Budget Cuts will require UConn to cut some (not all) athletic programs | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Budget Cuts will require UConn to cut some (not all) athletic programs

If they eliminate football,perhaps they can start a "riddled with athleticism," curling team to provide a few laughs on campus. :)
My son, who played high school football, took a trip to Alaska and said "curling" was now his all time favorite sport.

Also, where I live, App State (famous for beating Michigan at the Big House) said they were cutting 3 sports including men's soccer.
 
My son, who played high school football, took a trip to Alaska and said "curling" was now his all time favorite sport.

Also, where I live, App State (famous for beating Michigan at the Big House) said they were cutting 3 sports including men's soccer.
Ah yes - I remember it fondly. We had a really obnoxious die-hard Wolverine fan at work. The jokes were SOOO sweet...

Q: How many batteries does it take to beat Michigan?
A: One AAA
 
Ah yes - I remember it fondly. We had a really obnoxious die-hard Wolverine fan at work. The jokes were SOOO sweet...

Q: How many batteries does it take to beat Michigan?
A: One AAA

The game was the first game on the Big 10 network if I recall.... so I listened to the game on the App State Radio Network. My favorite radio call in the history of sports

 
Good points everyone.
Ignoring what Covid has done, if Uconn drops football, what 2-3 women's sports should be dropped?
Hypothetically, of course.
 
Why don't they get rid of some of those highly paid coaches and hire some cheaper ones? Just made me think what Geno would be worth on the open market. Do you think TENN would pay him big bucks to wear the Orange? Would he like Indiana as his new home? Could Duke afford him? Just thinking out loud. :)

The one thing I think we can be sure of is The Vols not hiring Geno.
 
Last edited:
.-.
And then there's this...

Wagstaff (Groucho Marx): "Have we got a stadium?"
Professors: "Yes."
Wagsraff: "Have we got a college?"
Professors: "Yes."
Wagstaff: "Well, we can't support both. Tomorrow we start tearing down the college ".
Professors: "But where will the students sleep?"
Wagstaff: "Where they always sleep. In the classroom.”

Horsefeathers(1932)
 

UConn's numbers from a year ago:
The school's football program lost almost $13.3 million, generating just $3.3 million in revenue. Men's basketball lost $3.9 million. Women's basketball, a perennial power, had a deficit of almost $3.5 million.

You know, I have a problem with the deficit shown for women's basketball. Just doesn't make sense. Now, I might be all wet, but it would seem that the program's cash costs are relatively low. Yes, there's Coach Geno's salary (what, $1.8 million or so?). But the ass't coaches can't earn all that much. Yes, recruiting travel and hotels. But other than that, the student-athletes' tuitions are not actual cash costs, but seats in lecture halls. Their cash outlays are for food and uniforms and travel. But the program gets SNY revenues, it gets ESPN revenues, and revenues when its games are carried on other for-fee broadcasting, fees for games from other universities, parking and ticket sales revenues. And then when it gets to the top levels of the NCAA tourney, it gets more revenues. And then there are AAC (Big East to be) revenues and tournament moneys.

Women's basketball is nothing like football with its huge equipment costs and a phalanx of coaches, assistant coaches, and others. So where is this big $3.5 million cost coming from?

I suspect that if we delve into it, we'll see a huge amount of athletic department overhead is being allocated to women's basketball that doesn't rightly belong there. I mean, does it make sense that a football team that draws few fans, carries about a hundred players, plus a mountain of coaches, would lose $13.3 million, while a team of just a dozen student-athletes with three assistant coaches that draws thousands of fans and gets television and tourney revenue would lose $3.5 million?

Somehow, the differential is too small to make sense. Honestly, if the numbers, including overhead allocation, were put under a financial microscope, I would be willing to bet that an argument could be made that women's basketball makes a hefty profit, not a loss. Nothing to go on, except a wet finger in the wind, and a healthy skepticism.
 
The $3.5 million doesn't seem like a lot if Geno's $1.8 million salary is more than half of it.
 
