UConn athletic budget trending in right direction (Dom Amore @Courant) | The Boneyard

UConn athletic budget trending in right direction (Dom Amore @Courant)

huskymedic

huskymedic

Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
104,346
Reaction Score
430,869


Assisted access <<

-> UConn Athletics is about to release its NCAA financial report for fiscal year 2023, and can finally say the numbers are trending in the right direction — the direction demanded by the school’s hierarchy a few years ago.

The numbers to come out Tuesday, updating the annual report out out last June, will show the department is bringing in more money, keeping its cost somewhat under control during inflationary times and that it managed to cut the institutional support it received by 35 percent, from $46.2 million to $30.2 million between fiscal years 2022 and ’23. <-

-> … With that one-time cost behind UConn, and added revenue from substantially increased ticket prices and attendance, especially for basketball, and added fund raising, the athletic department was able to self-generate 60 percent of its own revenues. Ticket revenues rose 32.8 percent, from $9.7 to $12.9 million, and contributions 30.3 percent, from $13.7 to $17.7 million. <-

-> UConn has been frustrated in its decade-long aspirationto join a power conference, most recently by the Big 12 and ACC last summer. Still, UConn, an independent FBS football school, a member of the Big East Conference in most sports and Hockey East in men’s and women’s ice hockey, raised more than $93 million in revenue which, Benedict noted, is more than any Group of Five conference school and more than some of the remaining power conference schools (sans the enormous football TV revenue).<-

-> “I feel very positive about the trendline,” Benedict said. “… We’re raising more money than we ever have as an athletic program, that’s going to continue to grow. We’re generating more ticket revenue, that’s going to continue to grow. We’re going to continue to win at an elite level. We feel we’re very good stewards of the university’s investment. There is a return, and we’re going to continue to do our absolute best to manage expenses and increase revenues.” <-
 
IMG_1434.jpeg

IMG_1433.jpeg

UConn playing in Hartford generates an estimated $15-$18 million per year for the Hartford economy.

The obvious answer, at least to me, is to dramatically reduce or eliminate our lease rate for using the XL center. Hartford gets to keep its economic boost. We continue to keep games accessible to lawmakers in the western end of the state. UConn's athletic department no longer is a hiding place for about 5 million of CDRA loss. Yes the state's subsidy of the CDRA loss line item goes up, but that's just accounting without any actual economic import.
 
CL82 said:
View attachment 95193
View attachment 95194
UConn playing in Hartford generates an estimated $15-$18 million per year for the Hartford economy.

The obvious answer, at least to me, is to dramatically reduce or eliminate our lease rate for using the XL center. Hartford gets to keep its economic boost. We continue to keep games accessible to lawmakers in the western end of the state. UConn's athletic department no longer is a hiding place for about 5 million of CDRA loss. Yes the state's subsidy of the CDRA loss line item goes up, but that's just accounting without any actual economic import.
Expand ...
You take away Hartford events (Rentschler and XL) I bet donations go down enough to negate the financial effect of moving everything on campus.

And you alienate your fanbase.
 
.-.
CTBasketball said:
You take away Hartford events (Rentschler and XL) I bet donations go down enough to negate the financial effect of moving everything on campus.

And you alienate your fanbase.
Expand ...
And yet, as I said in my post, another option exists where you eliminate or very significantly reduce the lease payments to use CDRA managed facilities. That would mean no reduction in actual games and the the end of hiding millions of dollars of CDRA's annual losses in the UConn athletic department. Fairfield County fans aren't inconvenienced by driving an extra 30 minutes, and the university and the CDRA both have more accurate financials. Yes, the state would be subsidizing the CDRA directly more, but it is doing that anyway, indirectly, using the university as a conduit.
 
superjohn said:
Anyone have any idea what the largest donation from a former UConn men's basketball player is?
Expand ...
I'm thinking it can't be too much given that the former coach told former players not to give.
 
superjohn said:
Anyone have any idea what the largest donation from a former UConn men's basketball player is?

www.ctinsider.com

Dwyane Wade pledging $3 million donation to Marquette

Dwyane Wade is donating $3 million to Marquette just over two decades after leading the...
www.ctinsider.com www.ctinsider.com
Expand ...
I can't remember anything about any of the former players donating to the athletic department. Maybe they have and information about it wasn't released.
 
CL82 said:
View attachment 95193
View attachment 95194
UConn playing in Hartford generates an estimated $15-$18 million per year for the Hartford economy.

