Conference Recruiting Expense Series: Top-50 Spenders

Jan 23

Posted by

Last week, BusinessofCollegeSports.com showed readers just how much schools spend on recruiting.  The following is a list of the top-50 spenders in terms of total recruiting expenses for both men’s and women’s sports.  We’ll list numbers 50-100 tomorrow!

School Conference Total Recruitment Expenses Men’s Recruitment Expenses Women’s Recruitment Expenses
1.  Tennessee SEC $2,296,023 $1,878,771 $417,252
2.  Auburn SEC $2,117,645 $1,530,917 $586,728
3.  Notre Dame Big East $2,070,316 $1,612,608 $457,708
4.  Alabama SEC $1,694,202 $1,339,537 $354,665
5.  Georgia SEC $1,540,743 $1,039,220 $501,523
6.  Florida SEC $1,501,899 $1,065,716 $436,183
7.  Georgia Tech ACC $1,489,599 $1,173,904 $315,695
8.  Arkansas SEC $1,480,557 $1,060,500 $420,057
9.  Michigan Big Ten $1,480,357 $1,039,948 $440,409
10.  Texas Big 12 $1,470,389 $989,370 $481,019
11.  Marquette Big East $1,461,373 $1,289,560 $171,813
12.  Kansas Big 12 $1,454,154 $1,033,618 $420,536
13.  North Carolina ACC $1,337,338 $949,396 $387,942
14.  Illinois Big Ten $1,328,931 $962,345 $366,586
15.  Duke ACC $1,313,378 $967,282 $346,096
16.  Oklahoma Big 12 $1,263,567 $837,890 $425,677
17.  Kentucky SEC $1,260,065 $865,254 $394,811
18.  Oregon Pac-12 $1,235,968 $922,653 $313,315
19.  Nebraska Big Ten $1,234,097 $888,165 $345,932
20.  Texas Tech Big 12 $1,184,799 $892,436 $292,363
21.  Florida State ACC $1,156,982 $749,499 $407,483
22.  Baylor Big 12 $1,138,946 $755,226 $383,720
23.  Ohio State Big Ten $1,134,013 $782,735 $351,278
24.  Minnesota Big Ten $1,130,963 $741,471 $389,492
25.  Louisville Big East $1,128,645 $786,574 $342,071
26.  Penn State Big Ten $1,128,129 $681,284 $446,845
27.  Washington Pac-12 $1,089,582 $776,098 $313,484
28.  Arizona Pac-12 $1,080,250 $733,394 $346,856
29.  Stanford Pac-12 $1,079,437 $771,567 $307,870
30.  Clemson ACC $1,069,565 $796,648 $272,917
31.  North Carolina State ACC $1,069,192 $722,995 $346,197
32.  Vanderbilt SEC $1,068,482 $792,574 $275,908
33.  Virginia ACC $1,045,893 $730,358 $315,535
34.  Syracuse Big East $1,045,212 $655,055 $390,157
35.  Iowa State Big 12 $1,022,016 $769,272 $252,744
36.  UCLA Pac-12 $993,663 $711,415 $282,248
37.  USC Pac-12 $992,414 $680,645 $311,769
38.  Ole Miss SEC $982,959 $694,038 $288,921
39.  Virginia Tech ACC $981,067 $650,651 $330,416
40.  Memphis Conference USA $961,150 $759,844 $201,306
41.  Purdue Big Ten $954,543 $684,920 $269,623
42.  Michigan State Big Ten $941,157 $653,640 $287,517
43.  Iowa Big Ten $931,989 $592,776 $339,213
44.  LSU SEC $927,990 $574,182 $353,808
45.  California Pac-12 $919,410 $630,158 $289,252
46.  Indiana Big Ten $899,047 $558,442 $340,605
47.  Miami ACC $897,271 $591,872 $305,399
48.  Colorado Pac-12 $885,421 $633,190 $252,231
49.  Kansas State Big 12 $882,902 $648,599 $234,303
50.  Missouri Big 12 $861,859 $621,949 $239,910


Posted on January 23, 2012, in Finance, Recruiting. Bookmark the permalink. 26 Comments.

  1. Jeff Roy | January 23, 2012 at 1:49 pm

    Love your lists because they always have their fare share of surprises.