You know, I have a problem with the deficit shown for women's basketball. Just doesn't make sense. Now, I might be all wet, but it would seem that the program's cash costs are relatively low. Yes, there's Coach Geno's salary (what, $1.8 million or so?). But the ass't coaches can't earn all that much. Yes, recruiting travel and hotels. But other than that, the student-athletes' tuitions are not actual cash costs, but seats in lecture halls. Their cash outlays are for food and uniforms and travel. But the program gets SNY revenues, it gets ESPN revenues, and revenues when its games are carried on other for-fee broadcasting, fees for games from other universities, parking and ticket sales revenues. And then when it gets to the top levels of the NCAA tourney, it gets more revenues. And then there are AAC (Big East to be) revenues and tournament moneys.

Women's basketball is nothing like football with its huge equipment costs and a phalanx of coaches, assistant coaches, and others. So where is this big $3.5 million cost coming from?

I suspect that if we delve into it, we'll see a huge amount of athletic department overhead is being allocated to women's basketball that doesn't rightly belong there. I mean, does it make sense that a football team that draws few fans, carries about a hundred players, plus a mountain of coaches, would lose $13.3 million, while a team of just a dozen student-athletes with three assistant coaches that draws thousands of fans and gets television and tourney revenue would lose $3.5 million?

Somehow, the differential is too small to make sense. Honestly, if the numbers, including overhead allocation, were put under a financial microscope, I would be willing to bet that an argument could be made that women's basketball makes a hefty profit, not a loss. Nothing to go on, except a wet finger in the wind, and a healthy skepticism.

You forget that 11,000 fans at the football game is still more than a filled Gampel. At this point in time, Gampel also includes more students at the games that don't pay to get in than football does, so that still makes more paying football fans than a basketball game.
I would also say we have the highest paid assistant coaches in Womens BB, and the lowest paid assistant coaches in football.
Don't get me wrong, I am a season ticket holder for both, and have been for over 20 years, but cutting football would be very disappointing to me and the large group I attend the games with.
 
You forget that 11,000 fans at the football game is still more than a filled Gampel. At this point in time, Gampel also includes more students at the games that don't pay to get in than football does, so that still makes more paying football fans than a basketball game.
I would also say we have the highest paid assistant coaches in Womens BB, and the lowest paid assistant coaches in football.
Don't get me wrong, I am a season ticket holder for both, and have been for over 20 years, but cutting football would be very disappointing to me and the large group I attend the games with.
Speaking as an outsider, the only reason UConn has been on my radar as a sports school has been basketball, and in the last 5-6 years, just the women's team. If UConn runs a $3.5m deficit to get 11 national championships in 25 years and all the good press and attention that provides, I'd say that's an investment well spent.

But if you're running a $13.3m deficit -- almost $10m more than women's basketball -- and you have nothing to show for it but disappointment and embarrassment, then it's time to question whether that expense is helping or hurting you. At least the WBB team delivers for fans year after year after year.

I'd venture to say UConn WBB's $3.5m deficit is the best $3.5m spent in all of college sports.
 
Speaking as an outsider, the only reason UConn has been on my radar as a sports school has been basketball, and in the last 5-6 years, just the women's team. If UConn runs a $3.5m deficit to get 11 national championships in 25 years and all the good press and attention that provides, I'd say that's an investment well spent.

But if you're running a $13.3m deficit -- almost $10m more than women's basketball -- and you have nothing to show for it but disappointment and embarrassment, then it's time to question whether that expense is helping or hurting you. At least the WBB team delivers for fans year after year after year.

I'd venture to say UConn WBB's $3.5m deficit is the best $3.5m spent in all of college sports.
There was a point in time (10-15 years ago?) when UConn showed WBB making a profit. So Geno has probably had a couple raises since then, and they don't sell out every game now, but the shoe deal and media rights have to be higher now. What else has changed so much, other than accounting methods? They always traveled 5 star - remember the $500 orange juice scandal? Maybe Geno runs up $3 million of air charter costs with national and European recruiting?

