Conference Realignment Thread v. 2016

[gtmoBlue]

The Big East has a better shot at getting Duke, Vandy, Gonzaga, or Syracuse than in getting UConn. Let it (talk of UConn rejoining the BEast) die a peaceful death.

C'mon Duke n S'Cuse...

[DudeAnon]

http://www.courant.com/sports/uconn-foo ... story.html

Quote from Patrick Riske, director of the sports business program at Washington University in St. Louis.

"I would say that their best hope would be to pursue something along those lines and somehow try to re-affiliate with the Big East," Riske said. "I don't know what that would mean for their football program. But if you look at the revenues, men's basketball generates more than the football program, which is a rarity among Division IA programs.

This could lead to a very interesting decision because if I was concerned with brand equity I'd love to be re-affiliated with the Big East...But I would think the Big East would be their ultimate goal if they are not a part of any expansion."

Of course, this guy doesn't know as much as Bill Marsh or gtmoBlue.

[gtmoBlue]

http://www.courant.com/sports/uconn-football/hc-uconn-big-12-expansion-1016-20161013-story.html

Quote from Patrick Riske, director of the sports business program at Washington University in St. Louis.

"I would say that their best hope would be to pursue something along those lines and somehow try to re-affiliate with the Big East," Riske said. "I don't know what that would mean for their football program. But if you look at the revenues, men's basketball generates more than the football program, which is a rarity among Division IA programs.

This could lead to a very interesting decision because if I was concerned with brand equity I'd love to be re-affiliated with the Big East...But I would think the Big East would be their ultimate goal if they are not a part of any expansion."

Of course, this guy doesn't know as much as Bill Marsh or gtmoBlue.

100% correct Dude...you must be a Savant.

[Xudash]

They are losing 20 million a year on football.

The people in Connecticut who are pulling the political strings (i.e. the very wealthy benefactors) don't care, and elected officials are disinclined to subvert the wishes of the people who finance their re-election campaigns. Democracy is not the same thing as making sensible financial decisions.

Previously posted on Page 57 of this thread:

UConn's athletic budget much larger than other Big 12 expansion hopefuls – August 22, 2016

Here are the USA Today figures of the top 20 non-Power-5 schools, with athletic budget and school subsidy. The subsidy gives you an idea how much revenue the departments generate (by subtracting) but also give you an idea how much the school is committed to athletic success.

1. Connecticut $72 million ($28M subsidy)
2. Cincinnati $52 million ($23M subsidy)
10. Houston $44 million ($25M subsidy)

Muddled Waters,

Your position about the disposition and preferences of wealthy benefactors is stupid.

The very wealthy people, the politicians and the citizens of the state ALL CARE. They now have to care. There is a difference between fiscal shortfalls that can be made up through small budget adjustments and coverages through rainy day funds, and something that looks much closer to a fiscal crisis.

Connecticut's budget deficit exceeded $300 million for FY 2016. Per a recent Hartford Courant article, they had no time to make any substantial cuts, so they had to rely on the state's rainy day fund to fill the gap. As a result of that action, that fund will NOT have enough left in it to plug even a $100 million shortfall for FY 2017 at this point. It certainly isn't going to be easy making the level of cuts required to chop a deficit down from north of $300 million to under $100 million, and in an environment where Connecticut's (tax) revenue profile is problematic, to be polite about it.

Otherwise, wealthy people remain wealthy by not making foolish financial decisions, including lost-cause "investments."

There is no doubt that about everyone in Connecticut that is in a position of authority and influence and who care about the University of Connecticut want to see a continuation of the school's BCS level football program. The investments in it have been substantial. The strategic value of it, especially when considered against the profiles of other state flagship schools against which UCONN compares itself, is obvious. But it all must come with a sound financial foundation, or it isn't sustainable.

Money is money. It isn't infinite at the civic level. It isn't infinite at the high net worth level. The math is simple enough: GAP multiplied by TIME. In Connecticut's case, whatever the specific gap is now for UCONN's athletic budget, it's going to begin growing substantially as its Big East exit fee revenue begins to dry up. Those cited revenue numbers include those Big East exit fees, and therefore cannot be considered sustainable revenue figures at that level - and which makes it no surprise that UCONN and UC, in particular, carry those current rankings. If the gap is at least equal to the subsidy (who knows what accounting practices they use in Storrs), then the annual gap is at least $28 million. Time must equal approximately 7 to 8 years in the event the Big XII doesn't expand, or at least doesn't expand with UCONN. The school already has a handsome budget gap (below). More student fees aren't practicable, and are already rather hefty (below).

