How much does your school spend on hoops?

[NJRedman]

Creighton's numbers seem a tad low. I'd think they'd be closer to Prov...after all they have to pay me and Mac.

Gumby said:
I'd love to see a breakdown on those expenses. When you look at those spending the most on college hoops, the BE is well represented. It speaks well to our collective commitment.

While it may speak to committment, it also speaks to waste. Other than Nova, and to a lesser extent Prov...the other 3 (Gtwn, Marq, StJ) in the top 5 are flushing dinars down the shitter.

Piss poor results on a lot of money spent.

Note: New facilities generally are programmed for in special fundraising campaigns, special donor gifts, and the like. They are not part of the annual budgets.

Its also about dollar value. A buck goes a lot further in Omaha than it does in the eastern cities. I bet your concessions would be amongst the cheapest in the league as well.

[scoscox]

Its also about dollar value. A buck goes a lot further in Omaha than it does in the eastern cities. I bet your concessions would be amongst the cheapest in the league as well.

It's also about paying for the Verizon, Bradley, and MSG. Add that to each program's recent struggles and there you have it.

We turn a solid profit because we have the cintas center on campus to ourselves and fan support has generally been through the roof every year as long as I can remember.

Xavier, Butler, and DePaul are the only teams that don't rent another arena during the season, right?

[gosports1]

I find it interesting ot see what some schools make in revenue compared to others. Some I thought would be higher (WVU Creighton ) others lower (Minnesota, Georgetown)

[Savannah Jay]

I find it interesting ot see what some schools make in revenue compared to others. Some I thought would be higher (WVU Creighton ) others lower (Minnesota, Georgetown)

I wonder if the actual disparity is as significant as it appears...a few comments:

1. I just did a cursory reviewed of Creighton's audit done by KPMG for FY 2015. I did not see "athletic department revenue" anywhere in the 34 page report.
2. Different schools, particularly private vs public, may be required (public) or not required (private) to report revenues in a certain manner.
3. Pure conjecture on my part, but if a donor gives X million dollars to build a basketball practice facility, is that athletic department revenue or capital endowment to the university? What if they spread the gift out over 5 years; does that change how it's accounted for on financials?
4. Contribution requirement to buy season tickets; again conjecture, but some schools may count that as athletic revenue and some may not; given that CU (and a few other schools) have exact same revenue and expenses in athletic department, this seems like a conscious decision to attribute enough of donated dollars to athletics to balance the books and nothing more.
5. As long as it's within GAAP, a board of trustees/regents/university leadership may decide to recognize revenues in different buckets depending on what is expected of the school by its funders/constituents/general public.

Again, a fair amount of conjecture but it seems to me that athletic departments have a variety of revenue streams that could be accounted for in different ways, which could explain some of the disparity.

[Xudash]

I find it interesting ot see what some schools make in revenue compared to others. Some I thought would be higher (WVU Creighton ) others lower (Minnesota, Georgetown)

I wonder if the actual disparity is as significant as it appears...a few comments:

1. I just did a cursory reviewed of Creighton's audit done by KPMG for FY 2015. I did not see "athletic department revenue" anywhere in the 34 page report.
2. Different schools, particularly private vs public, may be required (public) or not required (private) to report revenues in a certain manner.
3. Pure conjecture on my part, but if a donor gives X million dollars to build a basketball practice facility, is that athletic department revenue or capital endowment to the university? What if they spread the gift out over 5 years; does that change how it's accounted for on financials?
4. Contribution requirement to buy season tickets; again conjecture, but some schools may count that as athletic revenue and some may not; given that CU (and a few other schools) have exact same revenue and expenses in athletic department, this seems like a conscious decision to attribute enough of donated dollars to athletics to balance the books and nothing more.
5. As long as it's within GAAP, a board of trustees/regents/university leadership may decide to recognize revenues in different buckets depending on what is expected of the school by its funders/constituents/general public.

Again, a fair amount of conjecture but it seems to me that athletic departments have a variety of revenue streams that could be accounted for in different ways, which could explain some of the disparity.

You made a very key point: not withstanding the differences in how schools report their financials, at the end of the day, they all have to be within GAAP compliance.