Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

[Jimjamesak]

I was referencing spending, not earning

They are still a D-1 baseball team, so there is a ton of spending happening. They will do their two weeks in Florida to start the year then head down to Texas, Cali, or Arizona for a week before starting their home slate the 1st week of March (flip FL and the West Coast if needed). Their conference slate is still traveling in nice motor coaches and staying at hotels better than a Super-8. The budget dwarfs anything you would find in the GLIAC or similar I'm sure. Hell, the MAC uses 3-man umpire crews at $1400/man + 4 nights hotel for each 3-game conference series. The Officials budget alone is north of $25,000.

College officiating budgets are pretty insane at the D-1 level no matter the sport. Doubly so at Power 5 conferences.

 

[LordofBrewtown]

Re: Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

Dropping sports is certainly one avenue to save $$$. However, I'm also curious if this starts to get athletic directors and presidents to re-evaluate their conferences in some situations. The move to larger conferences (12 or more teams) spurred largely by football really doesn't make sense for the other sports, and I always thought there might come a time when the wheel would come full circle, and conferences would start to pare back down/split into smaller conferences (like when the Mountain West originally split off from the WAC, which had grown from 8 to 16 teams). There should be considerable opportunity for travel savings in the 'Olympic' sports if they were in conferences spanning smaller geographic regions and only 8 teams. Example: does the American conference really make sense (spread from Texas, to Florida to the Northeast)? Maybe for football, certainly not for track or women's soccer. How much does West Virginia spend on travel in the Big 12 for all their sports? How much could Syracuse and BC save if they were back in the Big East vs ACC (if they could just be affiliate members of the ACC for football)?

Except for maybe at the huge state flagship schools, I'm not sure the 'mega' conference format is sustainable in the long run. The majority of universities should be zigging where the the 'power 5' are zagging (and I'm not sure how well 14 teams really works for the ACC or the current 10 for the Big 12).

Obviously buyouts present an issue, and it's easier to split if you have 16 teams vs 12 (though you could still split into 2 conferences).

 

[kingdobbs]

Dropping sports is certainly one avenue to save $$$. However, I'm also curious if this starts to get athletic directors and presidents to re-evaluate their conferences in some situations. The move to larger conferences (12 or more teams) spurred largely by football really doesn't make sense for the other sports, and I always thought there might come a time when the wheel would come full circle, and conferences would start to pare back down/split into smaller conferences (like when the Mountain West originally split off from the WAC, which had grown from 8 to 16 teams). There should be considerable opportunity for travel savings in the 'Olympic' sports if they were in conferences spanning smaller geographic regions and only 8 teams. Example: does the American conference really make sense (spread from Texas, to Florida to the Northeast)? Maybe for football, certainly not for track or women's soccer. How much does West Virginia spend on travel in the Big 12 for all their sports? How much could Syracuse and BC save if they were back in the Big East vs ACC (if they could just be affiliate members of the ACC for football)?

Except for maybe at the huge state flagship schools, I'm not sure the 'mega' conference format is sustainable in the long run. The majority of universities should be zigging where the the 'power 5' are zagging (and I'm not sure how well 14 teams really works for the ACC or the current 10 for the Big 12).

Obviously buyouts present an issue, and it's easier to split if you have 16 teams vs 12 (though you could still split into 2 conferences).

A less known thing around the sports world in general is that for your Olympic sports, teams already do this. For most schools, you only have conference competition once a season at conference championships. Otherwise you compete primarily in local or regional events, and those competitions are usually more than two schools competing.

It’s when you get into the “team sports” category where round robin or semi round robin competition occurs, and you see the effects of more far flung travel in regular competition. And where you might see more expansive conferences banding together for smaller priority sports; one such that’s seen some public commentary is the Big East, Atlantic 10 and Colonial looking to regionalize competition for the upcoming academic year in “secondary sports” (presumably, everything that isn’t football or basketball), so that their collective schedules for sports like soccer and baseball look more like their track or swimming: mostly regionalized competition and the only true conference competition is in a league tournament.