$41 million budget gap for the University of Connecticut, and the school continues to spend over $71 million a year on athletics.

According to the documents, which were provided by the Huffington Post, almost $10 million from student fees goes toward athletics every year. This represents nearly 30 percent of the General University Fee, a $2,882 expense that every full-time UConn student pays. This amounts to almost $3,500 going towards athletics per student over four years at UConn.

None of the above suggests a sustainable model can be established for the status quo, should the Big XII not provide a golden life raft to UCONN (and remember that, even should an invite be extended, there is some amount of noise about "uneven distributions" for a period of time; they could receive a seal of approval without the necessary funding to make it totally viable).

I lived in Fairfield for a while and worked in Westport. There is no doubt that there is a lot of money in the state, especially all over Fairfield County. But they all didn't go to UCONN, and even if they did, not all give, and those that do give eventually will feel tapped out at some point, especially if they can't see validity and purpose behind the funding cause.

I have no doubt that anyone and everyone associated with UCONN and UCONN athletics want to find a way to ride this out to a promised land that now probably will not even have potential for coming into view for another 8'ish years. Notwithstanding that disposition, the fiscal challenges they face simply cannot be swept under a rug, leading to definitive statements as to what they will or will not do from here. The stakes are high, but the problems are big. It's too fluid to call right now.

[David G]

$41 million budget gap for the University of Connecticut, and the school continues to spend over $71 million a year on athletics.

According to the documents, which were provided by the Huffington Post, almost $10 million from student fees goes toward athletics every year. This represents nearly 30 percent of the General University Fee, a $2,882 expense that every full-time UConn student pays. This amounts to almost $3,500 going towards athletics per student over four years at UConn.

I've seen this before. It's from an article that DailyCampus.com posted this past December.

http://dailycampus.com/stories/2015/12/ ... t-troubles

Here is another line that's buried in that same article.....

According to the financial documents, UConn had a profit of $123,178 in 2014, after all expenses.

I've seen the financial sheets, and it's true. UConn actually made money on athletics. So, why all the handwringing in the media? I think they're all up in arms about how big the school's deficit is, and then they see all they're spending on athletics and they want to have this A-HA!!! moment. But, in their excitement for an aha moment, they overlook the fact that UConn actually made a profit in athletics. They lost over $6 million on football, but they have the good fortune to have multiple sports that generate revenue, and they actually came out ahead.

Now, the $2882 per year is on the high side for a student activities fee, or a general student fee, or a general university fee, or whatever you want to call it. But, most schools have athletics fees that are separate from, and in addition to, the general university fee. UConn doesn't. $3500 per student over four years is not ridiculously high for an athletics fee. That's less than $1000 per year. At Central Connecticut, for instance, the athletics fees are close to $1300 per year per student. The schools that rely the most heavily on subsidies are typically non-FBS div1 schools, even the ones that don't have football. NJIT doesn't have football, and they pay close to $1300 per year per student in athletics fees.

So, when you read something about how UConn is one of the most subsidized athletic departments in the country, that's technically true, but it's also worth noting that since their enrollment is over 31k, the amount of money each individual student pays isn't really all that much above average. Furthermore, at most schools the athletics fees and activities fees must be approved by the student governments. At a lot of Sun Belt and CUSA schools, the students vote in favor of the fees. I don't know if that's the case at UConn specifically, but I'm guessing that it is, and if the students are willing to approve a fee like that, then to me it means that they do, in fact, want football and are willing to pay for it. Or, have their parents pay for it. One of the two.

Student fees are no small thing. UC San Diego was all but set to join the Big West a few years ago, but the students voted down the increase in athletic fees that would come along with the move, so they stayed at the div2 level. Now, I know that has nothing to do with UConn specifically, but when you look at their situation I think you can safely conclude that they have no intention of dropping football.

And, the bottom line is I'm pretty much certain that the people in charge don't want to leave an FBS conference. The people who would make that kind of decision will decide to stay where they are.

