BobcatAttack.com - For Fans of Ohio University Sports

Welcome Guest!
Create an Account

site search

about us

advertise with us

help

BobcatAttack.com Message Board

Ohio Football

Topic: Subsidies

Topic: Subsidies

Author

Message

Alan Swank
General User

Member Since: 12/11/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,223

Status: Offline

Subsidies

Posted: 6/28/2011 7:27:46 AM

This article from the front page of the sports section of USA Today should certainly start the discussions going again at OU and other places around the MAC.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2011-06-23-2011-athletic-department-subsidy-table_n.htm

BattleCat
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 312

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/28/2011 8:04:06 AM

Sometimes when you look at the numbers it is hard to justify, especially when people are losing employment to increase the toys of the programs.

Ohio69
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 3,061

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/28/2011 8:54:05 AM

Nothing will happen until McDavis leaves. After that, I doubt OU will do anything without other MAC schools doing so as well. So, I don't think anything will change.

Can somebody hit a pull up jumper for me?.....

colobobcat66
General User

Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,548

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/28/2011 9:01:22 AM

Being in the top ten on this list is not something anyone wants. The gate receipts need to increase dramatically, the donations need to increase dramatically, guarantees from games played need to increase dramatically and conference revenue needs to increase dramatically. with the sports played already at the minimum, there's no place to go there. We don't have much potential for the outside revenue like TV and athletic gear deals like the big boys do to help either. Even if everything I mentioned increases by 50%, we're still hurting, but it would be a lot more tolerable considering the benefits. Our dependency on such support has got to be decreasing, not increasing. I love college athletics, but something has to change to make this work.

catfan28
General User

Member Since: 6/11/2011
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 1,503

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/28/2011 9:01:36 AM

Still, at the end of the day, you're only talking about 1-2% of the university budget. I've never seen so much attention given to something that's such a small part of the grand picture. There's a whole other 98% out there to criticize, much of it non-academic and arguable wasteful too.

L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,497

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/28/2011 10:45:58 AM

Very interesting to note that 3 of the top 5 are not even FBS schools. It isn't clear at all just how much of the subsidies are football related.

Last Edited: 6/28/2011 10:47:21 AM by L.C.

�We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.� ― Epictetus

BattleCat
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 312

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/28/2011 11:24:16 AM

L.C. wrote:

Very interesting to note that 3 of the top 5 are not even FBS schools. It isn't clear at all just how much of the subsidies are football related.

Also interesting to note that those three FCS schools spend considerably more than we do. JOKE!

D.A.
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,190

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/29/2011 5:06:49 PM

Another link I found on the UMass board:

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011/04/29/how-does-th...

The Few, The Proud, The Bobcats!

And for the record, I hate tOSU, and Ricordati and Torgerson are DB's.

"This isn't just another walkover from the MAC." Kirk Herbstreit, another DB, on College Football Gameday

Pataskala
General User

Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,365

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/29/2011 8:54:02 PM

And the main story says Rutgers is in a whole bunch of turmoil over subsidies:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2011-06-28-rutgers...

We will get by.
We will get by.
We will get by.
We will survive.

BattleCat
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 312

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/29/2011 9:33:15 PM

Face it with the political situation and the economic situation, subsidies may become an issue in many areas.

L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 10,497

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/30/2011 8:06:27 AM

This is an area were there needs to be some standardization of accounting practices. I love all these statements that show 0 profit, or whatever. Obviously the numbers are fudged somewhere to get to that. Let's look specifically at the numbers from those two articles, and I can show that they appear to show very different things. The first article shows Ohio with $18,713,965 in subsidies, and claims that the subsidies constitute 78% of the budget. OK, doing the math, that implies a total budget of $23,992,263, meaning that there was revenue of $5,278,298 from all other sources.

