Washington Post on CFB spending - heavy on RU and Auburn
- Thread starter vm7118
- Start date
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that I read earlier in the year that RU football and men's and womens Bball actually make money or break even. I believe wrestling also makes money. It's the other 20 or so sports that create the deficit. Yet these articles always insinuate it's football causing the problem.
Because at every other school FB and BB make money. They dont just barely break even (and I think FB only breaks even because they moved the expansion debt payments to the general athletics fund.) No way wrestling makes money.
Basically - the difference between RU and other schools isnt that the Olmypics sports costs alot more than they bring in. Its that FB costs about what it brings in at RU, while at other schools it costs much less. Same for BB. The other is that conference revenues are much higher everywhere else.
RU basically cant spend much less on non-FB/BB sports. Even if it cut sports it would only save about $2.5 million (unless you want to cut a core sport like baseball or soccer or lacrosse), and Im guessing most sports are operating on a lean budget right now. Womens basketball could save some a bit. Maybe we would get up to $5 million savings if we cut down to the bare minimum and cut the budgets for everything that isnt FB or BB down to basically subsistence level.
Thats still only about 20% of the subsidy and the PR from that move would in the short term end up driving away more money than you save (in the long term some of those people would come back - but byu then we will be getting more money from the conference.)
This article leaves out the fact that our revenues will jump significantly once we have to stop giving the big ten money. It's not a small point.
Wow - every ACC team was in the red in 2014?
The Nike effect in full view in the PAC-12, where everyone else is approximately 100 million behind in 2014 revenues. 100 million!!!
I know our subsidy is large, but net losses for Wisconsin, Michigan State, and Minnesota despite having over 100 million in revenue? That looks like a bigger story (similar to Auburn) to me than Rutgers.
The Nike effect in full view in the PAC-12, where everyone else is approximately 100 million behind in 2014 revenues. 100 million!!!
I know our subsidy is large, but net losses for Wisconsin, Michigan State, and Minnesota despite having over 100 million in revenue? That looks like a bigger story (similar to Auburn) to me than Rutgers.
The article is not about expected revenue it is about revenue from the last 10 years.
....and if our spending remains the same when we become a fully funded program we will just break even. Fact is people just need to start donating more, if we are ever going to see any change in facilities.
It's actually a very good article. And as far as Rutgers is concerned, it doesn't move the needle negatively or positively. It's just stating the facts. And the facts are: 1) we've yet to get the full amount of joining the B1G and won't for six more years; 2) our BB program has been a abysmal for decades which hurts our revenue; 3) The practice facilities will help immensely to bring our program from 1977 facilities to at least compete with our peers; 4)In football we have the wrong coach in place who has terribly run the program backwards, which adds nothing even though we're playing big time programs now in our house.
When one adds all of that up, one can see the deficits involved. One can also see the promise of what will be when we actually have successful coaches with successful programs. Rutgers can make money for the university and for all of our non-revenue sports, but we need to start thinking more big time and nationally and not the provincial way the BOG has thought for thirty years since Grunninger said he wanted us to go big time.
Last edited:
Rutgers massive problem is revenue. We are the lowest and the only one who is close is .. Utah.
The more and more I think about this over the last few weeks, the more i realize .. honestly the donors and fan base need to step up around here. The basketball facility should've been able to secure the additional funding in under a month. No idea why we can't get our fan base to step up. LSU raises $20m in a week to potentially fire a guy that won them a national championship.
The more and more I think about this over the last few weeks, the more i realize .. honestly the donors and fan base need to step up around here. The basketball facility should've been able to secure the additional funding in under a month. No idea why we can't get our fan base to step up. LSU raises $20m in a week to potentially fire a guy that won them a national championship.
The LSU situation definitely puts things in perspective. RU is worried about $4-5 million total buyout and LSU appears to be ready for four or five that. It's insane.
Some guy named Skillethead made a very interesting comment (though I wonder how much credibility someone named Skillethead has; it's not like he's some statistics egghead from Princeton):
I've often wondered about the sports budget: what gets left in, what gets taken out. Is there a public document somewhere that one could analyse?
Or perfectly timed.
RU risks losing millions in revenue from ticket sales with Flood as coach. That has to be part of the equation.
Regardless of any expected losses, this is still horrible timing for such an article.
RU needs to shit or get off the pot. If they want to get out of the red, both the FB and BB teams need to start winning much more regularly. Spending bargain basement money won't get them out of the red. Spending average money in the Big Ten won't get it done either.
RU has a tremendous revenue-generating opportunity here. The only question is, will they recognize it and take advantage of it.
See the NCAA financial reports here. You can analyse or analyze them if you want.
http://records.rutgers.edu/frequently-requested-documents/frequently-requested-documents
I think it's a wakeup call -- not that the administration probably needed one. It's a reminder of how college sports must be run as a business. I know there are people here who would love having Flood as their company's CEO. To me, his performance is worth finding a replacement. If RU runs their sports department as a business they will consider all of the variables including ticket sales, parking fees, and merch sales.
The program does risk losing thousands of season ticket holders and thousands of game day sales. When people are fed up, they cut their losses. Personally, I got rid of my season tickets after about a decade when Flood was kept on after the 2013 season. I knew I was leaving before the Big Ten tickets and that tickets might be more difficult to get in the future, but I had had enough. I'm sure plenty of others feel that way as well.
RU needs to look at how much money they could potentially lose vs what they could make with an exciting hire. They're in the big time now. To compete they need to invest in the program rather than look at simply saving a few bucks.
I think they're going to make the right decision. I really do. We've seen what could happen (empty stadiums during Shea era vs packed houses with ranked teams). The decision shouldn't be that hard -- especially when MONEY will be coming in just a few years. The article points out the possibility of losing up to $100 million before the Big Ten money fully kicks in. That may or may not be accurate, but I would much rather see packed stadiums and revenue earned than empty stadiums and revenue lost. Hopefully articles like this remind them of the direction they need to go. Penny pinching is the wrong path and will get them nowhere.
I do see you point and fully understand the risks associated with doing nothing, specifically keeping coach Flood. But like you over the decades I've seen articles like this spark ferocious fights between faculty and athletics which more often than not ends on a sour note.
Oh, boy. We even have to compete with private jets. How the hell did Rutgers end up as the co-star in this article? Auburn may be losing money but they do it in style. We are paupers compared to the rest of the college world. A million from Corzine is loose change. There just has to be a sugar daddy out there with $50 or $100 million to pull us out of this mess. Just name your price. The 9th oldest college in America is waiting to put your name on its historic campus.
Similar threads
