Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

[Dizzy21]

Men’s and women’s Bball will be just fine staying in the BE as long as the school lets them keep a few million of their revenue to pay players. But that would unfortunately require cutting football and half the women’s non revenue sports.

Pretty sure “bball identity” is code for dropping football once and for all

What revenue? Both men's and women's basketball lose money. Prior to Hurley's raise, the loss was significantly more than the entire Big East contract pays for all sports, now it is even more. Basketball has less than 5% of the athletes in UConn and is responsible for 30% of the athletic deficit. If a person was looking strictly at revenue and expense in the financials without any bias, you would easily say the basketball teams should be cut first. The basketball teams combined lost $10 million last year for 20 athletes and football lost $14 million for 85 athletes.

Anyone saying the Big 12 move is not because basketball needs to be saved is simply not looking at the numbers. The Big East model for basketball is unsustainable and will soon be even more unsustainable.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Nothing new here except this guy made my head hurt. Ooof. Who is this guy? What’s his background and agenda?

Later in the article he goes on to talk about revenue sharing and that we wouldn’t be able to keep up in the Big 12 and we should stick with our basketball identity and stay in the Big East. If we can’t keep up in the Big 12 how could we keep up in the Big East!?? How would be remain relevant nationally?!? How is this guy paid to say stupid ish like this?

But even with that kind of increase on the table, sports economist Andrew Zimbalist believes jumping to the Big 12 carries enormous risk for UConn.

“I think they would argue that it’s positive branding for the school to be a member of the Big 12. I think that’s what they would hope for, but I’m not sure how much good it’s going to do,” Zimbalist said. “Adding teams means they’re adding television markets, which will give them some increase in their television contracts, but of course, if you’re adding teams, you have to divide the increase amongst more teams … so I think that they’re kind of doing that out of desperation. They’re running around a little bit like a chicken with its head cut off doing whatever they possibly can to stay afloat and to generate some momentum and some positive images about what the future for their conference is.”

If everyone listened to Zimbalist, there'd be no sports industry in the US.

 

[Ha Who]

If everyone listened to Zimbalist, there'd be no sports industry in the US.

Exactly! I don’t know why they run to this guy. He doesn’t want life and fun in major cities. It is one thing to question taxpayer funding of stadiums, but to say they bring no economic benefits to cities is bunk. No, they are not high paying jobs, but remember the bars and restaurants when we had NHL hockey?

 

[Storrs South]

What revenue? Both men's and women's basketball lose money. Prior to Hurley's raise, the loss was significantly more than the entire Big East contract pays for all sports, now it is even more. Basketball has less than 5% of the athletes in UConn and is responsible for 30% of the athletic deficit. If a person was looking strictly at revenue and expense in the financials without any bias, you would easily say the basketball teams should be cut first. The basketball teams combined lost $10 million last year for 20 athletes and football lost $14 million for 85 athletes.

Anyone saying the Big 12 move is not because basketball needs to be saved is simply not looking at the numbers. The Big East model for basketball is unsustainable and will soon be even more unsustainable.

We actually don’t know if basketball is rev positive or neutral or negative. Nobody does. The accounting the school provides every year gives us some insight into sport by sport economics but it’s not a perfect view. For example, the license deals with Learfield, Nike, Coca Cola, etc cover the entire athletic department and don’t cover one sport.

Any one of us could make an argument X% is attributable to Y sport but we don’t actually know.

Benedict has mentioned in the past that if you cut football it would impact all of those agreements mentioned above and others so simply cutting a sport does not result in 1:1 savings since you are impacting revenue side of this for things directly related to football plus revenue that covers entire department.

Also playing at the Rent or XL is a cost on UConn’s books but it’s a state entity giving money to another state entity so one can argue this is hardly a cost but an interdepartment accounting adjustment.

And then lastly regarding hoops it has no accounting of donations, admissions and enrollment impacts looking at individual sport accounting.

