Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by IrishHockeyFan View Post
    Neither do I.

    A couple of reasons why:

    Revenue figures are fairly useless unless one knows what counts as revenue and what the source of the information is. The Notre Dame figure is accurate, but it is one metric (albeit the most meaningful one for ND), ticket revenue for the 18 games Notre Dame played at the Joyce Center in the 2009-10 season. It doesn't include memorabilia, concessions, or earmarked alumni donations, among other things. At some schools those items and others (TV/Radio revenue would be one) would likely rival the ticket revenue. So for Notre Dame the revenue number lacks the data necessary to be meaningful. I'm guessing for some (most) of the other schools the same thing is true.

    Expenses can be equally deceiving because for instance while the cost of one year's worth of education at Notre Dame now exceeds $50,000 for some individuals (and no it isn't really 2 or three times better than what a good public school provides), how do you really calculate how much it actually costs Notre Dame to provide it and more importantly, how is Notre Dame doing it? But included in expenses is possibly the market value of 18 scholarships at some of those schools. Notre Dame claims it spends around $23,000 in athletically related student aid per participant. Again, how do they arrive at those figures? These schools do exactly what Alton says and release self-serving numbers to whatever extent they can. If you don't think that's happening I have some prime swamp land in Florida I can make you a great deal on.

    At the end of the day these numbers likely don't give a true picture at all of the amounts of money the various schools spend or make on hockey. I don't think they can begin to be accurately analyzed. There is a reason the EIA website includes the cautionary note right on their front page: Please note that valid comparisons of athletics data are possible only with study and analysis of the conditions affecting each institution.
    I think it isn't perfect, but it's a lot closer to the true numbers than you want to make it sound.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

      Originally posted by JDUBBS1280 View Post
      I think it isn't perfect, but it's a lot closer to the true numbers than you want to make it sound.
      Actually neither you or I have the first clue as to how close these are to being "true numbers." Like I (and others) have noted repeatedly, without more information figures like these are nearly worthless. I don't doubt there is some connection to truth in some of the individual figures, like the ticket revenue I cited in the Notre Dame numbers. But it is like telling me the wind is blowing 15 miles per hour and expecting me to guess the weather based on that input and that input alone. It cannot be done. Do you really believe for a minute that Ferris State, while drawing fewer people per game, who are paying -- on average -- less per ticket, and having few or no discernable alternate sources of hockey specific revenue over and above Notre Dame still managed to generate nearly double the revenue over the course of an entire school year? Hell in the Notre Dame figure alone they failed to include the revenue from 3 off campus games where we the ticket revenue went into their pockets. What else is missing? I stand by my statement that these numbers hardly give a true or accurate picture of the actual dollars involved.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

        The important thing here is Minnesota was able to beat BC at something.
        Hollywood Hair Care Tip for Infinity (Directly from Hollywood himself)
        when its minus 20 and u have to go outside.. make sure u wear a winter hat as the mohawk does not enjoy the winter weathe(r)
        Hollywood Amazingness

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by IrishHockeyFan View Post
          Actually neither you or I have the first clue as to how close these are to being "true numbers." Like I (and others) have noted repeatedly, without more information figures like these are nearly worthless. I don't doubt there is some connection to truth in some of the individual figures, like the ticket revenue I cited in the Notre Dame numbers. But it is like telling me the wind is blowing 15 miles per hour and expecting me to guess the weather based on that input and that input alone. It cannot be done. Do you really believe for a minute that Ferris State, while drawing fewer people per game, who are paying -- on average -- less per ticket, and having few or no discernable alternate sources of hockey specific revenue over and above Notre Dame still managed to generate nearly double the revenue over the course of an entire school year? Hell in the Notre Dame figure alone they failed to include the revenue from 3 off campus games where we the ticket revenue went into their pockets. What else is missing? I stand by my statement that these numbers hardly give a true or accurate picture of the actual dollars involved.
          The schools are legally obligated to report the numbers accurately to the government for Title 9 purposes. Yeah, I'm sure there is some creative accounting involved, but I would be stunned if the government let the schools report numbers that are nowhere near representative of the actual revenues and expenses.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

            Originally posted by JDUBBS1280 View Post
            The schools are legally obligated to report the numbers accurately to the government for Title 9 purposes. Yeah, I'm sure there is some creative accounting involved, but I would be stunned if the government let the schools report numbers that are nowhere near representative of the actual revenues and expenses.
            What is needed to or leagally obligated to report does not make it true numbers. Anybody who runs a business will tell you that. I would bet a lot of money Schools count scholarship tution against their budget, but that is really double dipping or partial double dipping. Schools figure out tution cost by how much tution money they expect to collect. That means the students paying tution are actually paying a portion of the student who is not payings tution. Now obviously scholarship grants and state funding are figured in here, but the reality is a scholarship hockey player does not cost the school as much as they claim.
            I am Tommyboy, and I approve this message.

            In Bob we Trust!

