Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

LSU and Nebraska: only two FBS schools not to receive subsidies

Posted on 1/14/10 at 7:07 pm
Posted by nosaj56
Member since Aug 2007
21991 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 7:07 pm
...in the last four years.
quote:

More than $800 million in student fees and university subsidies are propping up athletic programs at the nation's top sports colleges, including hundreds of millions in the richest conferences, a USA TODAY analysis found.

The subsidies have reached that level amid a continuing crisis in higher education funding. At some of the schools where athletics is most heavily subsidized, faculty salaries have dipped, state-funded financial aid is drying up and students are bracing for tuition and fee increases.

Taken together, the subsidies for athletics at 99 public schools in the NCAA's 120-member Football Bowl Subdivision grew about 20% in four years, from $685 million in 2005 to $826 million in 2008, after adjusting for inflation. At more than a third of those schools, the percentage of athletic department revenue coming from subsidies grew during the four-year period studied.

"The word I would use is 'appalling,' " says Carole Browne, a professor at Wake Forest who co-chairs the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics, a national faculty group that advocates for athletics reform. "It's appalling in the big picture and representative of what is going on in athletics with coaches' salaries and facilities. It's part of a bigger problem."

USA TODAY, through open-records requests, obtained four years of financial reports schools must send annually to the NCAA. The newspaper examined allocated revenue from student fees, university and state sources.

Of the 30 public schools where the percentage of athletics revenue coming from allocated sources rose the most from 2005 to 2008, about half are from schools in the power conferences, often assumed to be self-supporting. The '09 reports, which might show bigger gaps because of the recession, are due Friday.

At the University of Cincinnati, a Big East Conference school, subsidies grew from 26.7% ($5.6 million) of athletics revenue in 2005 to 33.1% ($10.7 million) in '08. That made Cincinnati the power-conference public school where reliance on subsidies grew most during the years studied. UC athletics also has a $24 million operating debt.

"The ultimate goal is to have the athletics department running on its own," said Tim Lolli, the student body president. "But students here love big-time athletics ... and they are willing and eager to help athletics as much as possible."

Cincinnati has trimmed its budget. The faculty has faced state budget cuts, hiring "frosts" and some wage freezes. Bigger class loads are coming, faculty chairwoman Marla Hall said.

Scholarships to three sports, including men's track and field, were cut last year, coach Bill Schnier said. But new money might not bring them back.

"If (college) sports have to match the pros dollar-for-dollar in salaries and facilities, then we'll have to find more money next year, and the year after that, and the year after that," Schnier said. "Someone has to put an end to this madness."

Nebraska and Louisiana State were the only schools whose athletics programs reported receiving no subsidies in each of the four years studied.

LINK

La Tech and ULL are both in the top five (number two and five, respectively) in the list of the top thirty public schools where subsidies grew most as percentage of revenue from 2005-2008. ULM came in at twenty-four.

LINK
This post was edited on 1/14/10 at 7:31 pm
Posted by LSUTGR69
San Diegeaux
Member since Jul 2004
9934 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 7:11 pm to
Cliff Notes?
Posted by CRAZY 4 LSU
Member since Apr 2006
16903 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 7:12 pm to
That's because LSU athletics are completely self sustained.
Posted by jefforize
Member since Feb 2008
44077 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 7:22 pm to
summary:

athletics cost money
subsities help pay these bills

"most heavily subsidized, faculty salaries have dipped, state-funded financial aid is drying up and students are bracing for tuition and fee increases."

lsu and nebraska can sustain ourselves


"It's appalling in the big picture and representative of what is going on in athletics with coaches' salaries and facilities. It's part of a bigger problem"



expect more "cuts"
Posted by gthog61
Irving, TX
Member since Nov 2009
71001 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 7:30 pm to
quote:

La Tech and ULL are both in the top five (number two and five, respectively) in the list of the top thirty pubic schools where subsidies grew most as percentage of revenue from 2005-2008. ULM came in at twenty-four.


I want to know about these pubic schools y'all have in LA. No wonder there's too damned many of you. You actually go to school to learn more about the pubics.
Posted by nosaj56
Member since Aug 2007
21991 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 7:31 pm to
fixed
Posted by chalmetteowl
Chalmette
Member since Jan 2008
47479 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 8:40 pm to
hence UNO is ending their programs

if you can't afford it and the students don't want it, what can you do?
Posted by ottothewise
Member since Sep 2008
32094 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 10:20 pm to
I saw a post on td yesterday in which the poster claimed that Texas made $59 million last year on its athletics.
LSU was in the top ten with $39 million profit.

I dont see how both 'stories' can be true.
Posted by OldManRiver
Prairieville, LA
Member since Jan 2005
6922 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 10:27 pm to
Simple, if Texas receives any money from the university side, even if it's just a tiny bit, then they go on the list of schools getting money. LSU and Nebraska are the only 2 schools who are completely self sufficient. It didn't say LSU and Nebraska are the 2 richest programs.
Posted by nosaj56
Member since Aug 2007
21991 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 10:29 pm to
well, for instance if Texas's athletic department only received say $1000 dollars from the state legislature for something, they would go from not being subsidized to being subsidized for that year
This post was edited on 1/14/10 at 10:30 pm
Posted by RandyMarsh
South Park
Member since Dec 2009
1770 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 10:45 pm to
I believe 7 or 8 maybe even 9 SEC Athletic departments are in the black. Only 25-30 TOTAL NCAA athletic departments at least break even next year. This number was higher pre-Title IX.
Posted by molsusports
Member since Jul 2004
36105 posts
Posted on 1/14/10 at 11:00 pm to
the crazy thing is there can be profitable athletic programs that still overspend or manage to push other costs onto students

want an example? here's one most people won't think of even when it happened in front of them... U of Missouri puts up a new student recreation center including an Olympic sized pool. Clearly no reason to replace a recreational sized pool other than for the sports teams existed... but the cost still ends up going to the students via student fees for the recreation center

Seriously stop and think about how much infrastructure, travel, salaries for the big programs all add up to... it's a ton of money

That's doable if you are a high revenue generator but by definition only a small percentage of schools can be highly successful
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram