UConn athletic department deficit reached $42 million in 2019 with a decline in ticket sales and league revenue

[JohnFSilver]

John - getting back on Putterman, I have always found it confusing that newspaper reporters who cover a beat wouldn't go out of their way to be fair but lean toward favoring the product. I don't see how you get more readers when you piss off those who should be reading the article. Opinion guys can do that but not the beat writer?

That's a good question. I think I can write a master's thesis on this if I wanted to examine the role of sports writer as an intermediary between fan and team. (Side note: I also don't find anything wrong with what Alex writes about UConn. It's fair. Some editorial choices we can quibble with, but it's honest work).

It goes back to journalism we were taught in school and there are some really good points to consider. There is always a hometown lean in local coverage. For example, when UConn loses, the story is Uconn loses. Not how the other team won. That's called a hometown lede. You have to understand who your readers are.

As far as journalism, the truth is always in the middle. American sports journalism is very different than it is in other parts of the world. There is a more professional and even antagonistic tone to it. Sport reporters are taught to cover sports like the white house. And the press conferences have become dances like the press briefing at the white house. I think it has all evolved into a ridiculous charade. The football coach lies and tries to obfuscate the "TOUGH" question. The journalist tries to pin down a gotcha moment. It's dumb.

UConn sports has been a lifeblood to the media in this state. Think about it. For decades the newspapers have sold off their coverage. In the meantime, there is certainly a business and editorial wall that is built up that sometimes comes in conflict.

Journalists didn't really see the direct financial benefit of the UConn-Media relationship (I won a national award for my work covering the team about 10 years ago and got $100 and a football from the FWAA. No bonus from paper), so they have no stake in whether the coverage helps sell subscriptions and ads. That is actually coming to an end, IMO. I think UConn's fall from grace as a hot commodity has caused newspapers to suffer. Less interest, less sales, no more travel, reduced staff affects the journalist's livelihood. Upstart websites (Bleacher, SB Nation) and even The Athletic tie content to revenue production, meaning the writer has to be tied to revenue generation now. That was not always the case and is a change from traditional media.

So, in an era of declining revenue in newspapers, where content is now tied to revenue, why would you continue to agitate your customers? Speaking now as a publisher and not only a journalist, it's a question we have to ask. I don't know the answer.

Tell the truth is foremost. That is why the readers buy the paper. Good news and bad news have to be reported. But, how about other editorial choices?

Why does the journalist have to prove total independence from the team as far as wanting a team to be successful? It's weird and counterintuitive. I think harping on the negative, under the guise of independence, has created content that rings as inauthentic and totally divorces the customer from the work. It's like the media wants to antagonize their customer in many respects just to antagonize.

Here's what we wanted to do at the @UConndaily (Sign up at uconndaily.com

*What does the reader fan want to read? -- This comes from my time at ESPN after I left the Horde. I look at our job as to get content and information to fans. That's the job. Get them stories they want to read that help them understand their favorite team better. We are writing for the fans. That's who reads us.

You have to create content that the fans want. Informing them of bad news is a big part of that. Fans are passionate about the team, shouldn't you also be passionate about covering the team? I think you have to be passionate about the team you cover. If you are passionate, you will go after James Bouknight for running from police and try and find out what happened. So, negative news and news that reflect badly on the team and school are certainly apart of delivering honest and robust coverage. Fans want bad news.

How do you balance what fans want and still keep to your journalistic principles? Rigorous honesty and integrity. That means not beating a dead horse and having respect and gratitude for your customers.

 

[Exit 4]

That's a good question. I think I can write a master's thesis on this if I wanted to examine the role of sports writer as an intermediary between fan and team. (Side note: I also don't find anything wrong with what Alex writes about UConn. It's fair. Some editorial choices we can quibble with, but it's honest work).

It goes back to journalism we were taught in school and there are some really good points to consider. There is always a hometown lean in local coverage. For example, when UConn loses, the story is Uconn loses. Not how the other team won. That's called a hometown lede. You have to understand who your readers are.

As far as journalism, the truth is always in the middle. American sports journalism is very different than it is in other parts of the world. There is a more professional and even antagonistic tone to it. Sport reporters are taught to cover sports like the white house. And the press conferences have become dances like the press briefing at the white house. I think it has all evolved into a ridiculous charade. The football coach lies and tries to obfuscate the "TOUGH" question. The journalist tries to pin down a gotcha moment. It's dumb.

UConn sports has been a lifeblood to the media in this state. Think about it. For decades the newspapers have sold off their coverage. In the meantime, there is certainly a business and editorial wall that is built up that sometimes comes in conflict.

Journalists didn't really see the direct financial benefit of the UConn-Media relationship (I won a national award for my work covering the team about 10 years ago and got $100 and a football from the FWAA. No bonus from paper), so they have no stake in whether the coverage helps sell subscriptions and ads. That is actually coming to an end, IMO. I think UConn's fall from grace as a hot commodity has caused newspapers to suffer. Less interest, less sales, no more travel, reduced staff affects the journalist's livelihood. Upstart websites (Bleacher, SB Nation) and even The Athletic tie content to revenue production, meaning the writer has to be tied to revenue generation now. That was not always the case and is a change from traditional media.

So, in an era of declining revenue in newspapers, where content is now tied to revenue, why would you continue to agitate your customers? Speaking now as a publisher and not only a journalist, it's a question we have to ask. I don't know the answer.

Tell the truth is foremost. That is why the readers buy the paper. Good news and bad news have to be reported. But, how about other editorial choices?

Why does the journalist have to prove total independence from the team as far as wanting a team to be successful? It's weird and counterintuitive. I think harping on the negative, under the guise of independence, has created content that rings as inauthentic and totally divorces the customer from the work. It's like the media wants to antagonize their customer in many respects just to antagonize.

Here's what we wanted to do at the @UConndaily (Sign up at uconndaily.com

*What does the reader fan want to read? -- This comes from my time at ESPN after I left the Horde. I look at our job as to get content and information to fans. That's the job. Get them stories they want to read that help them understand their favorite team better. We are writing for the fans. That's who reads us.

You have to create content that the fans want. Informing them of bad news is a big part of that. Fans are passionate about the team, shouldn't you also be passionate about covering the team? I think you have to be passionate about the team you cover. If you are passionate, you will go after James Bouknight for running from police and try and find out what happened. So, negative news and news that reflect badly on the team and school are certainly apart of delivering honest and robust coverage. Fans want bad news.

How do you balance what fans want and still keep to your journalistic principles? Rigorous honesty and integrity. That means not beating a dead horse and having respect and gratitude for your customers.

Lots of excellent points here John...

 

[TheDoggPound]

What the State needs to do is stop IV-dripping $ into the XL and just rebuild or renovate. they're on the verge of investing almost $100m with nothing to show for it other than some updated concourses and jumbotron (along with unseen nuts/bolts expenses).. what benefit does it serve other than being politically expedient? Reboot the building and rework the lease, win-win for UConn.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

So why do we play our games in Hartford if they not only charge us rent, but keep all concession profits and parking fees? I get why we have to play at the Rent. But why aren't we forcing Hartford's hand? They need us at the XL more than we need the XL. If the winning starts and the Big East play attracts more fans, as expected, fans will travel to Gampel. If we are in the red by so much, one area we should be looking to cut or increase money should be at the XL. Force Hartford, mainly the state's, hand. They want to be able to keep the XL open and active and without UConn, that's a hard sell. So if they want us, pony up and help us out.

The state is UConn. UConn is the state.

The time to play tough with the state isn't when the taxpayers are subsidizing our awful football, and middling basketball programs.

 

[Husky25]

What the State needs to do is stop IV-dripping $ into the XL and just rebuild or renovate. they're on the verge of investing almost $100m with nothing to show for it other than some updated concourses and jumbotron (along with unseen nuts/bolts expenses).. what benefit does it serve other than being politically expedient? Reboot the building and rework the lease, win-win for UConn.