BTW CD makes $400K+ and Shea makes $200K+
 
Last edited:
.-.
You know, I have a problem with the deficit shown for women's basketball. Just doesn't make sense. Now, I might be all wet, but it would seem that the program's cash costs are relatively low. Yes, there's Coach Geno's salary (what, $1.8 million or so?). But the ass't coaches can't earn all that much. Yes, recruiting travel and hotels. But other than that, the student-athletes' tuitions are not actual cash costs, but seats in lecture halls. Their cash outlays are for food and uniforms and travel. But the program gets SNY revenues, it gets ESPN revenues, and revenues when its games are carried on other for-fee broadcasting, fees for games from other universities, parking and ticket sales revenues. And then when it gets to the top levels of the NCAA tourney, it gets more revenues. And then there are AAC (Big East to be) revenues and tournament moneys.

Women's basketball is nothing like football with its huge equipment costs and a phalanx of coaches, assistant coaches, and others. So where is this big $3.5 million cost coming from?

I suspect that if we delve into it, we'll see a huge amount of athletic department overhead is being allocated to women's basketball that doesn't rightly belong there. I mean, does it make sense that a football team that draws few fans, carries about a hundred players, plus a mountain of coaches, would lose $13.3 million, while a team of just a dozen student-athletes with three assistant coaches that draws thousands of fans and gets television and tourney revenue would lose $3.5 million?

Somehow, the differential is too small to make sense. Honestly, if the numbers, including overhead allocation, were put under a financial microscope, I would be willing to bet that an argument could be made that women's basketball makes a hefty profit, not a loss. Nothing to go on, except a wet finger in the wind, and a healthy skepticism.
I just think that since WBB doesn't make it profit, it should shut down. I mean that is the standard, right?
 
Last edited:
There was a point in time (10-15 years ago?) when UConn showed WBB making a profit. So Geno has probably had a couple raises since then, and they don't sell out every game now, but the shoe deal and media rights have to be higher now. What else has changed so much, other than accounting methods? They always traveled 5 star - remember the $500 orange juice scandal? Maybe Geno runs up $3 million of air charter costs with national and European recruiting?

BTW CD makes $400K+ and Shea makes $200K+

OK, so with those salaries and Coach Geno at $1.8 million, that makes $2.4 million. Transportation for recruiting has to be under $100k. Another $50k for meals for the kids? So that's cash expenses.

Against that are SNY revenues, ESPN revenues, CBSSN revenues, ticket revenues, parking revenues.

Something doesn't add up...
 
OK, so with those salaries and Coach Geno at $1.8 million, that makes $2.4 million. Transportation for recruiting has to be under $100k. Another $50k for meals for the kids? So that's cash expenses.

Against that are SNY revenues, ESPN revenues, CBSSN revenues, ticket revenues, parking revenues.

Something doesn't add up...
There are more salaries than that. There's another assistant, plus Director of Basketball Operations, training staff, plus whatever allocation they get for the Athletic Dept's administrative expense. I know you said "cash expenses" but they do count the full "cost" of scholarships = $50,000+ per year per scholarship athlete for school and living expenses. And a huge cash expense is team travel = chartered aircraft, 5-star hotels, entertainment - not only movies and dinners, but stuff like occasional NBA games (Dallas Mavericks, most recently), Broadway plays (Book of Mormon), etc. Being a UConn basketball athlete is a nice lifestyle - certainly far cushier than the WNBA. While at UConn, DT famously said, "We live like rock stars."

BTW I don't begrudge them these perks - at all. They earn it.
 
BTW CD makes $400K+ and Shea makes $200K+
Just a little context:
1591120207567.png


I wonder what the average D1 WCBB head coach makes? I was surprised by Shea's salary, but don't begrudge her a dollar of it.
 
