm just working from memory, but I will later.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
27,248
Reaction Score
67,385
So we should jeopardize our basketball team’s success by having our teams travel all over the country.. have to recruit players for a southern conference while we are a north east school.. and to top it off..play our conference championship in Kansas… for what?.. more money.. we might have the greatest men’s basketball team in the history of college basketball now.. why take the chance and throw it a way

Because businesses that lose money are unsustainable.

What is very clear is that the numbers coming from the university are NOT reliable. They are a choice the university has made. They in no way reflect the actual value of athletics in general, or athletics at a national championship level in particular, represent to the university.
 

Online statistics

Members online
43
Guests online
1,142
Total visitors
1,185

Forum statistics

Threads
157,775
Messages
4,121,468
Members
10,012
Latest member
GirlBoo1020


Top Bottom