 

[Split-N]

Re: Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

...one such that’s seen some public commentary is the Big East, Atlantic 10 and Colonial looking to regionalize competition for the upcoming academic year in “secondary sports” (presumably, everything that isn’t football or basketball), so that their collective schedules for sports like soccer and baseball look more like their track or swimming: mostly regionalized competition and the only true conference competition is in a league tournament.

I've heard the same thing. Specifically, a 56-game regular season schedule involving Northeastern, UConn, Rhode Island, UMass, Hofstra, St. John’s, Seton Hall, and Fordham, making it a bus league at least for one year. All three conferences would still hold league tournaments based on RPI. Conspicuously missing from the list is Boston College, the only P5 school in the area, which presumably remains bound to the ACC schedule.

Makes sense to me, especially if it means saving baseball and maybe other sports.

 

[capswon]

I was referencing spending, not earning

They are still a D-1 baseball team, so there is a ton of spending happening. They will do their two weeks in Florida to start the year then head down to Texas, Cali, or Arizona for a week before starting their home slate the 1st week of March (flip FL and the West Coast if needed). Their conference slate is still traveling in nice motor coaches and staying at hotels better than a Super-8. The budget dwarfs anything you would find in the GLIAC or similar I'm sure. Hell, the MAC uses 3-man umpire crews at $1400/man + 4 nights hotel for each 3-game conference series. The Officials budget alone is north of $25,000.

Dont forget our per-diem.

 

[LordofBrewtown]

Re: Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

A less known thing around the sports world in general is that for your Olympic sports, teams already do this. For most schools, you only have conference competition once a season at conference championships. Otherwise you compete primarily in local or regional events, and those competitions are usually more than two schools competing.

It’s when you get into the “team sports” category where round robin or semi round robin competition occurs, and you see the effects of more far flung travel in regular competition. And where you might see more expansive conferences banding together for smaller priority sports; one such that’s seen some public commentary is the Big East, Atlantic 10 and Colonial looking to regionalize competition for the upcoming academic year in “secondary sports” (presumably, everything that isn’t football or basketball), so that their collective schedules for sports like soccer and baseball look more like their track or swimming: mostly regionalized competition and the only true conference competition is in a league tournament.

Good point/clarification. I was aware that was the case for things like track/swimming and a little less so for golf/wrestling (some multi-team meets and some H2H). I had not heard about the Big East, Atlantic 10 and Colonial taking those steps. The Big East is interesting, as half the conference is in the midwest (Xavier, Marquette, Butler...). They could possibly attempt something similar with the Horizon and/or MAC; but, it's not quite as easy to fill those schedule gaps simply via bus trips.

 

[Split-N]

Re: Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

Good point/clarification. I was aware that was the case for things like track/swimming and a little less so for golf/wrestling (some multi-team meets and some H2H). I had not heard about the Big East, Atlantic 10 and Colonial taking those steps. The Big East is interesting, as half the conference is in the midwest (Xavier, Marquette, Butler...). They could possibly attempt something similar with the Horizon and/or MAC; but, it's not quite as easy to fill those schedule gaps simply via bus trips.

My understanding is that the proposal being floated involves only baseball and that long-distance travel would not be an issue unless and until league playoffs (based on RPI) are actually held (see Post #44). Ergo, UConn would not be traveling to the midwest; Northeastern would not be traveling south of metro NY; and the A-10 teams would not travel outside of southern New England, NYC, Long Island, and northern NJ. Seems to make sense.

 

[kingdobbs]

My understanding is that the proposal being floated involves only baseball and that long-distance travel would not be an issue unless and until league playoffs (based on RPI) are actually held (see Post #44). Ergo, UConn would not be traveling to the midwest; Northeastern would not be traveling south of metro NY; and the A-10 teams would not travel outside of southern New England, NYC, Long Island, and northern NJ. Seems to make sense.

It may also be something we see in soccer, volleyball and some other team sports as well, according to what I saw (a baseball site broke the rumor, but it also mentioned “secondary sports” as well).