    7. Georgia Tech – just two places behind their main rival in the same university system. They spend virtually the same amount, but Georgia gets better ROI. And the UGA fan base dwarfs GT.
    11. Marquette – a private school with no football program spending almost $1.3M to recruit men’s athletics. A poster child for the outsized role collegiate sports play today. Curious their main in-state competition, Wisconsin, not even in top 50.
    32. Vanderbilt – another private school spending seven figures with a football program that will never catch the No.1 spender.
    37. USC – with so much local talent, the travel portion of their expenses must be low.
    44. LSU – ditto USC, with the rich recruiting environment of Texas (specifically my hometown, Houston), Mississippi, and Louisiana, the state with the highest per capita rate of NFL players.
    47. Miami – They used to recruit Texas and Houston with some success. Now they are nowhere to be seen on the state’s Top 100 list. How the mighty have fallen.

    Reply
  2. Louisville Kentucky Mortgage | January 23, 2012 at 1:58 pm

    Does this include both basketball and football

    Reply
  3. Alicia Jessop | January 24, 2012 at 11:20 am

    The total expense is for all sports. Then there is a breakdown for men’s and women’s sports. Unfortunately, the schools do not have to break down how much they spend on a particular sport when they submit the data to the Department of Education.

    Reply
  4. M. Rahman | January 24, 2012 at 12:19 pm

    This is for the 2010-11 season. Correct.

    Reply
  5. Alicia Jessop | January 24, 2012 at 1:28 pm

    Yes, it is for 2010-11. The data for 2010-11 won’t be out until later this year, closer to the fall.

    Reply
  6. Alicia Jessop | January 24, 2012 at 1:29 pm

    Excuse me, I meant to say the data for 2011-12 won’t be out until later this year.

    Reply
  7. bobby seigle (@meandmyfro) | January 24, 2012 at 3:19 pm

    this is outrageous about marquette. unreal. they should have #1 basketball team in the country every year.

    Reply
  8. Alicia Jessop | January 24, 2012 at 4:22 pm

    The three freshmen this year on Marquette’s basketball team are from California, West Virginia and Alaska. They would’ve been recruited during the 2010-11 year. So, I’m guessing that because Marquette isn’t recruiting exclusively in Wisconsin, their expenses are proportionately higher than those schools who largely recruit in-state.

    Reply
  9. Jack Doub | January 25, 2012 at 4:07 pm

    The headline says the Aggies “lead the Big 12″ yet they don’t appear in the top 50?

    Reply
  10. Joe | January 27, 2012 at 9:18 am

    Wish you could break this down by sport too.

    Reply
  11. Tarawa | January 27, 2012 at 9:42 pm

    Under a bell curve a vast majority of these schools’ recruiting expenditures are normal. The geographic range (States) which they recruit and the repeated visits to undecided or vacillating HS athletes drive travel/per diem costs. Plus, a larger recruiting staff is costly if they are evaluating more players. Its an investment and the payoffs are better athletes, conference payouts, royalties, and nearly everyone loves a winner.

    Reply

  1. Pingback: Recruiting Expenses: Top 50 Spenders - Irish Envy | Notre Dame Football Discussion

  2. Pingback: UT #1 Nationally in Recruiting (Spending) - VolNation

  3. Pingback: SEC Schools Make Four of Top Five Recruiting Spenders « The College Court

  4. Pingback: 1/24/2012 Evening Edition | collegefootballnewswire.com

  5. Pingback: Top 50 Spenders on Recruiting.

  6. Pingback: KC SportsNation » K-State Daily Links 1/25/12: Henriquez reinstated, Tech preview and D-Coordinator search » KC SportsNation

  7. Pingback: I don't know whether to look at this as a positive or negative - TigerFan.com

  8. Pingback: Alabama, Auburn among top 5 in nation for recruiting expenses | Alabama News | Alabama Breaking News Headlines | Alabama News Directory

  9. Pingback: Tennessee Vols Have Highest Recruiting Expense | MoonDog Sports

  10. Pingback: Memphis to the Big East: A Good Fit? «

  11. Pingback: Which Schools and Conferences Support Multi-Year Scholarships? «

  12. Pingback: Georgia Tech’s Recruiting Expenses «

  13. Pingback: The secret to Stanford's recruiting success - money