Which conferences took home the bulk of the money from the College Football Playoff and the New Year’s Six bowls this year? I joined Campus Insiders to explain:
How much money will conferences make from the College Football Playoff this year?
Can Leonard Fournette fetch a historic amount for his game-worn jersey at auction?
And is Ohio State out of line with its ticket price increase for next year’s Michigan game?
I have the answers in my latest segment for Campus Insiders:
Every once in awhile I run across a baseball program that breaks even (or even makes a few bucks), but it’s rare. Even more rare: Nebraska volleyball turns a profit. So, while there are exceptions, trust me when I say they’re few and far between.
Today, I wrote a piece for Outkick the Coverage on FoxSports.com, and I made the case that Ohio State should raise football ticket prices when the market can bear it, because football is the best opportunity to make money for the 15 men’s sports, 17 women’s sports and two mixed teams which all operate at a loss (men’s basketball being the only other exception).
I wanted to give you a closer look at the numbers though. Particularly for those of you who don’t work in intercollegiate athletics, you might not fully understand how the economics work. Generally speaking, football and men’s basketball support every other sport within an athletic department.
Here’s a look at each sport’s revenue and expense numbers at Ohio State for 2014-15:
|Swimming and Diving||$273,022||$1,121,355||-$848,333|
|Track and Field, X-Country||$98,315||$1,278,248||-$1,179,933|
|Swimming and Diving||$96,008||$1,136,163||-$1,040,155|
|Track and Field, X-Country||$89,976||$1,435,552||-$1,345,576|
If you want a bigger picture look at the overall revenue and expense numbers for the athletic department, including how much is donated back to the university. check out my piece on Outkick the Coverage on FoxSports.com.
The start of a new school year ushers in a new financial reality for college athletic departments and, with it, questions about the hot new statistic in college sports: cost of attendance, or COA.
Schools use cost of attendance to determine a student’s need for financial aid, and federal law dictates the types of expenses that can be taken into account when a financial aid department determines its COA figure for the academic year. Athletic departments have traditionally provided grants-in-aid to cover a majority of COA components — tuition, books, room and board — but NCAA rules have prohibited them from covering travel/transportation and personal and miscellaneous expenses.
In January, however, the power five conferences — the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC — granted the ability to offer student athletes stipends to cover the full cost of attendance, and the other Division I football conferences followed suit.
And that’s where the questions come in. The methods that financial aid offices use to determine figures for travel and personal expenses differ from school to school. Different methods mean some schools offer larger stipends than others, creating a new point of differentiation in the hypercompetitive world of college athletics recruiting.
The change sparked a debate about whether the system could be manipulated to provide higher COAs, and the accompanying recruiting advantage, for some schools.
Last year, the NCAA did something unprecedented: they approved a pilot program to provide travel stipends to the parents or guardians of men’s and women’s basketball student athletes participating in the Final Four (up to $3,000 per student athlete) and National Championship (an additional $1,000 per student athlete).
The program also authorized the College Football Playoff to provide up to $3,000 per student athlete for the College Football Playoff National Championship, although the CFP ultimately adopted a $2,500 per student athlete stipend program.
Men’s and women’s basketball travel stipends
A month ago, the NCAA announced it would be extending the program for men’s and women’s basketball for a year, and then Tuesday the College Football Playoff followed suit and extended its program for another year.
Last year, Texas A&M discovered a new use of the Student Assistance Fund, a pool of money created out of revenue from the NCAA men’s basketball tournament and earmarked for student athletes with financial need. The fund has typically been used for expenses like trips home and clothing, but Texas A&M asked for a clarification last year regarding the insurance needs of student athletes and sparked a bit of a new trend when it spent $50,000-60,000 on a loss-of-value insurance policy for Cedric Ogbuehi.
Although disability insurance has been around for student athletes for quite some time, loss-of-value insurance is a newer phenomenon. Loss-of-value insurance pays out if a student athlete falls precipitously in the NFL draft due to an injury.
I wrote an in-depth piece for SportsBusiness Journal last year on this growing trend – which schools have purchased the policies, whether there’s any danger of depleting the SAF through the purchase of these policies and more – that you can read here (they’ve made it public, so you should be able to read even without a subscription).
Now Texas A&M is in the news again, with CBS Sports’ Dennis Dodd reporting the Aggies have purchased a loss-of-value policy for redshirt junior offensive tackle Germain Ifedi.
There are few cases of these policies paying out for student athletes, although former USC student athlete Marquis Lee is currently embroiled in a legal battle with Lloyd’s of London over his policy and the injury that led him to drop in the 2014 NFL Draft.
Want to learn more about loss-of-value insurance and how the SAF has been used previously to purchase policies, please read my article for SportsBusiness Journal.
It depends on how you look at it.
The Mountain West saw the largest percentage increase in revenue from $3.6 million to $23.5 million, a 553 percent increase. It was the Pac-12, however, who saw the largest increase in pure dollar and cents with a $41.4 million increase.
Full conference-by-conference financials for the College Football Playoff vs. the Bowl Championship Series now available here.
The new budget President Obama sent to Congress this week calls for an end to tax deductions for donations made to college athletic departments for season tickets or preferential seating, also known as seat-related contributions. Currently, 80 percent of these donations are tax deductible.
The administration claims people would pay an additional $2.5 billion in taxes over the next decade with this change.
No doubt, college athletics administrators will watch this development closely. Donations are the highest source of revenue in virtually every athletic department. Yes, even higher than those television contracts you hear so much about.
Here is a random sampling of schools throughout FBS to give you an idea of the revenue they generate from donations compared to their total distribution from their conference (television contract, championships, etc.) and the NCAA (March Madness):
|School||Donations||NCAA + Conference Distribution|
Chadd Scott over on SportsDay Now has a story about a new site called Ubooster, which allows donors to condition their gifts on a specific team signing a specific student athlete. If the student athlete declares his intent on National Signing Day, the athletic department will receive the donation. If not, the donor doesn’t make any donation at all.
Clemson has already indicated it will accept no donations through this method. I wouldn’t be surprised to see every other school follow suit.
You can read more about it over on SportsDay Now. In the interest of full disclosure, the writer is my husband. I’m only mad he found the story before I did!
It came as no surprise that the Power Five conferences easily passed the cost of attendance measure being considered at the NCAA convention on Saturday. The final vote tally was 79-1 in favor of going to scholarships that cover the full cost of attendance, with 64 of the 65 schools and all 15 of the student athletes voting in favor of the proposal.