 

[Sol Diablo]

It appears Holy Cross is in financial trouble, cancelling travel plans. I wonder if they can't afford D1 if they will drop down in divisions.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

If you were expecting BG to drop hockey you would not be well informed.

Naw, just have a memory from eleven years ago.

https://www.uscho.com/2009/03/11/bowling-green-program-could-be-in-jeopardy-according-to-trustee/

 

[Split-N]

Re: Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

It appears Holy Cross is in financial trouble, cancelling travel plans. I wonder if they can't afford D1 if they will drop down in divisions.

No idea what might be under closed-door discussion at top levels but HC's endowment is almost $800M, so it should be able to withstand the financial hit better than many others. Also, HC is within an easy bus ride of more than enough D1 schools from which it could build competitive schedules in hockey and everything else without incurring outrageous travel costs. So I'd see HC joining a temporary regional scheduling alliance before I could see it pulling the plug on D1.

 

[pdt1081]

Naw, just have a memory from eleven years ago.

https://www.uscho.com/2009/03/11/bowling-green-program-could-be-in-jeopardy-according-to-trustee/

Completely different situation. BGSU Hockey isn't going anywhere unless the entire Athletic Department disappears.

 

[Sean Pickett]

Re: Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

Completely different situation. BGSU Hockey isn't going anywhere unless the entire Athletic Department disappears.

If BGSU doesn't have all the students on campus that just might happen. From 2010-19 student fees accounted for 55.6% of total expenses, although for 2018-19 it was slightly less at 50.2%. Cutting baseball, expenses which averaged just 3% of the overall expenses and 3% for 2018-19, falls far short of closing the gap (and that's not taking into account paying severance to the coaches and honoring the athletic aid - if they do - awarded to the student-athletes). You can view BGSU's NCAA financials for 2010 through 2019 if you are interested.

Sean

 

[pdt1081]

If BGSU doesn't have all the students on campus that just might happen. From 2010-19 student fees accounted for 55.6% of total expenses, although for 2018-19 it was slightly less at 50.2%. Cutting baseball, expenses which averaged just 3% of the overall expenses and 3% for 2018-19, falls far short of closing the gap (and that's not taking into account paying severance to the coaches and honoring the athletic aid - if they do - awarded to the student-athletes). You can view BGSU's NCAA financials for 2010 through 2019 if you are interested.

Sean

I'm well aware of what is going on at BGSU. If BGSU doesn't have students on campus this fall, they won't be the only ones in that situation. I'd wager most schools outside the upper P5s will suffer from massive cuts, if their athletic departments survive at all. BGSU's situation is not unique to them. And the BGSU Hockey team will be the last one cut.

 

[TalonsUpPuckDown]

Re: Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

If BGSU doesn't have all the students on campus that just might happen. From 2010-19 student fees accounted for 55.6% of total expenses, although for 2018-19 it was slightly less at 50.2%. Cutting baseball, expenses which averaged just 3% of the overall expenses and 3% for 2018-19, falls far short of closing the gap (and that's not taking into account paying severance to the coaches and honoring the athletic aid - if they do - awarded to the student-athletes). You can view BGSU's NCAA financials for 2010 through 2019 if you are interested.

Sean

First off, I've been fascinated by your financial spreadsheets. Every time I use data from them I provide attribution to "a stats/financial guy from BU who pulls this together" along with a link. There's so much data in there that it's sometimes hard to figure out the story. I try to compare BG with our MAC brethren but it gets challenging with how the schools report things differently. So here's my question (everything is based on 2018's sheet). I understand the Student Fees part, but with WMU not reporting in that column, would a "fair" representation of revenue across all 3 schools also include Direct and Indirect Support and Indirect Facilities? The way I look at it, there are "actual green dollars" coming in from ticket sales, parking and concessions, donations, bowl games, guarantees, etc. Then there are the "University provided dollars" that in some way or another tie back to student fees that fund not only athletics, but pay the electric bill, salaries for instruction, campus police, etc. Shouldn't these direct and indirect costs also be included since budget cuts at the institutional level will affect these categories? Assuming this is not unreasonable, here's what I get from Averaged Overall for BG, MU, and WMU from the 2018 sheet:

Total MAC "University Provided Dollars"
BG   $13.7M / 64.3% (instead of 55.6%)
MU   $23.0M / 74.7%
WMU  $24.1M / 76.8%

Based on these numbers, wouldn't one conclude that if any MAC school doesn't start the year with students on campus they're screwed?

