Athletic Dept deficits

[1SEIACLONE]

The problem is NIL and this new era of college athletics and the inequity in the money involved. Your statement may be technicallly correct but if ISU were to eliminate the 'deadweight' sports, they would no longer be able to compete in the B12 conference as a full member.

We first created a problem with the ever increasing media contracts that broke up conferences, as schools started to move to new leagues for the benefit of the extra money that doing so brought in. Then we had universities using their new found wealth start an arms race on buildings new stadiums or improving existing ones. Locker rooms had to be over the top, much like a 5 star hotel in Vegas. Now we have NIL, which was sold as a player getting a cut of this jersey sales or some extra spending money so they could go out on the weekend. It has now morphed into pay for play, with unlimited transfers. So now every player is a free agent at the end of the year, schools are looking at players on other teams and contacting them under the table to see if they would be interested in leaving their current school to go play for them, and make even more money. We have kids entering the portal with "do not contact" basically saying that they already have a deal in place before they even allowed to look at a new school,
We have kids now playing five, six, now seven seasons, when before it was five to play four.

We have created a system that no one can survive and prosper, even the wealthiest schools can only do so much, its not sustainable and is being propped up by universities pouring 10s of millions into athletic programs with no end in sight. It's a broken system, and the only way to fix it, is to scrape the entire system and reboot everything. The question is will the few haves be willing to give up what they currently are getting for the betterment of everyone, or is the entire ship going to sink because of greed and only worrying about themselves?

 

[TD Hardeman!]

The problem is NIL and this new era of college athletics and the inequity in the money involved. Your statement may be technicallly correct but if ISU were to eliminate the 'deadweight' sports, they would no longer be able to compete in the B12 conference as a full member.

90% of Big 12 is in same boat and most of DI is in the same boat. I predict most of DI will downshift or eliminate deadweight sports or move many to club status like Rugby. These changes will be happening faster than people realize. More specifically, Womens Hockey, WBB, and Mens Hockey are the three biggest financial drains in college sports on DI college budgets. Hockey programs can lose $5 million plus a year in the blink of an eye. North Dakota won the women's NCAA D1 Hockey title 5 years ago, and eliminated the sport the following year. The program was losing $5 million plus per year. Minnesota's women's hockey program is extremely successful on the ice, but is hemmorraging cash by the millions. Men's hockey is not much better. Hockey has the highest fixed costs, very high travel costs, 25 to 30 scholarships, and the longest season and most brutal travel logistics in all of college athletics.

These are interesting times.

 

[dirtfarmer]

The problem is NIL and this new era of college athletics and the inequity in the money involved. Your statement may be technicallly correct but if ISU were to eliminate the 'deadweight' sports, they would no longer be able to compete in the B12 conference as a full member.

Yes that’s correct we have to have them. I never said to get rid of them. What I was getting at is the university needs to pay for them. Football and Men’s basketball should not be expected to pay the way of Olympic sports. In the modern era those need to be covered by the general operating budget

 

[t-noah]

We first created a problem with the ever increasing media contracts that broke up conferences, as schools started to move to new leagues for the benefit of the extra money that doing so brought in. Then we had universities using their new found wealth start an arms race on buildings new stadiums or improving existing ones. Locker rooms had to be over the top, much like a 5 star hotel in Vegas. Now we have NIL, which was sold as a player getting a cut of this jersey sales or some extra spending money so they could go out on the weekend. It has now morphed into pay for play, with unlimited transfers. So now every player is a free agent at the end of the year, schools are looking at players on other teams and contacting them under the table to see if they would be interested in leaving their current school to go play for them, and make even more money. We have kids entering the portal with "do not contact" basically saying that they already have a deal in place before they even allowed to look at a new school,
We have kids now playing five, six, now seven seasons, when before it was five to play four.

We have created a system that no one can survive and prosper, even the wealthiest schools can only do so much, its not sustainable and is being propped up by universities pouring 10s of millions into athletic programs with no end in sight. It's a broken system, and the only way to fix it, is to scrape the entire system and reboot everything. The question is will the few haves be willing to give up what they currently are getting for the betterment of everyone, or is the entire ship going to sink because of greed and only worrying about themselves?

Good analysis. Re-booting the entire system would be the way to go. We think we might get some relief that way, some fairness, some equity. The problem, if the 'haves' were to allow that, is re-boot to what? There is no central control anymore. The NCAA is toothless. Who will decide the future direction?

It's like asking Congress to eliminate Lobbyists, for example. What incentive do they have to do so? Somebody else needs to make that call, but who? The 'haves' in college athletics will likely look the other way and vote, if there is a vote, for the status quo.

 

[t-noah]

90% of Big 12 is in same boat and most of DI is in the same boat. I predict most of DI will downshift or eliminate deadweight sports or move many to club status like Rugby. These changes will be happening faster than people realize. More specifically, Womens Hockey, WBB, and Mens Hockey are the three biggest financial drains in college sports on DI college budgets. Hockey programs can lose $5 million plus a year in the blink of an eye. North Dakota won the women's NCAA D1 Hockey title 5 years ago, and eliminated the sport the following year. The program was losing $5 million plus per year. Minnesota's women's hockey program is extremely successful on the ice, but is hemmorraging cash by the millions. Men's hockey is not much better. Hockey has the highest fixed costs, very high travel costs, 25 to 30 scholarships, and the longest season and most brutal travel logistics in all of college athletics.