[GoldenWarrior11]

What about the topic of seeing all of these former regional schools (Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Virginia Tech, Rutgers, etc.) gaining not just access into the P5, but also getting $30, $40, even $50 million per year now in TV media deals - compared to the $1.7 million the AAC is currently paying out to its members? That in itself is a lost cause, and over the course of a decade, really adds up.

The gap is not only real, but it grows with each passing year.

[Xudash]

$41 million budget gap for the University of Connecticut, and the school continues to spend over $71 million a year on athletics.

According to the documents, which were provided by the Huffington Post, almost $10 million from student fees goes toward athletics every year. This represents nearly 30 percent of the General University Fee, a $2,882 expense that every full-time UConn student pays. This amounts to almost $3,500 going towards athletics per student over four years at UConn.

I've seen this before. It's from an article that DailyCampus.com posted this past December.

http://dailycampus.com/stories/2015/12/ ... t-troubles

Here is another line that's buried in that same article.....

According to the financial documents, UConn had a profit of $123,178 in 2014, after all expenses.

I've seen the financial sheets, and it's true. UConn actually made money on athletics. So, why all the handwringing in the media? I think they're all up in arms about how big the school's deficit is, and then they see all they're spending on athletics and they want to have this A-HA!!! moment. But, in their excitement for an aha moment, they overlook the fact that UConn actually made a profit in athletics. They lost over $6 million on football, but they have the good fortune to have multiple sports that generate revenue, and they actually came out ahead.

Now, the $2882 per year is on the high side for a student activities fee, or a general student fee, or a general university fee, or whatever you want to call it. But, most schools have athletics fees that are separate from, and in addition to, the general university fee. UConn doesn't. $3500 per student over four years is not ridiculously high for an athletics fee. That's less than $1000 per year. At Central Connecticut, for instance, the athletics fees are close to $1300 per year per student. The schools that rely the most heavily on subsidies are typically non-FBS div1 schools, even the ones that don't have football. NJIT doesn't have football, and they pay close to $1300 per year per student in athletics fees.

So, when you read something about how UConn is one of the most subsidized athletic departments in the country, that's technically true, but it's also worth noting that since their enrollment is over 31k, the amount of money each individual student pays isn't really all that much above average. Furthermore, at most schools the athletics fees and activities fees must be approved by the student governments. At a lot of Sun Belt and CUSA schools, the students vote in favor of the fees. I don't know if that's the case at UConn specifically, but I'm guessing that it is, and if the students are willing to approve a fee like that, then to me it means that they do, in fact, want football and are willing to pay for it. Or, have their parents pay for it. One of the two.

Student fees are no small thing. UC San Diego was all but set to join the Big West a few years ago, but the students voted down the increase in athletic fees that would come along with the move, so they stayed at the div2 level. Now, I know that has nothing to do with UConn specifically, but when you look at their situation I think you can safely conclude that they have no intention of dropping football.

And, the bottom line is I'm pretty much certain that the people in charge don't want to leave an FBS conference. The people who would make that kind of decision will decide to stay where they are.

I noticed that profit figure. But some of it has to be due the subsidies and some of it is supported by the BE exit fee run-off.

I guess I can't get my arms around UCONN making money on athletics when there are P5 schools- with better football attendance figures - that soak in the money from their conference media deals, while still losing money.

[David G]

UConn's football budget is about $14.2 million. That's small compared to the average P5 team. Kentucky, which isn't exactly a football school, spends close to $20 million on football. North Carolina, also a basketball school, spends close to $22 million on football. I'd say $14 million is about average for what a non power five FBS school would spend on football. Some spend more, and some spend less, but that's about what you would expect. A lot of it is due to the subsidies and boosters, but that's not particularly unusual. But, like anything, you can't lose more money than you spend in the first place, and UConn doesn't spend as much on football as the P5 schools

You also have to keep in mind that when it comes to boosters and subsidies, schools can report that in a lot of different ways. A lot of schools have boosters who donate money specifically for football, or basketball, or whatever, and schools have the option of reporting that as football specific revenue or just as non allocated general revenue. UConn does the latter. So, while they "lost" $6 million a year on football, they made about $22 million from boosters. You don't really know for certain how much of that $22 million was donated because of football, and that would go away if football went away. Look at a school like UAB. They cut football to "save money" (or so they claimed), and then after doing it lost pretty much all of their money from boosters. Now, they've brought it back. What's funny is they have a "football foundation," which means they can report that they're making money on football even though they currently don't even have the team back yet.