If you go the the UConn huskies website, look for the athletic department staff. Yes, in addition to coaches, there are administrative personnel, trainers, strength and conditioning people, compliance staff, and academic support staff. There are also team physicians, and a team dentist! I'm sure they are not permanently assigned to a team, but there is a retainer fee I'm guessing. There are also travel expenses, which I'm guessing are quite large. They fly charter, and stay in the best places. I'm sure a charter flight to Tulsa, Texas, etc is not cheap. I'm not begrudging any of this; it's just more than coaches' salaries.
 
There won't be many schools, even those in a Power 5 conference, who come out of this without some cuts in salaries, travel, or non revenue sports. Football and TV contracts for it hold up the department at most schools and while they too will see some adjustments and changes it will be the other sports that will sacrifice the most.

UConn being in the BE will help for travel but I suspect some of their sports will be considered for elimination. I don't like to see any school lose programs but it is almost inevitable at more than a few places. The full economic fall out from the virus will unfold for years.
 
.-.
If you go the the UConn huskies website, look for the athletic department staff. Yes, in addition to coaches, there are administrative personnel, trainers, strength and conditioning people, compliance staff, and academic support staff. There are also team physicians, and a team dentist! I'm sure they are not permanently assigned to a team, but there is a retainer fee I'm guessing. There are also travel expenses, which I'm guessing are quite large. They fly charter, and stay in the best places. I'm sure a charter flight to Tulsa, Texas, etc is not cheap. I'm not begrudging any of this; it's just more than coaches' salaries.

Yes, the team physician only gets a small fee for treating, on occasion, a dozen kids. And even if you add in travel, still the team receives a cut of revenues on the road. But let's say that we add another million to the expenses. That gets us to the amount that the university says the team is "losing," but all before a single dollar of revenues is taken into account.

Again, I strongly suspect that the team gets slammed with massive central athletic office expenses, which are probably much more related to football than the small basketball team.

Lots of other universities have retained basketball while dumping football. Football is the culprit, not basketball, and certainly not women's basketball.

The loss figure just smells. Not buying it.
 
Since Stefanie "bunny ears" Dolson took her bubbly personality to the wnba,the only comic relief we had at Uconn was the football team.If they eliminate football,perhaps they can start a "riddled with athleticism," curling team to provide a few laughs on campus. :)
Pacific, I know that our football team has not exactly been a powerhouse. We are not one of those schools who sell their soul in order to go to a bowl every year, but the young men who choose to sacrifice their time and bodies are not doing it for "comic relief". Please give them the respect they deserve.
 
Pacific, I know that our football team has not exactly been a powerhouse. We are not one of those schools who sell their soul in order to go to a bowl every year, but the young men who choose to sacrifice their time and bodies are not doing it for "comic relief". Please give them the respect they deserve.

I don't follow college football but I respect the program. What I don't respect is the professional sport college football has become, where coaches with eight figure salaries and huge cash bribes and other inducements are required to land top recruits. So when wishing for wcbb to hit the big time remember that the other goes along with it.
 
Yes, the team physician only gets a small fee for treating, on occasion, a dozen kids. And even if you add in travel, still the team receives a cut of revenues on the road. But let's say that we add another million to the expenses. That gets us to the amount that the university says the team is "losing," but all before a single dollar of revenues is taken into account.

Again, I strongly suspect that the team gets slammed with massive central athletic office expenses, which are probably much more related to football than the small basketball team.

Lots of other universities have retained basketball while dumping football. Football is the culprit, not basketball, and certainly not women's basketball.

The loss figure just smells. Not buying it.

This article explains a bit more... UConn athletic department lost $42 million in 2019 after decline in ticket sales and league revenue

 


The problem is with the $8 million in "expenses." How in the world do they get to $8 million? If you add in the full (not cash) cost of $50k per player, that's only $600,000. It appears that they are adding on overhead that totals more than 100% of direct costs, no matter what you add in for tuition and room and board, coaches, ass't coaches, travel. No way to get anywhere close to the $8 million they're claiming.

They have football, with nearly 100 players, and what has to be far more medical expenses and coaches, weight trainers etc, as only double the expenses of- wait for it!!- women's basketball with only a dozen players? Absolutely no way!