 

[bendm]

What revenue? Both men's and women's basketball lose money. Prior to Hurley's raise, the loss was significantly more than the entire Big East contract pays for all sports, now it is even more. Basketball has less than 5% of the athletes in UConn and is responsible for 30% of the athletic deficit. If a person was looking strictly at revenue and expense in the financials without any bias, you would easily say the basketball teams should be cut first. The basketball teams combined lost $10 million last year for 20 athletes and football lost $14 million for 85 athletes.

Sportico’s Intercollegiate Finance Database

In 2023 men's bball made ~$10.6mill in revenue and had operating expenses of ~$13.8mill. that's a net loss of ~$3.2million.
In 2023 football made ~$6mill in revenue and had operating expenses of ~$20mill. that's a net loss of ~$14million!!!!

You think the fact that football lost less money per player makes up for the fact that it lost ~$11mill more than men's bball??? No. Saying UConn has the best men's bball program in the country and the worst football program in the country isn't bias its fact, and funding the best men's bball program in the country is well worth all the intangible benefits it brings to the school/state. Football only brings embarrassment.

The added benefit of cutting football is cutting 6 of the 12 women's sports (volleyball, swimming, crew, cross country, tennis, lacrosse). In 2023 non-revenue women's sports were a net loss of ~$18mill. So cutting football (~$14mill) and half the women’s sports (~$9mill) would have saved the school ~$23mill in 2023...

Starting next year the men's bball program will need to use about half its annual revenue (~$5mill) to pay players rather than cover operating expenses but the program will also be earning an extra ~$2mill per year from the new BE tv deal.

So... while it will cost the school a couple mill more per year to fund men's bball, it's still well worth it for all the intangible benefits. Continuing to fund men's (and women's) bball will also be affordable if the school starts saving over $20mill/year by cutting football and 6 women's sports.

i really hope UConn gets into the big12 or ACC but if we dont get into either by 2025 when revenue sharing starts then the school needs to sacrifice football and half its women's sports to save the remaining sports (bball, soccer, hockey, track, baseball/softball, golf/field hockey).

 

[upstater]

Exactly! I don’t know why they run to this guy. He doesn’t want life and fun in major cities. It is one thing to question taxpayer funding of stadiums, but to say they bring no economic benefits to cities is bunk. No, they are not high paying jobs, but remember the bars and restaurants when we had NHL hockey?

He's saying the economic impact is overblown because all the money is local.

There's only been a zillion studies reinforcing his main argument.

 

[upstater]

Also playing at the Rent or XL is a cost on UConn’s books but it’s a state entity giving money to another state entity so one can argue this is hardly a cost but an interdepartment accounting adjustment.

That's all well and good until the President of the University declares 15% of all employees across all departments will be let go. At that point, it's actual cutbacks and not fungible money moving around.

One thing people don't realize about university budgets is that very little of that money is fungible. Almost the entire research budget is spoken for and the rest is tied up as well. My school has a billion dollar budget but when a 2 million deficit was announced, they started letting people go. The entire budget for Arts & Sciences was $14m so $2m was a huge deficit. This is in a school with over a billion in revenues.

 

[Storrs South]

That's all well and good until the President of the University declares 15% of all employees across all departments will be let go. At that point, it's actual cutbacks and not fungible money moving around.

One thing people don't realize about university budgets is that very little of that money is fungible. Almost the entire research budget is spoken for and the rest is tied up as well. My school has a billion dollar budget but when a 2 million deficit was announced, they started letting people go. The entire budget for Arts & Sciences was $14m so $2m was a huge deficit. This is in a school with over a billion in revenues.

Except UConn doesn’t have to make this expenditure (at least for basketball). So the President and AD have already pointed this out to the legislature that you will continue to scratch our back and we will scratch yours. The expense exists to keep folks in Ct government happy and in turn the government will support the university however necessary to support the expense, which makes this a unique arrangement.

 

[Ha Who]

He's saying the economic impact is overblown because all the money is local.

There's only been a zillion studies reinforcing his main argument.

He's saying the economic impact is overblown because all the money is local.

There's only been a zillion studies reinforcing his main argument.