[Bill Marsh]

There's been some great analysis of the UConn situation here. Kudos to you guys.

The negatives on the UConn situation treat the university and its athletic programs as a cost center. Financial analysis then evaluates the deficits and projects the continuing drain as unsustainable. All of this makes perfect sense when treating uconn athletics as a minor league sports franchise.

Let me suggest that state government doesn't see UConn as part of the problem, but as part of the solution. They see the university as an investment center and a jobs creator. UConn is several years into its new Genomics Institute, a billion dollar public/private partnership with Jackson Lab. This is a cutting edge research center affiliated with the UConn Medical Center, which will develop the technology and medical solutions of the future.

Athletics is actually a small part of university revenue and expenditures at a research university. The big dollars are in research. By far. That's where the administration and the state are steering UConn's future. Athletics are part of the package that they hope will make them a good fit for partnerships with other major research universities. The Human Genome Project is a major attraction to other universities who might consider affiliating with them. Athletics is simply a vehicle for establishing that affiliation.

That's the big picture as viewed by the university president. That's what other university presidents look at when they consider the possibility of UConn as a partner. It's why the B1G or the ACC might eventually have interest. It's why the state will continue to invest in UConn football and athletics in general to maintain its viability as a potential partner with other major public research universities.

[SJHooper]

People who just assume UConn will continue to sell its soul to the devil to strive for football superiority are not looking at the financial doom around the corner. Did they spend a TON to impress the P5 and try to get football big time? Sure. But as I said before, just because you construct a building for football doesn't mean you can't tear the insides apart and convert it to basketball facilities or something else. So they wouldn't be "wasting" the money, they'd be converting the facilities. I don't think it's nearly as much of a sure thing that they hold onto major football as many lead on. They are a rare exception in that their basketball program makes MORE than football. That's unheard of. You can be the best dressed football program, you can have the best facilities, you can have a cool husky logo on the 50 yard line...but if you are terrible and people don't show up, you won't make money. UConn is losing 20...TWENTY MILLION DOLLARS a year! That is profound. They have 2 more years where they get the leftover money for the breakup of the old Big East and THAT'S IT! The gravy train ends.

If they don't make the B12 which all indications are there is they will not (no sense geographically or culturally, terrible at football, not AAU), what else can they possibly do? They are essentially left with 1) Roll the dice and risk getting left back AGAIN praying that in 8 years or so the B1G will take them (but by then their brand/prestige will be diminished further and they will be struggling even more financially) 2) Stay in the AAC long-term (essentially inflicts a gunshot to the head of their athletics program), OR 3) Join the Big East and park football in the MAC/AAC OR 4) Join Big East for the long run and eliminate/downgrade football. The only viable option long-term I see is rejoining the Big East whether they park football or get rid of/downgrade it. UConn is an absolutely perfect fit geographically, culturally, and athletically for the Big East. They already have their tradition here, so going back would immediately reconnect that. SJU V. UConn, PC V. UConn, G'Town V. UConn, and Nova V. UConn would all be sellouts I would think. UConn is risking their entire athletic future to join the P5 and if they miss, they are done (if they miss the B1G in 8 yrs too). If I'm UConn, I settle for the much wealthier, much more prestigious conference focused on what I excel at (basketball). It may not be hitting the lotto like joining a F5 conference, but the Big East is the only conference that plays power conference level basketball without football and it is clearly succeeding. If UConn comes on board, that's Villanova, Georgetown, UConn, Xavier, St. John's, Providence, Seton Hall, Butler, Creighton, DePaul, Marquette. If there was any question left that the Big East was still a power, adding UConn would quiet them quickly. Our teams would have what, 4 of the championships in the past 10 years? Will CT taxpayers really allow them to spend ridiculous and ever-increasing amounts of money on their football program as they continue to lose on the field and lose financially? UConn may WANT to be a football power, but at a certain point when all other options dry up, they will be forced to stick to basketball instead. Many people seem to think they control their own destiny, but they don't. We do.