PDA

View Full Version : NCAA: FBS Schools Spend On Average $50 Mil on Athletics vs. $12 mil at FCS schools



Lehigh Football Nation
October 10th, 2012, 11:16 AM
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Resources/Latest+News/2012/October/NCAA+report+reveals+consistent+financial+allocatio n+among+DI+schools#.UHWUlh5rPvE.twitter


While the median Football Bowl Subdivision institution spent about $50 million in 2010-11, versus $12 to $13 million, respectively, for the Football Championship Subdivision and schools without football, the research reveals a more consistent contribution from all Division I schools as the value they place on their athletics programs.

Fascinating! FCS schools pay less than 1/5 the budget, they actually also pay less than the budget at schools like Gonzaga's, St. Mary's, St. John's etc.


Other findings include that in 2010-11 for almost 1,100 NCAA institutions in all three divisions, only 23 (all in Division I) generated more revenue than their overall athletics expenses. That number has ranged from a minimum of 14 during the recent recession to a maximum of 25 over the past several years, including 22 in 2009-10.

This one is a well-worn stat, and has been consistent over the past decade, but it's notable that even with the explosion in TV revenue, these numbers are very constant. And you can probably guess who the schools are.. and they ain't UL-Monroe, Idaho, or Memphis.

There are other goodies in here, too:


Athletics spending also continues to represent a small percentage of overall university budgets – about 5 to 6 percent in the past several years. (When generated revenues are netted against expenses, the median percentage of athletics expenditures of total expenditures is less than 3 percent in the FBS.)

NCAA schools in all three divisions spent about $330 billion in 2010-11 educating their students. The $12 billion spent on athletics represents a little more than 3.5 percent of total spending. That shrinks to less than 2 percent when the $6 billion in revenues is factored into the equation.

There was an upward movement in median generated revenues for Division I institutions in all subdivisions from 2010 to 2011. Football Bowl Subdivision schools saw a 9.7 percent increase, while median generated revenues increased by 4.6 percent in the Football Championship Subdivision. The increase was 12.6 percent for schools without football.

Total expenses for the last year increased at a lower percentage than generated revenues for FBS, FCS and schools without football. The FBS median expenses increased 8.8 percent from the previous year. The increase was 1.0 percent at the FCS level and 3.2 percent for schools without football.

Think about those last two stats for a minute. FBS NET revenue only increased by 0.9% a year, while FCS NET revenue increased by 2.2% a year. FCS is growing faster than FBS, while costs are nearly 80% lower. There is plenty of good news for FCS in these statistics.

Pard4Life
October 10th, 2012, 12:18 PM
Higher revenue is probably coming from higher ticket prices and TV deals and packages, no matter how small. Lafayette surely is not pulling in any more fans, but we do charge $1 more for tickets, have exposure on CBSN, and participate in the NCAA Tournament.

The Eagle's Cliff
October 10th, 2012, 12:21 PM
All schools make their budgets look like a Hollywood film. They either break even or "lose" money.

Hammerhead
October 10th, 2012, 01:50 PM
Don't most FBS schools sponsor more sports than most non-FBS schools such as gymnastics, water polo, rowing, sailing, etc.?

frozennorth
October 10th, 2012, 02:04 PM
Don't most FBS schools sponsor more sports than most non-FBS schools such as gymnastics, water polo, rowing, sailing, etc.?
yes

bojeta
October 10th, 2012, 02:47 PM
yes

I would think they would have to in order to comply with Title IX. At least in terms of additional women's sports.

dgtw
October 10th, 2012, 03:11 PM
I don't think there is a difference in the number of sports FCS and FBS schools are required to offer by the NCAA, although some conferences might have higher requirements.

The NCAA required DI schools to offer at least seven for each gender or six for men and eight for women. They must offer two team sports for each.

DII requires ten sports, with at least four for each.

UAalum72
October 10th, 2012, 04:05 PM
FBS requires 16 sports, FCS 14.

Lehigh Football Nation
October 10th, 2012, 04:14 PM
Here's something else to think about. Folks talking about "reining in runaway athletics spending" while playing FCS football - they ought to be greeted by this report at every turn. Only 1% growth in expenses for FCS? That doesn't even keep up with inflation, let alone higher education inflation of, what, 5-6%?

superman7515
October 10th, 2012, 05:33 PM
Think about those last two stats for a minute. FBS NET revenue only increased by 0.9% a year, while FCS NET revenue increased by 2.2% a year. FCS is growing faster than FBS, while costs are nearly 80% lower. There is plenty of good news for FCS in these statistics.

Figures lie and liars figure. If I'm making $100mm a year and increase my revenue by .9%, I've made an extra $9 million. If I'm making $100m a year and increase by 2.2%, I'm making an extra $2,200.

Who made out better?

walliver
October 10th, 2012, 09:41 PM
The "FBS" numbers are not particularly useful since FBS is a mixture of big time programs (LSU, Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas, Southern Cal, etc) with very large budgets, and schools from the Mighty MAC and super awesome Sun Belt. The lower level teams do have the expense of 44 extra scholarships and some increased travel (probably not an issue for the MAC), but would have budgets much more in line with FCS.