In that case demolish the XL and the Rent and save everyone a lot of money. As much as I love UConn, I don’t think state taxpayers should be subsidizing a small segment of the population. Maybe build a satellite campus for Smith College. That might help the school pay for his salary

 

[upstater]

Except UConn doesn’t have to make this expenditure (at least for basketball). So the President and AD have already pointed this out to the legislature that you will continue to scratch our back and we will scratch yours. The expense exists to keep folks in Ct government happy and in turn the government will support the university however necessary to support the expense, which makes this a unique arrangement.

It's the exact opposite of this. They will NOT support the expense, and this is already proven.

 

[superjohn]

We actually don’t know if basketball is rev positive or neutral or negative. Nobody does. The accounting the school provides every year gives us some insight into sport by sport economics but it’s not a perfect view. For example, the license deals with Learfield, Nike, Coca Cola, etc cover the entire athletic department and don’t cover one sport.

Any one of us could make an argument X% is attributable to Y sport but we don’t actually know.

Benedict has mentioned in the past that if you cut football it would impact all of those agreements mentioned above and others so simply cutting a sport does not result in 1:1 savings since you are impacting revenue side of this for things directly related to football plus revenue that covers entire department.

Also playing at the Rent or XL is a cost on UConn’s books but it’s a state entity giving money to another state entity so one can argue this is hardly a cost but an interdepartment accounting adjustment.

And then lastly regarding hoops it has no accounting of donations, admissions and enrollment impacts looking at individual sport accounting.

Basketball makes an unbelievable amount of money for UConn.

 

[upstater]

In that case demolish the XL and the Rent and save everyone a lot of money. As much as I love UConn, I don’t think state taxpayers should be subsidizing a small segment of the population. Maybe build a satellite campus for Smith College. That might help the school pay for his salary

Have you looked at Smith's endowment lately? They have over a million dollars for every student.

 

[Storrs South]

It's the exact opposite of this. They will NOT support the expense, and this is already proven.

What you’re saying does not match reality considering the university laid it out in those terms and the state capitulated

 

[Ha Who]

Have you looked at Smith's endowment lately? They have over a million dollars for every student.

Not my point

 

[upstater]

What you’re saying does not match reality considering the university laid it out in those terms and the state capitulated View attachment 103274

With this deal, the shortfall for UConn academics (not counting UConn Health & others campuses) has gone from $95m to $30m.

They still have a $30m shortfall.

 

[Exit 4]

This is interesting...

 

[GoKU]

This is interesting...

I doubt it, but possible. I know the Big 12 has zero interest in either school.

 

[CL82]

Also playing at the Rent or XL is a cost on UConn’s books but it’s a state entity giving money to another state entity so one can argue this is hardly a cost but an interdepartment accounting adjustment

Except that the state doesn't actually make a dollar for dollar payment for those rentals. That amount comes out of the school's budget generally. You can argue that if those rental fees weren't being charged the state would pay us less, but that's just speculation.

To the extent that Connecticut loses income opportunities, such as concession or parking revenue that is probably just lost revenue, and it is unlikely that it is in anyway accounted for in the funds we receive from the legislature.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

I've wondered about how much debt is carried on the UConn books for stadiums/arenas? Is it nothing? Does it sit on State of CT books? Anyone know about the debt service?

 

[Fairfield_1st]

We actually don’t know if basketball is rev positive or neutral or negative. Nobody does. The accounting the school provides every year gives us some insight into sport by sport economics but it’s not a perfect view. For example, the license deals with Learfield, Nike, Coca Cola, etc cover the entire athletic department and don’t cover one sport.

Any one of us could make an argument X% is attributable to Y sport but we don’t actually know.

Benedict has mentioned in the past that if you cut football it would impact all of those agreements mentioned above and others so simply cutting a sport does not result in 1:1 savings since you are impacting revenue side of this for things directly related to football plus revenue that covers entire department.

Also playing at the Rent or XL is a cost on UConn’s books but it’s a state entity giving money to another state entity so one can argue this is hardly a cost but an interdepartment accounting adjustment.

And then lastly regarding hoops it has no accounting of donations, admissions and enrollment impacts looking at individual sport accounting.

Let's not forget that the scholarships don't really cost what they cost. It's more, this is what we could have had for revenue had your bed been given to a paying student. I believe they also use the out of state student rate, even if the athlete, like DC, is in state.