Lose-lose for CDRA.

Both a tear down/rebuild and major renovation would require a drastic reduction in seating in order to make way for premium boxes closer to the lower bowl. Location must come out of the clouds. Prices probably as well, but no one is spending $1,000s for that view and concessions no better than the old Coach's. There is not one person (or corporation) who can afford the "luxury" boxes who does not provide themselves or guests with a better viewing experience, either at home, Russian Lady, other otherwise.

A couple positives to a lower capacity are: 1) The arena will reflect it's urban environment. A 16,000 seat Northeast venue is not viable without a major league tenant and 2) presumable maintenance/overhead would be less in a smaller building.

On the flip side however, capital costs would be in the neighborhood of 5x the outlay mentioned above. Also, the venue loses virtually of it's attractiveness for a major tenant that has a 10,000 seat on-campus arena (Albeit, without alcohol sales).

A bigger issue for the state is the lease in East Hartford. I don't see how both parties do not benefit if they renegotiate the "All other non-UConn events at Rentschler Field MUST turn a profit" provision.

 

[UCFBfan]

The state is UConn. UConn is the state.

The time to play tough with the state isn't when the taxpayers are subsidizing our awful football, and middling basketball programs.

I was thinking more along the lines of the concession prices, etc. Yet how come the rent fees get put on our budget if the state is UConn, etc

 

[CL82]

That's a good question. I think I can write a master's thesis on this if I wanted to examine the role of sports writer as an intermediary between fan and team. (Side note: I also don't find anything wrong with what Alex writes about UConn. It's fair. Some editorial choices we can quibble with, but it's honest work).

It goes back to journalism we were taught in school and there are some really good points to consider. There is always a hometown lean in local coverage. For example, when UConn loses, the story is Uconn loses. Not how the other team won. That's called a hometown lede. You have to understand who your readers are.

As far as journalism, the truth is always in the middle. American sports journalism is very different than it is in other parts of the world. There is a more professional and even antagonistic tone to it. Sport reporters are taught to cover sports like the white house. And the press conferences have become dances like the press briefing at the white house. I think it has all evolved into a ridiculous charade. The football coach lies and tries to obfuscate the "TOUGH" question. The journalist tries to pin down a gotcha moment. It's dumb.

UConn sports has been a lifeblood to the media in this state. Think about it. For decades the newspapers have sold off their coverage. In the meantime, there is certainly a business and editorial wall that is built up that sometimes comes in conflict.

Journalists didn't really see the direct financial benefit of the UConn-Media relationship (I won a national award for my work covering the team about 10 years ago and got $100 and a football from the FWAA. No bonus from paper), so they have no stake in whether the coverage helps sell subscriptions and ads. That is actually coming to an end, IMO. I think UConn's fall from grace as a hot commodity has caused newspapers to suffer. Less interest, less sales, no more travel, reduced staff affects the journalist's livelihood. Upstart websites (Bleacher, SB Nation) and even The Athletic tie content to revenue production, meaning the writer has to be tied to revenue generation now. That was not always the case and is a change from traditional media.

So, in an era of declining revenue in newspapers, where content is now tied to revenue, why would you continue to agitate your customers? Speaking now as a publisher and not only a journalist, it's a question we have to ask. I don't know the answer.

Tell the truth is foremost. That is why the readers buy the paper. Good news and bad news have to be reported. But, how about other editorial choices?

Why does the journalist have to prove total independence from the team as far as wanting a team to be successful? It's weird and counterintuitive. I think harping on the negative, under the guise of independence, has created content that rings as inauthentic and totally divorces the customer from the work. It's like the media wants to antagonize their customer in many respects just to antagonize.

Here's what we wanted to do at the @UConndaily (Sign up at uconndaily.com

*What does the reader fan want to read? -- This comes from my time at ESPN after I left the Horde. I look at our job as to get content and information to fans. That's the job. Get them stories they want to read that help them understand their favorite team better. We are writing for the fans. That's who reads us.