These are interesting times.

So, deadweight sports are removed somehow, and that is allowed by the conferences, because, well they'll all make more money if it is allowed, or at least they will be able to survive.

But that only means that the richer teams and conferenes will still have the monetary competitive edge, like before. It does nothing to balance the ledger or create equity.

 

[xr4ticlone]

This might be one of the most complacent times in history regarding debt.

Well, we’re $38+ trillion in debt. Worse, we’re by no means alone.

Despite what Harvard Economics Professor & Noble Prize winner Paul Klugman wants you to believe…it matters.

So just like the almost all the world’s countries…what college AD’s, and apparently a large majority of our citizens are doing financially is unsustainable.

 

[1SEIACLONE]

Good analysis. Re-booting the entire system would be the way to go. We think we might get some relief that way, some fairness, some equity. The problem, if the 'haves' were to allow that, is re-boot to what? There is no central control anymore. The NCAA is toothless. Who will decide the future direction?

It's like asking Congress to eliminate Lobbyists, for example. What incentive do they have to do so? Somebody else needs to make that call, but who? The 'haves' in college athletics will likely look the other way and vote, if there is a vote, for the status quo.

Truly the only way to make it through this is an NFL model, with everyone in the largest group sharing all media revenue equally, and then caps are put into place for NIL spending along with harsh penalties for disobeying the rules. Reorganize the conferences back to more regional areas, with 10 schools in each conference and have everyone playing each school in the conference every year and then 3 games with a sister conference. So if ISU and the Squawks want to continue playing that is fine, but then each school plays 2 other P4 schools in its other games. Each school will have 6 home and 6 on the road.
There are quite a few models out there to do this, this biggest hangup is going to be the B10 and SEC, getting them both on board. Go back to the old Big Eight conference schools then add maybe Utah and Boise to get to 10. Regional play would solve at least some of the money problems because schools will not be traveling as far for games.
Last you are going to have hire an overall commissioner that has the final say in all matters related to sports, maybe have one for football, then another person for mens and women's basketball ect. Doing so cuts back on the power of the conference commissioner, which they are not going to like. But how much longer can schools like Maryland, Rutgers and most of the B12 and ACC continue to lose money fielding teams?

 

[t-noah]

Truly the only way to make it through this is an NFL model, with everyone in the largest group sharing all media revenue equally, and then caps are put into place for NIL spending along with harsh penalties for disobeying the rules. Reorganize the conferences back to more regional areas, with 10 schools in each conference and have everyone playing each school in the conference every year and then 3 games with a sister conference. So if ISU and the Squawks want to continue playing that is fine, but then each school plays 2 other P4 schools in its other games. Each school will have 6 home and 6 on the road.
There are quite a few models out there to do this, this biggest hangup is going to be the B10 and SEC, getting them both on board. Go back to the old Big Eight conference schools then add maybe Utah and Boise to get to 10. Regional play would solve at least some of the money problems because schools will not be traveling as far for games.
Last you are going to have hire an overall commissioner that has the final say in all matters related to sports, maybe have one for football, then another person for mens and women's basketball ect. Doing so cuts back on the power of the conference commissioner, which they are not going to like. But how much longer can schools like Maryland, Rutgers and most of the B12 and ACC continue to lose money fielding teams?

Sounds good. I'd vote for that. Will my vote and yours count?

 

[1SEIACLONE]

Sounds good. I'd vote for that. Will my vote and yours count?

Not one bit. Until enough of the have schools have hit bottom yet, but many are getting close. We know that Maryland, UCLA and Rutgers are struggling to come up with money without school resources. Once the Wisconsin's, Illinois and Iowa struggle some more, than it might happen.
We also have no clue what happens when the next round of media contracts take place, if the money increases or stay put. I get the feeling most schools are not happy with the expansions that have occurred, but we have a few years to find out.

 

[t-noah]

Not one bit. Until enough of the have schools have hit bottom yet, but many are getting close. We know that Maryland, UCLA and Rutgers are struggling to come up with money without school resources. Once the Wisconsin's, Illinois and Iowa struggle some more, than it might happen.
We also have no clue what happens when the next round of media contracts take place, if the money increases or stay put. I get the feeling most schools are not happy with the expansions that have occurred, but we have a few years to find out.

I will vote anyway, and then feel better.

 

[flycy]

We first created a problem with the ever increasing media contracts that broke up conferences, as schools started to move to new leagues for the benefit of the extra money that doing so brought in. Then we had universities using their new found wealth start an arms race on buildings new stadiums or improving existing ones. Locker rooms had to be over the top, much like a 5 star hotel in Vegas. Now we have NIL, which was sold as a player getting a cut of this jersey sales or some extra spending money so they could go out on the weekend. It has now morphed into pay for play, with unlimited transfers. So now every player is a free agent at the end of the year, schools are looking at players on other teams and contacting them under the table to see if they would be interested in leaving their current school to go play for them, and make even more money. We have kids entering the portal with "do not contact" basically saying that they already have a deal in place before they even allowed to look at a new school,
We have kids now playing five, six, now seven seasons, when before it was five to play four.