I suspect that there is massive reallocation of AD office and even football expenses around to WCBB and other sports in order to minimize the massive losses in the football program.

Smells even more now.

Would love to see a real journalist look into these numbers and ferret out the truth. I think women's basketball is being victimized by men's football to cover up the real and ugly numbers.
 
.-.
The problem is with the $8 million in "expenses." How in the world do they get to $8 million? If you add in the full (not cash) cost of $50k per player, that's only $600,000. It appears that they are adding on overhead that totals more than 100% of direct costs, no matter what you add in for tuition and room and board, coaches, ass't coaches, travel. No way to get anywhere close to the $8 million they're claiming.

They have football, with nearly 100 players, and what has to be far more medical expenses and coaches, weight trainers etc, as only double the expenses of- wait for it!!- women's basketball with only a dozen players? Absolutely no way!

I suspect that there is massive reallocation of AD office and even football expenses around to WCBB and other sports in order to minimize the massive losses in the football program.

Smells even more now.

Would love to see a real journalist look into these numbers and ferret out the truth. I think women's basketball is being victimized by men's football to cover up the real and ugly numbers.
I have no idea, but I'm not surprised there is a net loss, it is typical in WBB.

One factor which you have not accounted for, which is the direct overhead of operating Gampel Pavilion for a game or whatever they do when they use the XL Center. There is a real cost to putting on games.

I would also challenge the idea that they get a portion of anything for a typical away game. Poorer teams are paid to come and play better teams, but that sure is not UConn. I've never heard otherwise. It is true that for some events (and the NCAA tournament) some travel costs are paid, but other than that, not so much.
 
The subject of budget cuts is a complicated one and the University of Connecticut needs to take a close look at all its programs, not just athletics. We can divide costs into four main categories - administration, facilities, faculty salaries, and athletics. The Board of Trustees needs to take some courage pills and confront systematic waste throughout the UConn system.

Facilities costs need to be maintained because deferment of maintenance always leads to far greater costs down the line. Like most modern universities, administrative bloat has gotten out of control with numerous highly compensated deans, assistant deans, chairs of specialized programs, etc. and these costs for many universities exceed those of faculty compensations. These excessive costs could be cut by a large percentage, probably at least by one-third, and the university needs to get beyond the paradigm articulated by eebmg that the cardinal rule of administrations is that services are cut and not administrative expenses. With regard to faculty salaries, a number of people are highly, of not excessively paid. As topogigio pointed out, a good place to start is exorbitant golden handshake that the Board of Trustees gave to former president Herbst. In addition, such highly paid faculty members as Geno Auriemma should take a haircut.

The athletic budget is always a tempting target of budget cutters and the huge deficit of the football program cannot be justified. Despite, however, the “losses” generated by big-time football, basketball, etc., no academic program or graduate school makes any money for the university. Has the history department ever generated $1.00 to the university? Successful sports programs can generate funds for the university through donations of support. UConn made a huge mistake in believing that its football program could ever grow and be competitive enough to generate the income that the major powers accrue. Except for a relatively small number of schools from the power conferences, no football program from whatever division makes any money. They are justified and supported for other reasons. The university should recognized that it made a mistake and scale it back the football program and trying to compete at, say, the Mid-American Conference level.

With regard to basketball, the second mistake university administrators made was to desert the Big East and go to the AAC to pursue its football dream. The new conference afforded the Huskies no traditional rivalries and made for humungous travel costs with trips to FL and TX among other places, not to mention NC, OK, LA, and TN. With the return to the Big East and playing teams that are much better known to UConn fans, gate income should increase substantially (COVID-19 permitting), particularly for men’s basketball. Moreover, significant savings can be made in travel expenses. It should be easily possible for the teams to bus to PC, St. John’s, Seton Hall, Villanova, and Georgetown, especially if road games are batched, as the Ivy League has done for many years. Such a strategy will not work in playing Creighton (Omaha, Butler (Indianapolis), and Xavier (Cincinnati), but it should be possible to play DePaul (Chicago) and Marquette (Milwaukee) on the same trip, as the two cities are in relatively close proximity to one another.