You have to create content that the fans want. Informing them of bad news is a big part of that. Fans are passionate about the team, shouldn't you also be passionate about covering the team? I think you have to be passionate about the team you cover. If you are passionate, you will go after James Bouknight for running from police and try and find out what happened. So, negative news and news that reflect badly on the team and school are certainly apart of delivering honest and robust coverage. Fans want bad news.

How do you balance what fans want and still keep to your journalistic principles? Rigorous honesty and integrity. That means not beating a dead horse and having respect and gratitude for your customers.

Great stuff John. It is intelligent and honest look at the business. Very interesting.

A couple of thoughts:

As far as journalism, the truth is always in the middle.

Hmmm, not always. Using that as a default conclusion allows parties to manipulate the coverage. Better, I think, to define the positions and list the facts that support and contradict them, rather than assume a the middle position will be right as a default.

How do you balance what fans want and still keep to your journalistic principles? Rigorous honesty and integrity. That means not beating a dead horse and having respect and gratitude for your customers.

This. As you note, you can maintain your journalistic integrity and still write an article that is informed by your readers' worldview.

Again, thanks for taking the time to put together such a thoughtful post. I enjoyed it.

 

[CL82]

The state is UConn. UConn is the state.

The time to play tough with the state isn't when the taxpayers are subsidizing our awful football, and middling basketball programs.

On the other hand, the University subsidizes the state's awful basketball and middling football venues.

 

[hardcorehusky]

That's a good question. I think I can write a master's thesis on this if I wanted to examine the role of sports writer as an intermediary between fan and team. (Side note: I also don't find anything wrong with what Alex writes about UConn. It's fair. Some editorial choices we can quibble with, but it's honest work).

It goes back to journalism we were taught in school and there are some really good points to consider. There is always a hometown lean in local coverage. For example, when UConn loses, the story is Uconn loses. Not how the other team won. That's called a hometown lede. You have to understand who your readers are.

As far as journalism, the truth is always in the middle. American sports journalism is very different than it is in other parts of the world. There is a more professional and even antagonistic tone to it. Sport reporters are taught to cover sports like the white house. And the press conferences have become dances like the press briefing at the white house. I think it has all evolved into a ridiculous charade. The football coach lies and tries to obfuscate the "TOUGH" question. The journalist tries to pin down a gotcha moment. It's dumb.

UConn sports has been a lifeblood to the media in this state. Think about it. For decades the newspapers have sold off their coverage. In the meantime, there is certainly a business and editorial wall that is built up that sometimes comes in conflict.

Journalists didn't really see the direct financial benefit of the UConn-Media relationship (I won a national award for my work covering the team about 10 years ago and got $100 and a football from the FWAA. No bonus from paper), so they have no stake in whether the coverage helps sell subscriptions and ads. That is actually coming to an end, IMO. I think UConn's fall from grace as a hot commodity has caused newspapers to suffer. Less interest, less sales, no more travel, reduced staff affects the journalist's livelihood. Upstart websites (Bleacher, SB Nation) and even The Athletic tie content to revenue production, meaning the writer has to be tied to revenue generation now. That was not always the case and is a change from traditional media.

So, in an era of declining revenue in newspapers, where content is now tied to revenue, why would you continue to agitate your customers? Speaking now as a publisher and not only a journalist, it's a question we have to ask. I don't know the answer.

Tell the truth is foremost. That is why the readers buy the paper. Good news and bad news have to be reported. But, how about other editorial choices?

Why does the journalist have to prove total independence from the team as far as wanting a team to be successful? It's weird and counterintuitive. I think harping on the negative, under the guise of independence, has created content that rings as inauthentic and totally divorces the customer from the work. It's like the media wants to antagonize their customer in many respects just to antagonize.

Here's what we wanted to do at the @UConndaily (Sign up at uconndaily.com

*What does the reader fan want to read? -- This comes from my time at ESPN after I left the Horde. I look at our job as to get content and information to fans. That's the job. Get them stories they want to read that help them understand their favorite team better. We are writing for the fans. That's who reads us.

