USA Today revenue list for college athletics

Teel Time: U.Va., Virginia Tech among top 40 nationally in athletics revenue

"Some observations before charting the raw numbers.
# Thanks to an ACC-best $31.3 million in donations, Virginia’s $84.4 million in revenue trailed only Florida State’s $91.4 million in the conference. The Cavaliers ranked 28th nationally, 12 spots north of Virginia Tech ($70.0 million and fourth in the ACC).
# The Hokies’ $3.4 million surplus was third in the ACC to Florida State’s $6.6 million and North Carolina State’s $4.4 million. Virginia’s $200,000 profit was sixth.
# Private schools such as the ACC’s Boston College, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Duke, Wake Forest, Notre Dame and Miami were not subject to USA Today’s open-records requests.
# Louisville, which replaces Big Ten-bound Maryland in the ACC on July 1, reported revenue of $96.2 million, 18th nationally. The Cardinals’ driving force is $25.9 million in ticket sales, nearly double Virginia’s $13.1 million and reflective of basketball suite monies at the KFC Yum! Center.
# Led by Texas’ $165.7 million, 13 schools reported revenue of $100 million or more, five each from the Southeastern Conference and Big Ten, two from the Big 12 and one from the Pacific 12. Those conferences' superior television deals fuel their revenue advantage over the ACC."

"Finally, here’s how the ACC’s public schools ranked in athletic donations for 2012-13:
Virginia: $31.3M
Louisville: $28.9M
Florida State: $18.9M
North Carolina: $18.7M
Virginia Tech: $16.6M
Georgia Tech: $15.1M
Clemson: $14.0M
Maryland: $10.7M
N.C. State: $10.6M"


USA Today College Athletic Finances

RANK	SCHOOL	TOTAL REVENUE	TOTAL EXPENSES	TOTAL SUBSIDY	% SUBSIDY
1	Texas	$165,691,486	$146,807,585	$0	0.00
2	Wisconsin	$149,141,405	$146,659,187	$7,859,675	5.27
3	Alabama	$143,776,550	$116,607,913	$5,791,200	4.03
4	Michigan	$143,514,125	$131,018,311	$255,832	0.18
5	Ohio State	$139,639,307	$116,026,329	$0	0.00
6	Florida	$130,011,244	$106,972,983	$4,444,516	3.42
7	Oklahoma	$123,805,661	$102,447,553	$0	0.00
8	LSU	$117,457,398	$105,312,018	$0	0.00
9	Oregon	$115,241,070	$94,972,708	$2,337,377	2.03
10	Tennessee	$111,579,779	$110,269,194	$12,434,056	11.14
11	Iowa	$107,153,782	$106,969,227	$678,842	0.63
12	Penn State	$104,751,464	$110,737,200	$0	0.00
13	Auburn	$103,680,609	$103,126,413	$4,315,584	4.16
14	Arkansas	$99,770,840	$92,131,933	$2,027,439	2.03
15	Minnesota	$98,286,669	$96,427,632	$8,101,066	8.24
16	Georgia	$98,120,889	$96,904,626	$3,237,955	3.30
17	Michigan State	$97,942,726	$93,743,529	$1,772,415	1.81
18	Louisville	$96,193,330	$92,383,221	$10,914,122	11.35
19	Kentucky	$95,720,724	$93,423,628	$847,079	0.88
20	California	$94,487,380	$90,126,390	$7,567,235	8.01
21	Texas A&M	$93,957,906	$85,114,588	$590,973	0.63
22	Oklahoma State	$93,664,337	$96,551,860	$7,336,442	7.83
23	Kansas	$93,114,168	$79,720,036	$2,870,626	3.08
24	Florida State	$91,382,441	$84,772,759	$7,859,734	8.60
25	South Carolina	$90,484,422	$89,097,412	$2,537,697	2.80

Important Clarification on University Subsidies to Athletic Departments

"USA Today has released its annual report on college athletics finance. One category, “Total Subsidies,” always draws the most criticism. In USA Today’s explanation of its methodology, it defines this category as, “The sum of students fees, direct and indirect institutional support and state money. The NCAA and others consider such funds “allocated” or everything not generated by the department’s athletics functions.”
The definition provided by USA Today is 100 percent correct…however, it’s an area I’ve found to be misunderstood by other media members and fans alike. People generally understand the student fees portion. It’s the direct and indirect institutional support and state money portions that cause people to draw inaccurate conclusions. Generally speaking, those are not simply checks written by universities and state governments to cover shortages in the athletic department. In fact, with respect to direct institutional support, it’s almost always a reduction in expenses for the athletic department rather than incoming revenue.

I tackle this subject it in the very first chapter of my book on the business of college football, Saturday Millionaires. Since the entire chapter is available for free (here), it’s easiest to simply give you the relevant section here to educate you about direct institutional support.