 

[CTBballfan243]

Men’s and women’s Bball will be just fine staying in the BE as long as the school lets them keep a few million of their revenue to pay players. But that would unfortunately require cutting football and half the women’s non revenue sports.

Pretty sure “bball identity” is code for dropping football once and for all

College athletics needs to adopt the Canadien Junior hockey model for all sports. The Major junior players ( WHL, OHL, QMJHL) get paid, all the rest of the leagues are a step below and don’t get paid. For college athletics the SEC, B1G, B12, ND, and for now the ACC can be the “major” division of college athletics for all sports. Those schools financially can compete with each other. All the other conferences are at a financial disadvantage and in the long run be better off competing at a lower level. That’s what needs to happen. No one wants UConn to drop down a level but, eventually that’s going to happen anyway. Without money UConn cannot compete.

 

[CL82]

Let's not forget that the scholarships don't really cost what they cost. It's more, this is what we could have had for revenue had your bed been given to a paying student. I believe they also use the out of state student rate, even if the athlete, like DC, is in state.

Plus, out of state students often don't pay the full undiscounted rate

 

[upstater]

Let's not forget that the scholarships don't really cost what they cost. It's more, this is what we could have had for revenue had your bed been given to a paying student. I believe they also use the out of state student rate, even if the athlete, like DC, is in state.

It's all real money. I'm not sure what you're point is. Every department has allocations from the college according to head count. This is how they pay professors. Those bean counters consider each and every student.

 

[Dizzy21]

Sportico’s Intercollegiate Finance Database

In 2023 men's bball made ~$10.6mill in revenue and had operating expenses of ~$13.8mill. that's a net loss of ~$3.2million.
In 2023 football made ~$6mill in revenue and had operating expenses of ~$20mill. that's a net loss of ~$14million!!!!

You think the fact that football lost less money per player makes up for the fact that it lost ~$11mill more than men's bball??? No. Saying UConn has the best men's bball program in the country and the worst football program in the country isn't bias its fact, and funding the best men's bball program in the country is well worth all the intangible benefits it brings to the school/state. Football only brings embarrassment.

The added benefit of cutting football is cutting 6 of the 12 women's sports (volleyball, swimming, crew, cross country, tennis, lacrosse). In 2023 non-revenue women's sports were a net loss of ~$18mill. So cutting football (~$14mill) and half the women’s sports (~$9mill) would have saved the school ~$23mill in 2023...

Starting next year the men's bball program will need to use about half its annual revenue (~$5mill) to pay players rather than cover operating expenses but the program will also be earning an extra ~$2mill per year from the new BE tv deal.

So... while it will cost the school a couple mill more per year to fund men's bball, it's still well worth it for all the intangible benefits. Continuing to fund men's (and women's) bball will also be affordable if the school starts saving over $20mill/year by cutting football and 6 women's sports.

i really hope UConn gets into the big12 or ACC but if we dont get into either by 2025 when revenue sharing starts then the school needs to sacrifice football and half its women's sports to save the remaining sports (bball, soccer, hockey, track, baseball/softball, golf/field hockey).

First of all I said women's and men's basketball. When you add in Hurley's raise, combined it about equals the loss of football, which has 4 times as many athletes.

Regardless, the point is you said give basketball their revenue to cover the cost. Fact is that basketball does not have some revenue to cover the increased cost while in the Big East and they will be more in the hole when paying players. It is simply not sustainable in the Big East, even when cutting a huge swath of the athletic department like you want to.

The Big 12 payout will soon be 5 times that of the Big East and over $50 million. If you dumped $20 million a year into football for 4 years to get it up to snuff for the Big 12, then after two years in the full Big 12, that $80 million would be paid off and we would be making $40 million a year more than in the Big East. Even with the increased $20 million a year spent on football, that is $20 million a year net more to pay basketball than in the Big East.

Any way you look at it, investing in football to get into the Big 12 helps generate revenue for the basketball team and will make them more competitive financially. Cutting football and remaining in the Big East hurts basketball and puts them at a disadvantage.

 

[shizzle787]

This is interesting...

Doubt it. They likely stay independent for a while.