The obvious answer, at least to me, is to dramatically reduce or eliminate our lease rate for using the XL center. Hartford gets to keep its economic boost. We continue to keep games accessible to lawmakers in the western end of the state. UConn's athletic department no longer is a hiding place for about 5 million of CDRA loss. Yes the state's subsidy of the CDRA loss line item goes up, but that's just accounting without any actual economic import.
Expand ...
From your response below, at least you don't think I'm still making this crap up.

It really doesn't matter whether we pay more in lease fees and get more state aid or pay less in lease fees and get less state aid. The article accurately describes it as a shell game.
 
.-.
businesslawyer said:
.

It really doesn't matter whether we pay more in lease fees and get more state aid or pay less in lease fees and get less state aid. The article accurately describes it as a shell game.
Expand ...
Well, if that's the case then why not do it in a way that reflects the economics of the CDRA's losses by letting them occur in that institution rather than trying to hide them in the athletic departments budget?

Truth be told, however, it does matter. Part of the criticisms that the university of Connecticut receives regarding its status as a conference realignment partner is it annual losses. Hiding part of the CDRA's losses In the athletic department budget creates a narrative that our university isn't a good investment as a partner.

For what it's worth, I've always believed your firsthand impressions. Where you and I disagree is that "the way things are is the way they will always be." I've never been a believer in that mindset as it comes across as an excuse to me more than anything else. The current problem isn't insurmountable. It will just take some time and effort to fix. Check your PMs if you want more detail.
 
Last edited:
Every D1 school (except maybe the Ivies) are raising more money due to NIL
AD David Benedict with more smoke and mirrors
 
CL82 said:
And yet, as I said in my post, another option exists where you eliminate or very significantly reduce the lease payments to use CDRA managed facilities. That would mean no reduction in actual games and the the end of hiding millions of dollars of CDRA's annual losses in the UConn athletic department. Fairfield County fans aren't inconvenienced by driving an extra 30 minutes, and the university and the CDRA both have more accurate financials. Yes, the state would be subsidizing the CDRA directly more, but it is doing that anyway, indirectly, using the university as a conduit.
Expand ...
Agree on CDRA, such a bad organization. But one could argue they are so good at their jobs they basically blindfold and steal money from UConn every year. And we knowingly let it happen.
 
CL82 said:
And yet, as I said in my post, another option exists where you eliminate or very significantly reduce the lease payments to use CDRA managed facilities. That would mean no reduction in actual games and the the end of hiding millions of dollars of CDRA's annual losses in the UConn athletic department. Fairfield County fans aren't inconvenienced by driving an extra 30 minutes, and the university and the CDRA both have more accurate financials. Yes, the state would be subsidizing the CDRA directly more, but it is doing that anyway, indirectly, using the university as a conduit.
Expand ...

This is another "unique" aspect to UConn athletics. There are fan factions based on arenas and locations.

Moving all the games to Storrs? Fine. I'll stop donating and attending. I can't think of another university which has this variable and I think it's so ingrained in the UConn make up you just have to live with splitting venues. I'll add this. I've always believed in games played while school is in session are played at Gampel. Games over breaks and holidays are at XL. Start with that model and there's only 1 or 2 games a season to wank about.
 
.-.
Chin Diesel said:
This is another "unique" aspect to UConn athletics. There are fan factions based on arenas and locations.

Moving all the games to Storrs? Fine. I'll stop donating and attending. I can't think of another university which has this variable and I think it's so ingrained in the UConn make up you just have to live with splitting venues. I'll add this. I've always believed in games played while school is in session are played at Gampel. Games over breaks and holidays are at XL. Start with that model and there's only 1 or 2 games a season to wank about.
Expand ...
This. Play a marquee game or two add XL to take advantage of its added capacity and then play games during semester break there. That pretty much gets you to the same ratio of games that exist currently.

Then, if you stop charging the university of Connecticut lease rates for what is essentially a state run facility you still end up with the same number of games in Hartford, but the athletic departments financials look dramatically better and the perpetual multimillion dollar annual loss CDRA shows up in its books, rather than the athletic departments.

I agree with you that people are really territorial on this issue and tend to be locked in on the notion that it's either the status quo, or, all games are played in Storrs. That's not correct and there is a fairly obvious solution that would work for everyone except for the bureaucrats at the CDRA looking to hide their persistent ineptitude.
 
Chin Diesel said:
This is another "unique" aspect to UConn athletics. There are fan factions based on arenas and locations.

