Most people get fired for numbers like these...
- Thread starter cocean
- Start date
Title IX is gonna make it tough to cut just one thing. It's also possible that one or more sports that aren't really making money are also not the big expenses.
Last edited:
Yeah, hands are tied. If this was run like a business, we'd have football and men's basketball.
It's gonna circle back around and we will suck again. Also merit based on what people actually watch.
The AD also gave $5M back to the university. That's included in those numbers. It's not a business. There are no shareholders holding RT responsible for a 15% return on their investment. There are no distributions getting paid to owners. His job, quite honestly, is to spend every dollar he gets in as efficiently as possible...or give it to the university.
Now, you could make a case that he's not bringing enough in...that's a part of his job that he appears to be falling down on. This is for the FY 21-22. It's hard to convince people to give money to an AD where the bball team sucks, the baseball team has sucked, and the football team has sucked (but a little positivity going). He also has something to do with that as well, so it call comes back to him.
Now, you could make a case that he's not bringing enough in...that's a part of his job that he appears to be falling down on. This is for the FY 21-22. It's hard to convince people to give money to an AD where the bball team sucks, the baseball team has sucked, and the football team has sucked (but a little positivity going). He also has something to do with that as well, so it call comes back to him.
Here is the link to the ranking.
Athletic Dept Finance Rankings
Here is a link to the breakdown of USC revenue. To me the revenue figure is the only thing that's relevant. The AD exists to raise more money so they can spend more money. If the AD is turning a profit then they're not allocating their income properly in my opinion. It's like the government. As an FYI, Clem is killing us in contributions. Not surprising as they have a national championship caliber football program and we don't. The reported 2022 ticket sales for USC seems odd. We sold out every home game, so that one looks off. I don't see how we dropped off $6M from 2020. Wonder if it had something to do with the "upgrades" that took seats out and maybe they didn't sell out the luxury seating options as they had planned??
USC Revenue
Athletic Dept Finance Rankings
Here is a link to the breakdown of USC revenue. To me the revenue figure is the only thing that's relevant. The AD exists to raise more money so they can spend more money. If the AD is turning a profit then they're not allocating their income properly in my opinion. It's like the government. As an FYI, Clem is killing us in contributions. Not surprising as they have a national championship caliber football program and we don't. The reported 2022 ticket sales for USC seems odd. We sold out every home game, so that one looks off. I don't see how we dropped off $6M from 2020. Wonder if it had something to do with the "upgrades" that took seats out and maybe they didn't sell out the luxury seating options as they had planned??
USC Revenue
I think this was for the fiscal year ending 6/30/2022 (which would have included the 2021 football season numbers) - the real head turner will be when next years numbers are released (which will include the 2022 football season)
But it's not. A business exists to maximize shareholder profitability. Neither our AD, nor any other in the country, exists for that reason.
That's true. But I still can't imagine it dropping off that dramatically. Other than last year our ticket sales were comparable to clemsux.
I think cutting the dead weight (Martin and Muschamp) could be a contributing factor - even if paid for by outside sources, that means those sources weren’t giving that money to the athletic department to count toward revenues.
That should still count towards revenue as a contribution.
Since most people want to go straight to a comp with Clemsux, the only real difference is in the contributions category. Other than last year, the ticket sales are even with Clem. But in 2016 their contributions skyrocketed. Coincidentally, that's right after their 1st NC. I've said this for a while...we got some big time boosters that would love throw money at a winner, just like Clem did. They just need a reason.
Other than that, I'm sure our basketball ticket revenue is killing us. That's a lot of home games where we should have 3-4K more tickets sold.
Isn’t the purpose of college athletics to meet the needs of students? Don’t their needs factor in here somewhere?
Major college athletics are just the marketing arms of the universities. They don't need to turn a profit. On-field and on-court success brings increased notoriety which brings increased applications (quicker and more dramatically than any other form of marketing they can employ). They aren't worried about losing a couple million dollars in the athletic department.
everything is for profit...your church is for profit, your hospital is for profit, your doctor is for profit....and colleges are for profit
Nope. This is just wrong. Making money and being for profit are two separate things. The AD could break records and profit $20M next year. Guess what's going to happen? There will be an announcement of a $20M renovation project shortly thereafter. The AD raises money for one reason...to spend it. Same for churches (hopefully). There are no individuals that are taking those profits. They're either spent, or distributed back to the university.
Also, don't get too tied up in what those profit numbers are. The only thing that matters is cash flow, which isn't reported. There are major expenditures going out that aren't classified as "expenses". They're capex. Or you're paying off debt you took to make major upgrades. Those payments are not expenses either. So that's irrelevant. The only thing we should be focusing on is how much money we're bringing in. Because one way or another, it's all getting spent anyway.
Isn't that the same as "break even" ? You spend what you bring in, but don't lose money by spending more than you bring in!