You have to create content that the fans want. Informing them of bad news is a big part of that. Fans are passionate about the team, shouldn't you also be passionate about covering the team? I think you have to be passionate about the team you cover. If you are passionate, you will go after James Bouknight for running from police and try and find out what happened. So, negative news and news that reflect badly on the team and school are certainly apart of delivering honest and robust coverage. Fans want bad news.

How do you balance what fans want and still keep to your journalistic principles? Rigorous honesty and integrity. That means not beating a dead horse and having respect and gratitude for your customers.

John - thank you. I did not realize The Athletic has gone to pay as read model. I guess that is great for the person who has the coverage for a winning team or a really big name. That also makes it imperative to learn different information or to be perceived as a source of different information in order to drive activity toward the article.

You bring up so many great points - PS - love the UCONN Daily!!

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I was thinking more along the lines of the concession prices, etc. Yet how come the rent fees get put on our budget if the state is UConn, etc

On the other hand, the University subsidizes the state's awful basketball and middling football venues.

It's all coming from the same bucket though. The AD budget is a small drop in the budget for the amount of funding the state gives to UConn.

We're really going to argue over UConn getting to show the revenue from some hot dogs at the XL Center, as opposed to keeping Hartford happy so they continue to throw money at the school?

 

[CL82]

It's all coming from the same bucket though. The AD budget is a small drop in the budget for the amount of funding the state gives to UConn.

We're really going to argue over UConn getting to show the revenue from some hot dogs at the XL Center, as opposed to keeping Hartford happy so they continue to throw money at the school?

I think that’s a false choice.

I think that you can make a good case that the CDRA is being unfair in their pricing toward UConn. If you have a state legislator raise the issue in that context you probably have an easy go getting it through.

 

[Irishfan]

Season tickets for UConn games in the chairbacks required a seat donation of over $750 per seat. That boosts revenue quickly

That‘s pretty cheap, but even if there were only 5,000 of these season tickets, the seat donations alone would exceed $3.7 million.

 

[huskymedic]

The Hearst CT take on UConn AD Finances:



Alternate access link

 

[UCFBfan]

The Hearst CT take on UConn AD Finances:



Alternate access link

I love the dig at the football team by adding the stat on their record this year and the past 4. I didn't happen to catch anything in there about the basketball team, that also lost money, and how they haven't had a winning record or made the post season since 2016. Once again, I like how they twist the narrative. He doesn't come out and say football is the problem or cut it, but it is the only program with it's own point about it's failure last season.

 

[billybud]

I assumed that pointing out the football record was a shorthand way of explaining declined football revenue...ticket sales, donations, etc as mentioned in the UConn admin quote.

 

[JohnFSilver]

guys, $3200 per year In student fees? That is unconscionable.

 

[huskymedic]

guys, $3200 per year In student fees? That is unconscionable.

Tell me about it - I just wrote the last (hopefully) check

It’s actually closer to $3,500. It’s $3,428 (which also now includes a non-waiveable $500 fee for the new student rec center). It’s been reported that less than $500 of the mandatory fees is directed to the Athletic Department.

 

[Hoophound]

Whatever, if people will pay it, charge it. This stuff isn’t cheap, and yes, you can drop football to FCS but you won’t save any money. Drop football altogether, then yeah, you’ll save money but you’ll also be the only major state u without football. Dropping football makes no sense, so let’s just try to win football games instead. Stupid.

 

[GridironGR8]

Whatever, if people will pay it, charge it. This stuff isn’t cheap, and yes, you can drop football to FCS but you won’t save any money. Drop football altogether, then yeah, you’ll save money but you’ll also be the only major state u without football. Dropping football makes no sense, so let’s just try to win football games instead. Stupid.

FCS schools such as Lehigh, Lafayette and Holy Cross spend 5, 6, 7 million and take in revenues of 5 or 6 million. They lose money on football but we're talking several hunded thousand, not $10 million. Truth is you would save money playing New Hampshire, Maine and Albany and Holy Cross but is the drop in prestige worth it?