Direct Institutional Support
Since out-of-state tuition is largely an up-charge, and not indicative of additional costs to the university, some universities provide tuition waivers to allow out-of-state student-athletes to be treated as in-state students. This can show up in a couple of different ways on athletic department financials: as a payment (a sort of refund) to the athletic department from the university or as a reduction in expense for the athletic department if the money is deducted before payment is sent to the university. Almost all athletic departments who receive these waivers use the former method, showing it as revenue categorized as direct institutional support.
For example, the University of Illinois planned to provide $920,000 in tuition waivers to the athletic department to ensure Title IX compliance for the 2011-2012 school year. Rather than a reduction in the athletic department’s scholarship expenses, these monies are reported as revenue into the athletic department from the university, under the direct institutional support category.
As mentioned at the start of the book, Georgia Tech is in a similar situation. The athletic association’s audited financial report shows $1,667,213 in institutional support for fiscal year 2011. Nearly $1.3 million of that reflects out-of-state tuition not charged to the athletic department – shown as revenue instead of a reduction in expenses. The remainder is the university’s share of the athletic director’s salary, as he is part of the university’s senior management team and reports directly to the university president.
Many commentators simply see monies attributed to direct institutional support and go no further. As you’ve seen, that money isn’t always a transfer of funds from the university to the athletic department. Is institutional support in this manner, especially given Goff’s “list price” theory, a negative reflection on an athletic department’s financial situation?

Similarly, state support is often misunderstood. Here’s the explanation from my book, Saturday Millionaires:

Government Support
Similarly, athletic departments which report government support are criticized without discussion of the funding being received.
Title IX presents additional complications when it comes to evaluating athletic departments. In the instance of University of Illinois, detailed above, tuition waivers are provided for female athletes and reported as direct institutional support. In addition, some state legislatures have decided to support Title IX by providing funding to athletic departments earmarked for women’s athletics programs. This can show up on a school’s NCAA disclosure as government support.
One of the most comprehensive state laws regarding Title IX compliance was enacted by the State of Washington. Under state law, institutions can grant tuition waivers amounting to up to a specified percent of total operating income. One percent of those tuition waivers can be dedicated to gender equity initiatives in the athletic department.
The specified percentage for University of Washington is 21 percent. Based on fiscal year operating revenue of $3.39 billion, the university could provide discounts and waivers of up to $711.9 million, $7.1 million of which could be for athletics. The total amount provided for athletics in fiscal year 2011 was $2.5 million.
Many other states have similar laws. In Illinois, state law allows for up to 1 percent of total tuition revenue at a public university to be used to support tuition waivers for female student-athletes. In Louisiana, state law allows for 50 tuition waivers per year for female student-athletes at public universities.
University of Oregon showed $959,779 in direct state/government support for fiscal year 2011 on its NCAA disclosure document. Over half of that represents funds forwarded to the athletic department from the state lottery. Under Oregon law, a portion of state lottery proceeds are allocated to the athletic departments at the seven public universities in an effort to reduce the need for athletic departments to be supported by the university’s general fund.
The athletic department cannot simply refuse these funds, and the university has no discretion to reallocate these funds. Is it the athletic department then that should be criticized for using state funds in its budget?
Florida A&M University recorded $263,036 in government support on its 2010 NCAA disclosure document. The athletic department confirmed those were funds received from the State of Florida for Title IX purposes. As is the case at Oregon, these funds cannot be reallocated by the university to other areas; these are funds directly appropriated by the State of Florida to the athletic department for a specific use."

USA Today revenue list for college athletics

"Looking at the list for 2013 a few things stand out:

Big 12
Two top ten—UT and OU—incl #1 UT

Four top twenty five—UT, OU, OK State, Kansas

8 of 10 top 50 –two private unknown



SEC
Four top ten
Highest #3 Alabama

10 top 25

13 of 14 top 50, 1 private unreported


 
Big Ten

3 top ten-highest #2 Wisconsin

7 top 25

13 top 50, 1 private unreported


Pac 12

1 top ten #9 Oregon

2 top 25

7 top 50, 1 unreported

3 outside top 50—Utah, CU and Wazzou



ACC
 
0 top 10

0 top 15

New member not yet in only one in  top 20—#18 UL

FSU only existing member in top 25 at #24 lowest revenue "power" program in any of P5

6 of 14 top 50,  privates wake, duke, su, bc, Miami  and for some reason Pitt--don’t report

one school--GT outside of top 50"


"Conference average revenue of reporting schools:
*Using next year's conference layout with Maryland, Rutgers, and Louisville in their new conferences

Big Ten: $99,908,815
SEC: $99,770,871
Big 12: $94,964,423
ACC: $77,890,644
Pac-12: $73,076,176

Median Conference Revenue:

SEC: $98,120,889
Big Ten: $97,942,726
Big 12: $85,140,533
ACC: $76,411,413
Pac-12: $67,092,435

Variation of revenues within Conferences (Standard Deviations):

ACC: $12,484,632
Pac-12: $21,618,868
SEC: $22,97,587
Big Ten: $28,296,661
Big 12: $34,407,052

Of the schools that reported from each other the power 5 conferences, the Pac-12 and ACC averaged the lowest revenue by far. When looking at the median revenues of the conferences the SEC and Big Ten stood above the others but were neck and neck, Big 12 in the middle, ACC, and Pac-12 bringing in the rear again. The Big 12 had the greatest variation in conference revenues between schools while the ACC averaged the least variation by far."