            The Herb Brooks National Hockey Center..... I wonder who originally came up with that.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

              I have a hard time believing UAF is the second-highest revenue generator in the CCHA.
              “We offer no apology for our location at 64 51’21’’ north latitude. We are building for the future and we are confident that well directed effort and education are the forces which make progress possible”

              —UA President Charles E. Bunnell, 1925

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by scsutommyboy View Post
                What is needed to or leagally obligated to report does not make it true numbers. Anybody who runs a business will tell you that. I would bet a lot of money Schools count scholarship tution against their budget, but that is really double dipping or partial double dipping. Schools figure out tution cost by how much tution money they expect to collect. That means the students paying tution are actually paying a portion of the student who is not payings tution. Now obviously scholarship grants and state funding are figured in here, but the reality is a scholarship hockey player does not cost the school as much as they claim.
                Oh, I agree. There has to be some creative accounting going on. That said, i find it hard to believe the numbers reported are completely unrespresentative of the truth either. I think the numbers are much closer to being accurate than they are to being not. Otherwise, why even report them? It's supposed to give us an indication of just how much is being spent on men's and women's athletics, and how much they make. And to be completely honest, I'm not all that surprised by the numbers. Hockey is a tough sport to make money on.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

                  Perhaps administrations or student unions are providing regular monetary amounts towards the program, and they are including that in the revenue. With the 23 schools that come out dead even, perhaps there's a clause to say that the school will provide the amount needed to get back to even, or take the money to get to even. A school is a non-profit organization, after all.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

                    Its an interesting debate, but obviously the numbers on both sides of the spreadsheet can be massaged.

                    I once spoke to an NHL scout who asked me what DU spent on hockey. I told him, "A million or two" and he almost fell out of his chair laughing. He knew what major junior teams were spending, obviously DU had better facilities, traveled by plane and had schollies to name just a few perks.

                    How do you account for the coach's secretary, the director of hockey operations, possible rent on the arena, DU spends $500,000 converting Magness from hockey to basketball, the 18 scholarships are worth $900,000, $300,000 on travel, $500,000 on coaches salaries, zambonis, ice time and electrical.

                    On the revenue side, parking on game nights, advertising in the arena, merchandise sales. DU probably sells a million bucks worth of beer & liquor, most schools don't have that revenue stream.

                    That being said, $2.3 million is probably an accurate number for DU's ticket sales.
                    Last edited by dggoddard; 04-12-2012, 02:33 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

                      Originally posted by Alton View Post
                      I don't trust those numbers.

                      (1) The revenue numbers might be reasonably accurate (although I suspect that each school has a different way of calculating revenues), but the expenses are all over the place. I simply don't buy the idea that Wisconsin spends more than twice as much on its hockey program as Minnesota. Why? Where are those 2 million dollars being spent in Madison that aren't being spent in Minneapolis?

                      (2) If even one school had exactly the same revenue and expenses, it would be an amazing coincidence. However, if you look at the chart, 23 of the 56 schools list revenues and expenses the same down to the last dollar! How did BC know to spend exactly $3,702,040 on their hockey program? Amazing how they nailed that guess...too bad Denver went $1 over!

                      The numbers that schools report are going to be self-serving, and there is no way to ensure that they are calculated in the same way (or even a remotely similar way).
                      so these are dam lies?
                      or statistics? or worse yet?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

                        Originally posted by JDUBBS1280 View Post
                        Oh, I agree. There has to be some creative accounting going on. That said, i find it hard to believe the numbers reported are completely unrespresentative of the truth either. I think the numbers are much closer to being accurate than they are to being not. Otherwise, why even report them? It's supposed to give us an indication of just how much is being spent on men's and women's athletics, and how much they make. And to be completely honest, I'm not all that surprised by the numbers. Hockey is a tough sport to make money on.
                        Why do so many doctors prescribe antibiotics for respiratory infections that are viral in nature? Because doing so may make the patient feel like they are doing SOMEthing. So the government requires these numbers to be submitted so we all think that someone is minding the store and all of the various laws of the land (and each of them has at least someone interested in them) are being enforced. I'm sorry, but I think if you or anyone else believes these numbers have any basis in the reality of the money being spent on college athletics, you are naive.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

                          Originally posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
                          That money doesn't go to the schools, DuMass.
                          No T.V. money ever gets to any college hockey program through any channel? Prove it, or hush your mouth.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

                            Originally posted by Osorojo View Post
                            No T.V. money ever gets to any college hockey program through any channel? Prove it, or hush your mouth.
                            Nice trick to put the burden of proof on the one who claims something never happens.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by IrishHockeyFan View Post
                              Why do so many doctors prescribe antibiotics for respiratory infections that are viral in nature? Because doing so may make the patient feel like they are doing SOMEthing. So the government requires these numbers to be submitted so we all think that someone is minding the store and all of the various laws of the land (and each of them has at least someone interested in them) are being enforced. I'm sorry, but I think if you or anyone else believes these numbers have any basis in the reality of the money being spent on college athletics, you are naive.
                              You're certainly entitled to think it's just a facade, but I'm more inclined to think it's a best effort attempt to track this stuff. And I think the numbers are much closer to reality than you want to believe.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not

                                I can only speak from what I've seen from UAH, from the now-infamous athletics review last summer that was done to fit Dr. Portera's decision to cut hockey. The bulk of the "revenue" from the 2010-11 report for hockey was "direct institutional support" -- the money from the university to the hockey program to make up the difference between revenues and expenditures. I would at least consider that all the other schools that are showing as "even" are doing the same thing -- counting what the school is kicking as "revenue" to the hockey program.

                                Incidentally, one of the conditions for UAH to keep hockey (besides securing a conference spot) is that the university will supply $650,000 toward the program -- still a decent amount but less than what the school supplied in the past. Because this is a flat rate and no longer based on how much the hockey program spends, I would think UAH will no longer be shown as "break even."
                                Michael Napier - UAH '97
                                uahhockey.com

                                UAH Chargers Hockey
                                U.S. National Club Champions - 1982, 1983, 1984
                                NCAA Division II National Champions - 1996, 1998
                                CHA Regular Season Champions - 2001, 2003
                                CHA Tournament Champions - 2007, 2010

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X