Edit: With BG eliminating baseball we are now at the D1 limit of 16 varsity sports. Both MU and WMU are already at this limit which means they can't cut a sport to save $$ without petitioning the NCAA for a waiver.


Of course if this approach is not reasonable, then none of this matters and I have to go back to the drawing board for comparisons. Thanks again for all the work you put into this.

 

[Wicked Slappaahs]

Re: Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

Interesting article from ESPN today re: the impact that no football would have on universities and athletic departments.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports...l-financial-wreckage-due-coronavirus-pandemic

 

[Sean Pickett]

Re: Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

First off, I've been fascinated by your financial spreadsheets. Every time I use data from them I provide attribution to "a stats/financial guy from BU who pulls this together" along with a link. There's so much data in there that it's sometimes hard to figure out the story. I try to compare BG with our MAC brethren but it gets challenging with how the schools report things differently. So here's my question (everything is based on 2018's sheet). I understand the Student Fees part, but with WMU not reporting in that column, would a "fair" representation of revenue across all 3 schools also include Direct and Indirect Support and Indirect Facilities? The way I look at it, there are "actual green dollars" coming in from ticket sales, parking and concessions, donations, bowl games, guarantees, etc. Then there are the "University provided dollars" that in some way or another tie back to student fees that fund not only athletics, but pay the electric bill, salaries for instruction, campus police, etc. Shouldn't these direct and indirect costs also be included since budget cuts at the institutional level will affect these categories?

Yes, which is why I have the earned profit/loss columns which are not in the NCAA reports (USA Today also differentiates between earned and non-earned revenue). While WMU doesn't have student fees, they do have a large direct support amount every year, which like, BGSU, they don't split up among the sports teams. Both BGSU and WMU only report earned revenue for each team so each team's earned profits/losses equals overall profits/losses: non-earned revenue is not split up among the teams in their reports. Since the expenses for each sport have to be covered in the end, this does make more sense in many ways, but some schools direct students fees (and other school support) to specific sports; MTU, for example, directs 100% of student fees to hockey.

Assuming this is not unreasonable, here's what I get from Averaged Overall for BG, MU, and WMU from the 2018 sheet:

Total MAC "University Provided Dollars"
BG   $13.7M / 64.3% (instead of 55.6%)
MU   $23.0M / 74.7%
WMU  $24.1M / 76.8%

Based on these numbers, wouldn't one conclude that if any MAC school doesn't start the year with students on campus they're screwed?[?QUOTE]Well, yes and no. Since BGSU and MU specifically uses student fees a lack of students on campus will hit their athletic budgets directly. WMU, with no student fees, appears to have more flexibility. In fact, I believe someone posted here that WMU already announced a 20% cut for athletics for the upcoming school year. So, based on that they look to still receive a large amount of university dollars. And while a number of other schools have student fees, besides BGSU and MU, only ASU and UNH reported student fees over $10 million, with UConn and UMass close to $10 million. There is also the potential loss of ticket revenue, which would hit all the schools, but the B1G schools especially hard.

Edit: With BG eliminating baseball we are now at the D1 limit of 16 varsity sports. Both MU and WMU are already at this limit which means they can't cut a sport to save $$ without petitioning the NCAA for a waiver.

Since I've only compiled the financial numbers I believe that may have led to a misunderstanding on your part as to how the NCAA counts sports teams. Despite lumping, indoor track, outdoor track and cross-country into one financial reporting category, they are counted as three different teams. So, for BGSU, they have men's and women's CC and women's indoor and outdoor track for 18 teams: 7 men's and 11 women's. With BGSU dropping baseball that reduces them to 17 teams: 6 for men and 11 for women. NCAA DI rules requires 14 sports, either 7 men and 7 women or 6 men and 7 women, with at least 2 men and 2 women being team sports. So BGSI is now at the men's limit, but can drop 3 women's teams, including 2 team sports. MU reported 19 teams for 2018: 8 men's and 11 women's; WMU reported 16 teams for 2018: 6 men's and 10 women's. So, both do have some room to drop teams.

Sean

 

[TalonsUpPuckDown]

Yes, which is why I have the earned profit/loss columns which are not in the NCAA reports (USA Today also differentiates between earned and non-earned revenue). While WMU doesn't have student fees, they do have a large direct support amount every year, which like, BGSU, they don't split up among the sports teams. Both BGSU and WMU only report earned revenue for each team so each team's earned profits/losses equals overall profits/losses: non-earned revenue is not split up among the teams in their reports. Since the expenses for each sport have to be covered in the end, this does make more sense in many ways, but some schools direct students fees (and other school support) to specific sports; MTU, for example, directs 100% of student fees to hockey.

Assuming this is not unreasonable, here's what I get from Averaged Overall for BG, MU, and WMU from the 2018 sheet:

Total MAC "University Provided Dollars"
BG   $13.7M / 64.3% (instead of 55.6%)
MU   $23.0M / 74.7%
WMU  $24.1M / 76.8%

Based on these numbers, wouldn't one conclude that if any MAC school doesn't start the year with students on campus they're screwed?[?QUOTE]Well, yes and no. Since BGSU and MU specifically uses student fees a lack of students on campus will hit their athletic budgets directly. WMU, with no student fees, appears to have more flexibility. In fact, I believe someone posted here that WMU already announced a 20% cut for athletics for the upcoming school year. So, based on that they look to still receive a large amount of university dollars. And while a number of other schools have student fees, besides BGSU and MU, only ASU and UNH reported student fees over $10 million, with UConn and UMass close to $10 million. There is also the potential loss of ticket revenue, which would hit all the schools, but the B1G schools especially hard.

Since I've only compiled the financial numbers I believe that may have led to a misunderstanding on your part as to how the NCAA counts sports teams. Despite lumping, indoor track, outdoor track and cross-country into one financial reporting category, they are counted as three different teams. So, for BGSU, they have men's and women's CC and women's indoor and outdoor track for 18 teams: 7 men's and 11 women's. With BGSU dropping baseball that reduces them to 17 teams: 6 for men and 11 for women. NCAA DI rules requires 14 sports, either 7 men and 7 women or 6 men and 7 women, with at least 2 men and 2 women being team sports. So BGSI is now at the men's limit, but can drop 3 women's teams, including 2 team sports. MU reported 19 teams for 2018: 8 men's and 11 women's; WMU reported 16 teams for 2018: 6 men's and 10 women's. So, both do have some room to drop teams.

Sean

This explains why Miami is so freaked about the NCHC costs while Western isn’t. Thanks!!

 

[Sean Pickett]

Re: Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

Interesting article from ESPN today re: the impact that no football would have on universities and athletic departments.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports...l-financial-wreckage-due-coronavirus-pandemic

A pretty good read, but I do disagree with the following:

"While there are no publicly available data that separate out fans' game-day spending (for example, food/beverage, merchandise, parking) at college football stadiums, Rishe's analysis shows Power 5 schools would collectively lose $303 million in revenue on game-day spending by fans (excluding tickets), or $4.7 million per school, if there were no football season. Further, collective game-day losses alone would be at least $1.5 billion, at least $23.3 million per school."

The NCAA financial reports have a category specifically for this. For 2018 ASU reported $1.67 million, plus $518 thousand non-specific; Michigan reported $2.23 million, plus $800 thousand non-specific; Michigan State reported $1.49 million, plus $317 thousand non-specific; Minnesota reported $4 million non-specific; OSU reported $4.86 million. plus $700 thousand non-specific; PSU reported $6.34 million, plus $460 thousand non-specific; Wisconsin reported $4.8 million, plus $-1.8 million non-specific. So the data is there and I don't know why the article states otherwise.

And of course, this article and other like it don't bother to mention the savings each school would have if there were no sports played for the upcoming school year. Looking at OSU here are some numbers for 2018:
Athletic Aid - $21 million - assuming no on-campus learning
Guarantees paid out - $4 million
Team Travel - $12 million
Sports Equipment, Uniforms, Supplies - $5 million
Game Expenses - $5.7 million
Sports Camps - $1.4 million
Spirit Groups - $470 thousand
Medical Expenses and Insurance - $1.47 million
Student Athlete Meals - $3.74 million
Other Expenses - $11.2 million
Bowl Expenses - $4.2 million
Bowl Expenses, Coaches - $1.33 million

That's about $71.5 million in saved expenses, if you don't give out the athletic aid and can save all of the other expenses category expenses. Even giving out all of the athletic aid the savings is over $50 million and even if you exclude the other expenses its still over $39 million. It also don't account for probable pay cuts or layoffs for coaches and support staff or reduced recruit budgets.

Sean

 

[LordofBrewtown]

Re: Pandemic and budget strain: Will any schools drop hockey?

A pretty good read, but I do disagree with the following:

"While there are no publicly available data that separate out fans' game-day spending (for example, food/beverage, merchandise, parking) at college football stadiums, Rishe's analysis shows Power 5 schools would collectively lose $303 million in revenue on game-day spending by fans (excluding tickets), or $4.7 million per school, if there were no football season. Further, collective game-day losses alone would be at least $1.5 billion, at least $23.3 million per school."

The NCAA financial reports have a category specifically for this. For 2018 ASU reported $1.67 million, plus $518 thousand non-specific; Michigan reported $2.23 million, plus $800 thousand non-specific; Michigan State reported $1.49 million, plus $317 thousand non-specific; Minnesota reported $4 million non-specific; OSU reported $4.86 million. plus $700 thousand non-specific; PSU reported $6.34 million, plus $460 thousand non-specific; Wisconsin reported $4.8 million, plus $-1.8 million non-specific. So the data is there and I don't know why the article states otherwise.

And of course, this article and other like it don't bother to mention the savings each school would have if there were no sports played for the upcoming school year. Looking at OSU here are some numbers for 2018:
Athletic Aid - $21 million - assuming no on-campus learning
Guarantees paid out - $4 million
Team Travel - $12 million
Sports Equipment, Uniforms, Supplies - $5 million
Game Expenses - $5.7 million
Sports Camps - $1.4 million
Spirit Groups - $470 thousand
Medical Expenses and Insurance - $1.47 million
Student Athlete Meals - $3.74 million
Other Expenses - $11.2 million
Bowl Expenses - $4.2 million
Bowl Expenses, Coaches - $1.33 million

That's about $71.5 million in saved expenses, if you don't give out the athletic aid and can save all of the other expenses category expenses. Even giving out all of the athletic aid the savings is over $50 million and even if you exclude the other expenses its still over $39 million. It also don't account for probable pay cuts or layoffs for coaches and support staff or reduced recruit budgets.

Sean

Great work/research (as always).
Understanding there's probably some gray area/difference in how schools account for the various expenses. Is it correct that the athletic aid is the cost of scholarships/room & board, etc? If so, I think I'd exclude those expenses to analyze strictly on a cash basis, as those are likely mostly allocations to the sport/athletic dept ($ are being spent regardless to operate dorms, pay professorts/admins for classes, etc). Of course, in the OSU example that still leaves $50M of expense savings...and seems to be greater than revenue (excluding donations/booster support). So it seems like cancellation wouldn't really directly impact the cash flow. The concerns the schools probably have is more about big picture/long term: how does it affect those contributions/donations if football is not front & center every week. Do they go down, and in turn, as people learn to live without it, do some of them not come back, which impacts the net $$$ going forward.