Moving all the games to Storrs? Fine. I'll stop donating and attending. I can't think of another university which has this variable and I think it's so ingrained in the UConn make up you just have to live with splitting venues. I'll add this. I've always believed in games played while school is in session are played at Gampel. Games over breaks and holidays are at XL. Start with that model and there's only 1 or 2 games a season to wank about.
Expand ...
Yup, you don't see this venue split with other top fan bases. Kansas, Kentucky and North Carolina are all geographically spread out states that play virtually all of their home games on campus. I don't see them having issues with attendance or donations.

I live in Fairfield County and I'm in the camp that as many games as possible should be played on-campus. I think @CL82 offers a reasonable solution with playing games during break at XL.

To those that said they'd stop donating if they don't play games in Hartford, are you even a fan?
 
UConn Dan said:
To those that said they'd stop donating if they don't play games in Hartford, are you even a fan?
Expand ...
It's well established that the large majority of Boneyarders do not give any money to UConn. And they consider themselves just as good fans as people that do. So the answer is clearly Yes.
 
UConn Dan said:
Yup, you don't see this venue split with other top fan bases. Kansas, Kentucky and North Carolina are all geographically spread out states that play virtually all of their home games on campus. I don't see them having issues with attendance or donations.

I live in Fairfield County and I'm in the camp that as many games as possible should be played on-campus. I think @CL82 offers a reasonable solution with playing games during break at XL.

To those that said they'd stop donating if they don't play games in Hartford, are you even a fan?
Expand ...
I’ll just say that we’ve been playing half our home games at XL (Civic Center) since 1976. It’s literally been 47 years. The split is fundamental to our basketball identify and no other fanbase has such history with anything similar.
 
UConn Dan said:
Yup, you don't see this venue split with other top fan bases. Kansas, Kentucky and North Carolina are all geographically spread out states that play virtually all of their home games on campus. I don't see them having issues with attendance or donations.

I live in Fairfield County and I'm in the camp that as many games as possible should be played on-campus. I think @CL82 offers a reasonable solution with playing games during break at XL.

To those that said they'd stop donating if they don't play games in Hartford, are you even a fan?
Expand ...

Odd you say the top teams don't do this, given that since 2011, 5 of 12 NCAA titles have been won by teams playing a mix of home games in a smaller on-campus arena and bigger NBA sized arena off campus.
 
ConnHuskBask said:
Odd you say the top teams don't do this, given that since 2011, 5 of 12 NCAA titles have been won by teams playing a mix of home games in a smaller on-campus arena and bigger NBA sized arena off campus.
Expand ...
lmao
 
.-.
CL82 said:
We do know that in the last round of big 12 expansion some of the criticism of Connecticut involved the amount of our annual deficit. Logically, then, decreasing that deficit would seem to be helpful to our, admittedly, precarious realignment hopes.

Independent of that, though, it's more accurate to have the CDRA's annual persistent losses show up on their balance sheet rather than trying to hide them in the athletic department via above market lease scheme. The only point of that scheme seems to be continuing the existence of the CDRA which, at best, can be characterized as an political patronage position that has produced extraordinarily bad results in every venture it undertakes and loses money every single year and every one of them.
Expand ...
I can't understand why Hartford fans won't just admit what an awful deal it is for our athletic department.

Not to mention how short-sighted the whole plan is. It's fiscal irresponsibility, yet that's ok somehow in this case? What's wrong with you people?
 
Mr. Wonderful said:
I can't understand why Hartford fans won't just admit what an awful deal it is for our athletic department.

Not to mention how short-sighted the whole plan is. It's fiscal irresponsibility, yet that's ok somehow in this case? What's wrong with you people?
Expand ...
There's 0 financial impact from playing in Hartford to the school. The money they pay to play in Hartford goes to the state which then partially funds the university, who then covers the "deficit".

Sure, they might miss on concessions and such, but that is more than made it up with the extra season tickets and general tickets the school sells due to a higher capacity.
 
Waquoit said:
It's well established that the large majority of Boneyarders do not give any money to UConn. And they consider themselves just as good fans as people that do. So the answer is clearly Yes.
Expand ...
I didn't say "you have to donate in order to be fan". I said if you're a donor and your reason to stop donating is that they move all games to campus, are you really fan? Is the reason one donates because they play games in Hartford or because they're a fan? That's the stopper? It's bull, just like those people that say they'll stop being a fan if UConn leaves the Big East for the Big 12.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,618
Messages
4,585,881
Members
10,497
Latest member
Orlando Fos


Top Bottom