 

[J187Money]

"Student Aid" of $17.7M
(This is a phantom number largely generated by charging full out of state tuition for each athlete.)

CDRA "Rent" of $3.5M.
(This is one state entity paying another one. The high "rent" for the XL and the Rent masks the lack of profitability of the CDRA and inflates the cost of athletics at UConn.)

That's $21.2M of the $42M short fall.

I haven't looked at the most recent numbers but in the past UConn's "administrative overhead" was higher that the average P5 school that is a place I'd look for reductions.

Keep in mind as well that the school estimates that travel costs will drop by $2M next year.

UConn can get this to a more 1) reasonable number by changing the way they account for athlete tuition; and
2) changing our "rental agreement" with the CDRA to profit split rather than a fix fee. That's a pretty easy fix. Clean up administrative overhead and start winning and all of sudden we back in the black, or at least close.

So is $21M a reasonable amount to spend on advertising/marketing for a $1B+ yearly institution? I'd say so.

 

[billybud]

UConn is at a small financial disadvantage because so many of the athletes are out of state students...

Say, compared to FSU:

For the 2018-19 school year, the AVERAGE cost of an in-state, undergrad athletic scholarship was approximately $22,456 and out-of-state, undergrad was $36,804. Our student-athletes are currently, and traditionally, almost evenly divided between Florida residents and non-Florida residents. That means that half are subject to in-state tuition and half to out-of-state tuition...total athletic scholarship costs of $11.5 million.

The Athletic Department is required to pay all of the student-athletes’ scholarship expenses, including tuition. Gifts from annual Seminole Booster donors (Golden Chief, Silver Chief, Tomahawk, etc.) have been transferred to the Athletic Department to pay those scholarship costs.

 

[uconnric]

FCS schools such as Lehigh, Lafayette and Holy Cross spend 5, 6, 7 million and take in revenues of 5 or 6 million. They lose money on football but we're talking several hunded thousand, not $10 million. Truth is you would save money playing New Hampshire, Maine and Albany and Holy Cross but is the drop in prestige worth it?

Oh great. Now you want us compared to Lehigh and Lafayette? Great schools but swim in different markets.

 

[CL82]

UConn is at a small financial disadvantage because so many of the athletes are out of state students...

Say, compared to FSU:

For the 2018-19 school year, the AVERAGE cost of an in-state, undergrad athletic scholarship was approximately $22,456 and out-of-state, undergrad was $36,804. Our student-athletes are currently, and traditionally, almost evenly divided between Florida residents and non-Florida residents. That means that half are subject to in-state tuition and half to out-of-state tuition...total athletic scholarship costs of $11.5 million.

The Athletic Department is required to pay all of the student-athletes’ scholarship expenses, including tuition. Gifts from annual Seminole Booster donors (Golden Chief, Silver Chief, Tomahawk, etc.) have been transferred to the Athletic Department to pay those scholarship costs.

I'm not sure that it accounted for based upon the domicile of each student athlete

Regardless, since UConn is operating at capacity, I'm not sure that opportunity cost is the best way to account for the cost of student athletes

 

[Hoophound]

FCS schools such as Lehigh, Lafayette and Holy Cross spend 5, 6, 7 million and take in revenues of 5 or 6 million. They lose money on football but we're talking several hunded thousand, not $10 million. Truth is you would save money playing New Hampshire, Maine and Albany and Holy Cross but is the drop in prestige worth it?

So their football revenue is double ours? What?

 

[billybud]

I'm not sure that it accounted for based upon the domicile of each student athlete

Regardless, since UConn is operating at capacity, I'm not sure that opportunity cost is the best way to account for the cost of student athletes

Many universities turn away kids and are at full capacity...FSU's 2019 class had 57,000 applications received and they admitted 19,230.

But...maybe that is not the issue....

I wonder if the NCAA allows waivering all out of state tuition for athletes on scholarship if that benefit isn't available to all students?

I understand that it may not make a difference on "full ride" scholarships where all costs are school supported....but what happens to all the partial scholarships? Do they get automatic in state tuition even if out of state?