"The yearly data in this USA Today report is the same FY (2012-2013, WV's first year in the B12) as what was listed in the equity in athletics data here, however it might be updated for 13-14 soon.

ope.ed.gov/athletics/

Private schools have to report here so we can get the raw totals but subsidy amounts and whatnot are an unknown. Stanford & Rice used to have % amounts in their pie chart a year or two back so I will include theirs here.

Baylor- $78,412,938
BC- $60,770,300
BYU- $54,644,578 (There was a % chart for them a couple years back. Applying those gets 16.3mm ticket rev, 10.9 rights rev, 8.7 donation, 7.1 other, and 11.47 tuition allocation which I assume it subsidy but am not sure)
Duke- $76,366,113
Northwestern- $66,413,894
Rice- $32,294,612 (Using a couple year old % chart: 968k tickets, 2.583mm donation, 1.6mm rights rev, 1.29mm other, and 21.6mm subsidied in one way or another)
SMU- $52,029,002 (Had an 18 million subsidy a year or two before, probably higher now)
Stanford- $90,490,234 (Using recent % chart to this year rev... $13.83mm tickets, 12.16mm donation, 14.855 in league dist, 10.2mm univ/state funding, 24.3mm Endowment, 15.13mm other)
Syracuse- $76,329,618
TCU- $71,932,668
Tulane- $29,441,104
U of Miami, FL- $67,253,273
U of ND- $108,509,683
USC- $97,802,254
Tulsa- $32,541,245
Vanderbilt- $61,122,469
Wake Forest- $48,830,266


and because Pennsylvania doesn't make every school report to USA Today's source references here are their 3 entrants:

Pitt- $57,606,235
PSU- $104,751,468
Temple- $41,558,322"

"Notre Dame 108,509,683
Louisville 96,193,330
 Florida St 91,382,441
Virginia 84,402,710
N Carolina 82,792,342
Duke 76,366,113
Syracuse 76,329,618
Virginia Tech 70,030,484
Clemson 69,061,398
N C State 67,481,639
Miami (FL) 67,253,273
Georgia Tech 61,780,812
Boston College 60,770,300
Pittsburgh 57,606,235
Wake Forest 48,830,266"




USA Today vs. ESPN Financial Data for 2013

"USA Today released their college sports financial data for the 2013 season, and there are some discrepancies between this data and the ESPN data I've been using up to now. No, the totals are the same - it's just how some of the revenue and expenses have been categorized that's different. ESPN and USA Today agree on Ticket revenue, Student Fees, Contributions, and Total revenues. They also agree on Student aid and Total expenses. So where do they differ, and can we get any useful information out of the differences?

Let's look at FSU as an example, since their financials are more complicated due to the BCS national championship game.

FSU Revenues:

Here's a table of revenues as reported by each website:

Florida St	USA Today	ESPN
Ticket sales	$20,302,766	$20,302,766
Contributions / donations	$18,894,097	$18,894,097
University subsidy	$0	$0
Student fees	$7,859,734	$7,859,734
$ from playing in away games	$0	$414,200
Paid directly to coaches	$0	$0
NCAA, conferences	$0	$19,814,702
Media rights	$0	$355,000
Licensing / royalties, etc	$36,775,949	$11,859,646
Other	$7,549,895	$11,882,296
Total revenues	$91,382,441	$91,382,441

Obviously USA Today lumps a lot more revenue into "licensing and royalties", while ESPN put a little more into "Other". That does help a bit because we know that there is approximately $3.7M in ESPN's "other" category which USA Today considers to be "licensing/royalty" related. Could be things like Seminole T-shirts maybe?

(not shown: ticket sales, contributions, subsidies and student fees)

FSU Expenses:

Here's a table of expenses as reported by each website:

Florida St	USA Today	ESPN
student aid	$9,544,912	$9,544,912
paid to visiting team		$1,957,775
coaches salaries	$27,239,537	$14,415,931
Staff / admin salaries		$0
Recruiting		$1,092,061
Team travel		$6,823,241
Game day expenses	$11,912,214	$7,620,959
Fund raising, marketing		$1,901,081
Medical expenses, insurance		$1,483,445
Other	$36,076,096	$39,933,354
Total operating expenses	$84,772,759	$84,772,759

Again USA Today lumps a lot of expenses into the "coaches salaries" category which ESPN breaks out for us. ESPN also put an extra $3.9M into "other", but it's a little harder to tell what that is from the USA Today data.

(not shown: student aid)

ESPN breaks out "game day expenses" into $7.6M for immediate game day and $6.8M for travel (remember, FSU had to travel to the ACC championship game, then across the country - with a huge entourage, btw - to California for the BCS championshop game). So USA Today is evidently re-categorizing part of those costs since they only report $11.9M for game day expenses. Therefore I'd conclude that USA Today must be including some of what ESPN calls "other" into what they are calling "coaches salaries".

BOTTOM LINE:

Unfortunately there are no hard-and-fast rules for categorizing this data. However, it's pretty useful when you consider that just a decade ago we didn't get hardly any of it at all!"