(04-06-2018 08:26 AM)nole Wrote:  

(04-06-2018 08:06 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-06-2018 07:41 AM)nole Wrote:  Those are ACADEMIC endowments. Every list (aleit they are rare) I have ever seen of athletic endowments had UNC has 2nd largest, only behind Stanford.

(04-06-2018 07:44 AM)nole Wrote:  Correction. By my best semi knowledgeable guestimate nationally on ATHLETIC endowment, it goes:

Stanford
Notre Dame
UNC

I guess I stand corrected. Does anyone have a link showing Athletic Endowments by school? or is this the kind of thing you have to research one school at a time?

One school at a time, but here is what I have found:

http://allthingsfsu.blogspot.com/2014/03...wment.html

http://allthingsfsu.blogspot.com/2016/12...wment.html

I'm still working on the totals.

https://247sports.com/college/north-caro...-106509866

http://www.ramsclub.com/ViewArticle.dbml...=211522094

Carolina's athletic endowment transferred $14.6 million out of it's earnings to the University in 2015-16 to cover scholarship costs for that year.

Eric Crawford (@ericcrawford)
4/13/18, 10:13 AM
Year-to-date, revenue for U of L football and stadium are approx $775k above projections (budgeted), basketball is $1.8m below budget projections. Total athletic revenue is $1.6m under budget. But anticipating that, department has held expenses to $6.2m below budgeted total.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(04-05-2018 09:36 PM)nole Wrote:  My best guess (but not sure it's a good one) is added revenue from FSU's Champion's club and College Town which are efforts to increase revenue streams.

I do know that some of these numbers are different or vary based upon how they account for booster donations.

The biggest variance for FSU I noticed was FSU's women's revenue. Hard for me to believe there is that much revenue there. Thrilled, but....just hard to believe.

Florida St. reported revenue from WBB at $6.98 million. Color me skeptical. On the other hand, Stanford claims $21.4 million from WBB.

In examining the EADA data to explore these apparent anomalies, I did notice that both the AAC and Big East almost to a school reported that their WBB revenues and WBB expenses were identical. After I saw that, I stopped looking into it further. Between that and "revenues not allocated to a specific sport or gender" I concluded that the numbers were as close to useless as they could be. When one school in a conference reports revenues for a sport that are 80 times greater than another member in the same conference, that's beyond useless.

I suppose it is reasonable to assume that, when the data is intended to assure gender equity in athletic spending, the concern isn't to ensure that male athletes aren't being shortchanged.

One section of the report only deals with participation by sport/by gender. I'm sure that the people who passed this act and created these reports are pleased as punch that at Ohio State there are 114 women on their varsity rowing team and 126 on the track team! When they can crunch numbers like that into aggregates, they can surely claim success in their mission to improve opportunities for women all around the country.

I had hoped that these reports would provide a window into data for private schools that is often missing in press stories. I doubt we will ever see the real numbers that schools use to make actual decisions. Every school has an agenda, and those agendas require that actual revenues and expenses never become transparent.

If, as was claimed earlier, the EADA revenue numbers match the school's tax return, then at least the TOTAL revenue should be accurate (or at least as accurate as any corporate tax return). Likewise the total expenses. But I must agree, there's no reason to believe that the breakdowns are reliable - maybe rule of thumb at best.

(04-13-2018 03:57 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  If, as was claimed earlier, the EADA revenue numbers match the school's tax return, then at least the TOTAL revenue should be accurate (or at least as accurate as any corporate tax return). Likewise the total expenses. But I must agree, there's no reason to believe that the breakdowns are reliable - maybe rule of thumb at best.

I have some difficulty believing spending figures for schools earning well north of $100 million per year. There is a practical limit to how much of that can be legitimate athletic expenditures on an ongoing basis. I mean, just how many people can have actual athletics related jobs at Texas to soak up all that money pouring in?