Doesn't really seem to be stopping the deficits from growing. If the blue bloods are taking out loans and continuing to spend more and more then what's going to stop them? Obviously we need some legislation.
Athletic Dept deficits
- Thread starter acoustimac
- Start date
It's not the blue bloods hurting its schools that do not have the resources to continue the game the way its played. The Ohio States, Michigans, Texas and others of the world have plenty of money coming in. The same cannot be said for almost every school in the B12 and the ACC. Schools in the B10 are starting to feel the pinch, when that happening with their media contract its a warning sign for everyone. Iowa is make a lot of money and it spending it as fast as it comes in, they have little in resource, which we saw during Covid. If things continue without their media income increases they could very well be in trouble in the next five years.
Except the state of Iowa can’t afford it. There’s nothing that says you can’t tax legalized gambling then say, pay for schools or other things. It’s not like there’s some “department of sports” in which all revenues and expenses have to remain.
In the end Iowa as a state is on a terrible fiscal trajectory. That’s undeniable. Finding a revenue source like gambling taxes should be pursued. Offsetting that with a new expense of closing NIL revenue sharing while continuing down the current fiscal trajectory seems like a bad idea.
I have to disagree with that. I do not have an independent study or white paper on this topic, but the impact of athletics for UNI, iowa, and Iowa State is much better than the support that they (government) give which I think is zero. I do believe it is time for the state to kick in via a sin tax, gambling tax, etc. to support these aspects of the day-to-day life of Iowans. The easy way is to say you philosophically don't agree with it. I get that. However, it's a losing proposition because the majority of states are going to support actions in this arena to survive and thrive in the future.
Are we going to support these cultural activities that drive significant tax and hospitality revenue or fold up or tent because "it's not right for a state to support college athletics."
Each school has their own responsibility to get their budget in check. No one is forcing them to pay coaches insane salaries or build new facilities with debt constantly.
For schools without the large donor bases this is a problem of their own making. If no one tells the AD to reign things in then they will keep spending. Just like any budget though it’s on the individual university to do what’s right for them.
The 20mil that is paid out to NIL is covered by every P4 teams media deal.
Hey, I’m all for a gambling tax. And if someone wants to actually put forth a budget that doesn’t exceed receipts by $1.2B this year that includes funding NIL, I’m all ears. And if someone wants to also provide any reasonable plan to get our state’s year over GDP growth out of the basement I would be all ears too.
I would like the state of Iowa to be in a position to fund this. But it seems irresponsible to do given Iowa’s bleeding of the surplus, anemic growth, and Argentina and Brazil poised to take market share from Iowa ag markets that are critical to the state.
Just seems like a nice to have when we aren’t in a strong financial position right now.
How about a gambling tax to help close the budget gap first, then we can see about funding NIL.
So teams outside the P2 should pay the players just shy of 70% of their media money? Seems a little steep.
I just laugh when I hear W&B talk about this on the pod, seemingly unaware of what the state has done to itself fiscally. We're a year or two away from having problems that make (arguably) underfunded college athletic departments look like a hangnail on a patient whose body is riddled with tumors.
Don’t have to pay the full amount or even better pick a sport to be competitive in. There is a reason so few programs have championships in football and basketball or even just a final four/playoff appearance. Most schools unless you have a ton of donor money aren’t going to be good at both. Duke doesn’t care about being good at football they put their funds into basketball. LSU doesn’t care about being good at men’s basketball, so they pay 3 football coaches. Same for notre dame.
Every school has choices and no one is forcing them to spend money because as long as the AD doesn’t get pushback they will continue to spend
Even if it is it doesn’t stop a Rutgers or Maryland from overspending or Arizona misplacing 300 million building a new stadium they don’t need
How about the lottery? It probably can't cover everything, but if the Iowa Lottery gives away $300,000,000 in prizes plus $100,000,000 for funding state initiatives, (both approximate numbers), could $30,000,000 of that go to the Iowa State, UNI, and Iowa? $10,000,000 each for athletic department budgets.
Does the lottery sell less tickets if they give away $270,000,000 in prizes instead of $300,000,000?
Then add taxes to sports gambling, and have some additional.
If you leave it to the individual schools, nothing will change until it is too late. It will be a slow death by a thousand cuts. I see it as similar to the case of public funds for stadiums. We can all sit around and agree that the return on investment just isn't there, or that the tax burden falls on those least able to pay, but the problem is as long as there is one single city out there willing to ignore that and cut the check, your city ponies up to keep the team. You are forced into that choice.
Same for these athletic budgets. If there are 10 or 15 schools rolling in the cash and ready to spend with no limits, the 50-60 that don't have that and would prefer to reign it in can only make that individual choice by simultaneously admitting that they really won't make an effort to compete on the field at the top level. And nobody is willing to do that. It is hard to sell tickets and seek donations if you can't sell a vision of hope. The whole thing collapses.
Totally agree and exactly my point. The problem is those schools were most likely never really competing in the first place, they just like to pretend they were. Indiana’s recent success in football doesn’t help this but also they basically shifted basketball donors over to football with the switch in success.
As you said, as long as those programs keep lying to themselves they will keep spending money they don’t have pursing success that they never really achieved
There is already a lot of states that have passed legislation to help with schools. Sadly the state of Iowa is very slow to respond. Like it or not, states are going to have to assist... unless congress steps in and institutes some kind of a spending limit/cap. The current state of college athletics is not sustainable, Yes, even the Hoks will run dry... albeit slower than ISU and UNI, but they will start feeling it soon enough.
So glad we're using our tax dollars to fund private education!!
My kids have 1 more year at ISU, after that, I would guess my desire to care about college sports will go way down. It's a constant arms race, that 90% of the schools have no shot at winning.
Let's say the State of Iowa figures out how to give ISU another $5mil, do you think the big donors around the country are going to be like "that's nice, it's good to have some more competition with our school." No, it will be Cody Campbell, or Mark Cuban, etc. etc. etc. giving their schools another $10.
Let's say the State of Iowa figures out how to give ISU another $5mil, do you think the big donors around the country are going to be like "that's nice, it's good to have some more competition with our school." No, it will be Cody Campbell, or Mark Cuban, etc. etc. etc. giving their schools another $10.
Sure, but u bring up different, but related topics then I did.
There is a simple way to fund the NIL for uni, iowa, and iowa state.
It is a stand alone decision. You are muddling it up with other topics, imo. If you stay on that path, then nothing will get done.
Let's fund it with a sin tax and be done with it.
The schools all have a cap already, how you convince any court to allow independent caps on outside spend is going to be very hard if not impossible
It’s all the state budget. You’re raising a source of revenue that’s available, which I agree should be done. If there’s proof that investing state money in filling the revenue sharing for college athletes makes some multiplier in economic growth then go for it.
I’m not conflating two topics. The state is bleeding money. You want the state to add a new expense. You have a source of new revenue to do that.
Our state is in a terrible financial state. We don’t have the luxury to turn down reasonable sources of revenue as long as it doesn’t damage growth, so we are on the same page on the gambling tax.
I’m just not convinced that adding a new expense without having some data that suggests that investment is going to deliver additional future revenue.