No chance exists for any other sport to hope to become close to revenue neutral, although hockey (Hockey East) and soccer do have popular followings and all athletic teams should benefit by the renewal of membership in the Big East.

For far too long, UConn athletics has been a victim of the big football mentality and it needs to end. UConn can continue to be a national power in basketball without membership in a Power Five conference. Villanova’s two NCAA basketball championships in the past decade are not chopped liver and the success of many such mid-major male basketball programs demonstrates that you do not have to be Alabama, Michigan, or Texas to achieve athletic distinction. I do wonder, however, how the Big East’s TV contract with Fox Sports compares to that of the AAC with ESPN. The SNY contract should be much more attractive at renewal time with a Big East affiliation.
 
I've worked at both football colleges and non football colleges. No brainer I preferred non football. Football becomes their won kingdom. I always had a problem justifying it. On the other hand, football is where the clout lies.

Some one said 100k for recruiting. Sorry not close, for Geno to maintain the level of recruiting he/the staff is spending. Minimum 500-$1 million. More likely more. If he's buzzing around in charters easily more than $1M. Think about it: car rentals, hotels, per diem>>>BOOM. A so-so Div I baseball team can spend $500,000.

Team travel is a double BOOM. Those charters are between 5-10K per hour, add first class hotels and meal money. Add the tutors and training staff.

As a rule there are no game guarantees for conference schedule. I double SC and Baylor's guarantees pay for half of transportation. Tv money for women is about 10% of men's TV money. This I know for a fact. There is still discrimination there and for the most part the women are glad to be on TV. (The women have come a long way with TV and Geno is a big part of that.

Finally, NCAA Tournament money is a split between each school in the conference and one share for the conference commissioner's office. It dwindles down, Same for Men's b-ball and football bowl games.
 
Last edited:
The problem is with the $8 million in "expenses." How in the world do they get to $8 million? If you add in the full (not cash) cost of $50k per player, that's only $600,000. It appears that they are adding on overhead that totals more than 100% of direct costs, no matter what you add in for tuition and room and board, coaches, ass't coaches, travel. No way to get anywhere close to the $8 million they're claiming.

They have football, with nearly 100 players, and what has to be far more medical expenses and coaches, weight trainers etc, as only double the expenses of- wait for it!!- women's basketball with only a dozen players? Absolutely no way!

I suspect that there is massive reallocation of AD office and even football expenses around to WCBB and other sports in order to minimize the massive losses in the football program.

Smells even more now.

Would love to see a real journalist look into these numbers and ferret out the truth. I think women's basketball is being victimized by men's football to cover up the real and ugly numbers.
Fairfield Fan, I'm by no means an accountant but when you look at the final figure you might start adding in things like insurance for each player, medical expenses for players who are injured, the cost of rooming and meals, travel (and the girls go first class) and the hotel and dining expense on the road. I guarantee you that a team trip out to California or to Texas or Florida adds up. Also, the ladies have a certain dress code. Does that mean that the school is obligated to pay for the clothing they are expected to wear. Have you ever checked out the price for your wife or daughters shopping trip to the mall? Those are the things that add up.
 
The problem is with the $8 million in "expenses." How in the world do they get to $8 million? If you add in the full (not cash) cost of $50k per player, that's only $600,000. It appears that they are adding on overhead that totals more than 100% of direct costs, no matter what you add in for tuition and room and board, coaches, ass't coaches, travel. No way to get anywhere close to the $8 million they're claiming.

They have football, with nearly 100 players, and what has to be far more medical expenses and coaches, weight trainers etc, as only double the expenses of- wait for it!!- women's basketball with only a dozen players? Absolutely no way!

I suspect that there is massive reallocation of AD office and even football expenses around to WCBB and other sports in order to minimize the massive losses in the football program.

Smells even more now.