We have created a system that no one can survive and prosper, even the wealthiest schools can only do so much, its not sustainable and is being propped up by universities pouring 10s of millions into athletic programs with no end in sight. It's a broken system, and the only way to fix it, is to scrape the entire system and reboot everything. The question is will the few haves be willing to give up what they currently are getting for the betterment of everyone, or is the entire ship going to sink because of greed and only worrying about themselves?

You forgot state governments are being black mailed into financing the paying of players.

 

[flycy]

So, deadweight sports are removed somehow, and that is allowed by the conferences, because, well they'll all make more money if it is allowed, or at least they will be able to survive.

But that only means that the richer teams and conferenes will still have the monetary competitive edge, like before. It does nothing to balance the ledger or create equity.

Quit with that word, you mean equality.

 

[1SEIACLONE]

You forgot state governments are being black mailed into financing the paying of players.

Really I would rather have the state helping pay the players than it going to tax breaks to corporations that give little or nothing back in return.

 

[t-noah]

Quit with that word, you mean equality.

I meant equity, fairness, lack of disparity. Equality might be even better though. I would settle for equity or equality, both fairly equal or equatible. Are we equal or equitable? It's getting late.

 

[CyDude16]

Really I would rather have the state helping pay the players than it going to tax breaks to corporations that give little or nothing back in return.

I’d rather they do neither.

 

[Nor'MidWester]

College athletics are so unique because no one "owns" the teams unlike every other sport so there is no incentive in reign in spending and make a profit. Not sure how you fix that.

There has to be way to control the NIL spending, obviously schools are blowing past their salary cap by telling their donors to pay players via their companies. That's not NIL and it makes the sport uncompetitive when the outside sponsorship deals are larger than the salary cap.

 

[ZorkClone]

College athletics are so unique because no one "owns" the teams unlike every other sport so there is no incentive in reign in spending and make a profit. Not sure how you fix that.

There has to be way to control the NIL spending, obviously schools are blowing past their salary cap by telling their donors to pay players via their companies. That's not NIL and it makes the sport uncompetitive when the outside sponsorship deals are larger than the salary cap.

IMO this cannot be stopped unless Congress steps in to basically attempts to put pandora back in the box by giving the NCAA carte blanche over college athletics.

College athletics is like European football without the structure that makes it successful. What we have now is like if Premiere league, Champions league, and League one were all one division and had the worst post-season structure in all of sports.

 

[1SEIACLONE]

College athletics are so unique because no one "owns" the teams unlike every other sport so there is no incentive in reign in spending and make a profit. Not sure how you fix that.

There has to be way to control the NIL spending, obviously schools are blowing past their salary cap by telling their donors to pay players via their companies. That's not NIL and it makes the sport uncompetitive when the outside sponsorship deals are larger than the salary cap.

The incentive to reign in spending is simple, when the amount you spend is millions more than what you have brought in then the system is not sustainable. We have schools taking 10s of millions a year to keep funding athletic programs from the university, money that could be used for other things.
Some thought NIL was reign in spending, which never occurred, that $20 million is going to be spread so thin to keep everyone happy that those in the major sports that produced money are not going to agree to it.

Maybe congress will step in and help, but we need to get these players under a contract, cut down the transfers and pull back spending.

 

[AuH2O]

You forgot state governments are being black mailed into financing the paying of players.

Maybe some states can afford it, and/or their people are dumb enough that they want good college sports teams over services for their state.

But Iowa's state GDP has been dog **** and is going to be a disaster yet again this year. We've been screaming through the old surplus, and there's not really a logical reason to believe any of that is changing anytime soon.

As much as I love ISU athletics, it's not responsible for probably most states, sure as hell not the state of Iowa, to be spending a bunch of public dollars to cover athletic department shortfalls.

 

[1SEIACLONE]

Maybe some states can afford it, and/or their people are dumb enough that they want good college sports teams over services for their state.

But Iowa's state GDP has been dog **** and is going to be a disaster yet again this year. We've been screaming through the old surplus, and there's not really a logical reason to believe any of that is changing anytime soon.

As much as I love ISU athletics, it's not responsible for probably most states, sure as hell not the state of Iowa, to be spending a bunch of public dollars to cover athletic department shortfalls.

The State of Iowa could afford it, just raise the tax on legalized gambling to bring in the revenue. It's not money that stop it. Its the fact that all three schools would be getting it, if all the money went to Iowa, it would pass in a few days, but sharing state money with ISU and UNI is not part of the plan. There is a very pro Iowa bias in the state house, and anyone that does not see that has their head in the sand. There are many at the state house that would be fine to see both ISU and UNI moved down in athletics leaving only the squawks as the main program in the state, much like they have in Wisconsin and Minnesota. One major program, getting almost all the resources and donations of the state.