Turning to the next article, it shows Ohio with $7,467,896 of football revenues. There are also going to be basketball revenues, and volleyball, too, and presumably some general revenue from sports licensing. These numbers appear to be in conflict with the first article. In fact, there is a direct conflict because they second article show that subsidies were $16,460,250.00, not the $18.7m from the first one.

By the way, I don't see much difference between "direct institutional support" and financing via student fees. You can charge the students separate fees for certain things, or you can bundle it all in the tuition, and then divide it up, and it ends up being the same thing. It's like where some landlords charge me one number called "rent", while others charge a smaller "rent" but also add a "CAM charge". In the end what matters is the size of the check I mail in, not how it's labelled.

�We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.� ― Epictetus

D.A.
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,190

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/30/2011 11:49:45 AM

L.C. wrote:

By the way, I don't see much difference between "direct institutional support" and financing via student fees. You can charge the students separate fees for certain things, or you can bundle it all in the tuition, and then divide it up, and it ends up being the same thing. It's like where some landlords charge me one number called "rent", while others charge a smaller "rent" but also add a "CAM charge". In the end what matters is the size of the check I mail in, not how it's labelled.

I totally agree LC, and believe that while intellectually more honest, Ohio's practice of having a direct tie accounting wise of ICA funding to the revenue category "student fees" is something that allows for more whitewater than if the ICA funding came from the General Fund, where it would only stand out as 2% of the annual budget. I don't often argue for more ambiguity, but in this case I wish the Board were more so.

Casper71
General User

Member Since: 12/1/2006
Post Count: 3,090

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 6/30/2011 3:27:38 PM

I believe that when you look at the student fees that go to ICA you will find much of it going to the Administration of ICA not necessarily the individual sports. I think you could identify FB or BB revenues and subtract direct sport expenses to see the "loss" (or profit) for each program. You could do the same for non revenue sorts. The remaining transfer of fee monies covers the "other/administrative" expenses of ICA which tend NOT to be allocated as in cost accounting for the total cost of a sport.

OhioCatFan
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,763

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 7/1/2011 3:49:05 PM

From previous discussions of this issue over the years, I recall that the reason Ohio -- and other Buckeye State schools -- take this kind of thing out of student fees is that it is against Ohio law to use tuition for anything other than academic or academic-related support. Student fees can be used for darn near anything. I agree it would be nice if we could bury it in the overall budget, but that's just not possible under current state law. Some of you old farts may remember when Ohio law forbid contracts for more than one year at a time. Bill Hess and Woody Hayes always had one-year contracts renewed at the end of each year. I'm not so sure it wouldn't be a good idea to reinstitute that law.

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

TWT
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,191

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 7/1/2011 8:31:18 PM

Casper71 wrote:

Also a portion of that subsidy is scholarship money, essentially student fees are subsidizing athletic scholarships. Almost 50% of that money. As the price of tuition and room and board increases that subsidy will correspondingly increase.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

TWT
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,191

Status: Offline

RE: Subsidies

Posted: 7/1/2011 8:57:06 PM

L.C. wrote:

The subsidy is up 26% outpacing revenue growth. Total growth is over 6 million. At least 1 million dollars of that growth is attributable to the increased cost of scholarships, maybe even more than a million. Most of the remainder has to be going to the football budget. Twenty years ago funding for the football program was probably at the bottom of the MAC when the MAC was no better than the Missouri Valley Football Conference. The escalation started under Boeh to keep up with the MAC and then accelerated when McDavis became president wanting to be at the very top of the MAC in funding for revenue sports. The program is getting into the upper 1/3 of non-BCS programs in football funding so we probably won't see as much growth in the budget over the next few seasons. I could be wrong though as the school is projected to have 23,000 main campus students and 10,000 during summer session by 2016. The alumni base is starting to peak. Looking at those numbers alone its going to cause an increased demand for tickets but what the program really needs is big donors to step up for athletics.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Showing Replies:	1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Jump to Page:	1

View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics

There are 202 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com

202 Guests
0 Registered Users

There are no other users looking at this page.