Would love to see a real journalist look into these numbers and ferret out the truth. I think women's basketball is being victimized by men's football to cover up the real and ugly numbers.
Complete file can be found here: Equity in Athletics (Federally mandated annual filing for Reporting year 7/1/18>6/30/19)

Definitions here: Equity in Athletics User Guide

>Operating (Game-Day) Expense by Team > Operating (Game-Day) expenses are all expenses an institution incurs attributable to home, away, and neutral-site intercollegiate athletic contests (commonly known as “game-day expenses”) for
(A) Lodging, meals, transportation, uniforms, and equipment for coaches, team members, support staff (including, but not limited to team managers and trainers), and others; and
(B) Officials
 The Operating (Game-Day) Expenses category is a subset of the Total Expenses category. This means that the dollar amount you enter for Operating (Game-Day) Expenses should also be included on the Total Expenses screen.
 The original source of the funds used to pay operating expenses (e.g., fund-raising organizations) does not exempt the institution from reporting those expenses. If the funds are expended by the institution for one of the purposes listed in the statute, the expenses must be reported.
 Include:
- Expenses incurred by a team during an entire year, not just those incurred during the sports
season of a team (e.g., expenses for tournaments and bowl games).
- Institutional expenditures only. Report expenses for unfunded or non-institutionally funded varsity teams as zero. If your institution has teams that it only partially funds, report those expenses it does not fund as zero.
 Do Not Include:
- Categories of expenses that are not specifically listed above.
- Capital expenses and appearance fees or guarantees paid to visiting teams.
- Facility rental, stadium/arena staff or other expenses not specifically listed above.
- Expenses not attributable to a particular sport, such as general and administrative overhead. Those expenses must only be included on the Total Expenses screen in the Not Allocated by Gender/Sport field.
- Practice equipment<

UConn WBB Operating Expense = $2,368,136.

>>Total Expenses

 Expenses are expenses attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities. This includes appearance guarantees and options, athletically related student aid, contract services, equipment, fundraising activities, operating expenses, promotional activities, recruiting expenses, salaries and benefits, supplies, travel, and any other expenses attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities.
 Your total expenses include, and are expected to be greater than, your recruiting expenses, operating expenses, athletically related student aid, and coaches’ salaries combined.
 The basis for determining whether an expense should be included in an institution’s EADA data is simply whether the item was attributable to the institution’s intercollegiate athletic activities.
 Include in Team Expenses:
- Actual amounts expended, not budgeted or estimated amounts.
- Athletics aid awarded to non-athletes (student-managers, graduate assistants, trainers) who serve a specific team. Prorate these expenses by team if the individual serves more than one team. If the individual serves all teams, please put the athletics aid in the Not Allocated field.
- Incurred expenses for non-competitive cheerleading (pep squad), mascots and pep band which support the varsity team.
- Benefits paid to coaches by the institution.
- The dollar amount for items donated to the institution for intercollegiate athletics (for example, bats and shoes) if a dollar amount can be assigned.

 Do not include in Team Expenses:
- Capital expenditures or debt service.
- Money for indirect facilities (i.e., the value of facilities and services provided by the
institution but not charged to athletics).
 Expenses Not Allocated by Gender/Sport are expenses not attributable to a particular sport.
 Include in Not Allocated Expenses:
- Expenses for varsity athletics staff not attributable to a particular sport, such as, athletic director, assistant athletic director, trainers, support staff.
- General and administrative overhead.
- If your school anticipated fielding a team, however, there were no participants and/or games for that team, place all related expenses in the Not Allocated field. You can add a caveat to explain the situation.<<

UConn WBB Total Expense = $7,853,769.

UConn Expense Not Allocates by Gender/Sport = $19,250,422.
 
Last edited:
$19 million of unallocated (by team) expenses for the total department basically so understates the expense allocation by team as to make those absolute numbers meaningless.

@Fairfield Fan - Don't forget to load each dollar of salary by 33% (approx.) to recognize retirement, health and various other comparable costs.
 
.-.

Forum statistics

Threads
167,982
Messages
4,548,230
Members
10,431
Latest member
TeganK


Top Bottom