USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
REPORT: North Dakota cutting women's hockey
- Thread starter TonyTheTiger20
- Start date
.Just wondering about some things ...
When a state school like UW offers an out of state player a scholarship they are responsible for the out of state tuition, correct? So rostering more out of state players is more expensive? And what about the cost of attendance scholarships? I'm assuming scholarship $ goes towards these operating budget numbers? Schools with primarily in-state players have a smaller amount to play for scholarships, right?
Also look at some recent non-conference games/trips UW took...California, Colorado, etc. Pretty expensive.
Wondering if Coach Johnson's salary is endowed, like some coaches at other (private) schools. Is that possible as a state employee? Curious.
All I can say is thank God the Badger football & basketball teams have been killing it in recent years, and the Athletic Dept has the money to spend on women's hockey!
FiveHoleFrenzy
Well-known member
Re: REPORT: North Dakota cutting women's hockey
That's an interesting visual...Is that flavor now available at Wendy's?
That's an interesting visual...Is that flavor now available at Wendy's?
Leather helmet
New member
Re: REPORT: North Dakota cutting women's hockey
There appears to be a salary level that, when exceeded, prevents National Championships. I would suggest that UW should lower MJ's salary below that level.
There appears to be a salary level that, when exceeded, prevents National Championships. I would suggest that UW should lower MJ's salary below that level.
Sean Pickett
2009 NCAA Champions
Re: REPORT: North Dakota cutting women's hockey
A number of good points that could have been answered if the reporter had bothered to request the latest NCAA Financial report from each school instead of just using the limited EADA information. Furthermore, the EADA reports have different accounting reuirements than the NCAA reports (see “Chapter 5: Reports Submitted by Athletics Departments” of Financial Reporting in Division I College Athletics, a thesis by Anish Sharma) so that sometimes the reported expenses in the EADA are different (usually lower) than the reported expenses in the NCAA reports. In the case of the eight WCHA teams this is true for 6 of 7 of the teams for which I have the NCAA Financials (I’m still waiting for the reports from St. Cloud State).
So, looking at Wisconsin where did they spend that money on? Over $1 million was on athletic aid, the highest amount in the WCHA for 2016 and double what Minnesota spent. In fact only Ohio State was close, at just over $993 thousand, with North Dakota in third at just over $511 thousand. Wisconsin also has the highest total compensation paid to coaches ($563,450) and at over $139 thousand, the team’s support and administrative staff (double the next highest two, UMD & UND). UW has the second highest recruiting budget at nearly $51 thousand and the highest travel budget, at over $407 thousand. The next big expenses are the debt service on LaBahn Arena at over $304 thousand and another $85 thousand on direct overhead for maintenance.
What I don’t see in the reports is where each school has paid to support the women’s WCHA. According to the article the annual budget is about $700 thousand and 80% to 85% is paid for by the schools. That would be $87,500 each at 100% support and $70,000-$74,375 each at 80%-85%. What I see is UMD having $40,000 and UND having $60,000 under membership and dues for 2016, but nothing similar for the other 5 schools. It is likely that the money is being accounted for out of non-specific expenses (for example, OSU reported $287,513 in memberships, dues and fees not related to specific teams) for most of the schools. Furthermore it appears that the schools are not supporting the league equally.
As for the additional expense per school, now that UND as dropped women's hockey, having to support the league at 100% the additional amount would be about $12,500 for each of the 7 remaining schools and $10,000-$10,625 at 80%-85%. While not a drop in the bucket, that is about 1% of Bemidji's reported women’s ice hockey expenses and less than 1/5 of 1% of Bemidji’s overall 2016 athletic budget of just over $7.3 million (the smallest of the 7) and nearly a rounding error for Ohio State’s overall 2016 athletic budget of almost $167 million.
Speaking of rounding errors, earlier in this thread Sicatoka called the women’s hockey budgets for the B1G schools rounding errors:
school – average percentage of overall athletic budget (2010-16)
Ohio State – 1.1%
Minnesota – 1.8%
Wisconsin – 3.8%
North Dakota – 6.3%
Minnesota State – 8.7%
St. Cloud State – 10.4%*
Bemidji State – 15.5%
Minnesota-Duluth – 17.2%
Regarding coaches total compensation, in 2016 Coach Frost received $320,998 and Coach Johnson received $339,408, quite a bit higher and closer than just their salaries.
Sean
* Used EADA reported expenses which may be different from NCAA reported expenses
A number of good points that could have been answered if the reporter had bothered to request the latest NCAA Financial report from each school instead of just using the limited EADA information. Furthermore, the EADA reports have different accounting reuirements than the NCAA reports (see “Chapter 5: Reports Submitted by Athletics Departments” of Financial Reporting in Division I College Athletics, a thesis by Anish Sharma) so that sometimes the reported expenses in the EADA are different (usually lower) than the reported expenses in the NCAA reports. In the case of the eight WCHA teams this is true for 6 of 7 of the teams for which I have the NCAA Financials (I’m still waiting for the reports from St. Cloud State).
So, looking at Wisconsin where did they spend that money on? Over $1 million was on athletic aid, the highest amount in the WCHA for 2016 and double what Minnesota spent. In fact only Ohio State was close, at just over $993 thousand, with North Dakota in third at just over $511 thousand. Wisconsin also has the highest total compensation paid to coaches ($563,450) and at over $139 thousand, the team’s support and administrative staff (double the next highest two, UMD & UND). UW has the second highest recruiting budget at nearly $51 thousand and the highest travel budget, at over $407 thousand. The next big expenses are the debt service on LaBahn Arena at over $304 thousand and another $85 thousand on direct overhead for maintenance.
What I don’t see in the reports is where each school has paid to support the women’s WCHA. According to the article the annual budget is about $700 thousand and 80% to 85% is paid for by the schools. That would be $87,500 each at 100% support and $70,000-$74,375 each at 80%-85%. What I see is UMD having $40,000 and UND having $60,000 under membership and dues for 2016, but nothing similar for the other 5 schools. It is likely that the money is being accounted for out of non-specific expenses (for example, OSU reported $287,513 in memberships, dues and fees not related to specific teams) for most of the schools. Furthermore it appears that the schools are not supporting the league equally.
As for the additional expense per school, now that UND as dropped women's hockey, having to support the league at 100% the additional amount would be about $12,500 for each of the 7 remaining schools and $10,000-$10,625 at 80%-85%. While not a drop in the bucket, that is about 1% of Bemidji's reported women’s ice hockey expenses and less than 1/5 of 1% of Bemidji’s overall 2016 athletic budget of just over $7.3 million (the smallest of the 7) and nearly a rounding error for Ohio State’s overall 2016 athletic budget of almost $167 million.
Speaking of rounding errors, earlier in this thread Sicatoka called the women’s hockey budgets for the B1G schools rounding errors:
While not true, they are very small percentages of each school’s overall athletic budgets. As for UND and the other schools in the WCHA women’s hockey is a more noticeable percentage of the overall athletic budget:
school – average percentage of overall athletic budget (2010-16)
Ohio State – 1.1%
Minnesota – 1.8%
Wisconsin – 3.8%
North Dakota – 6.3%
Minnesota State – 8.7%
St. Cloud State – 10.4%*
Bemidji State – 15.5%
Minnesota-Duluth – 17.2%
Regarding coaches total compensation, in 2016 Coach Frost received $320,998 and Coach Johnson received $339,408, quite a bit higher and closer than just their salaries.
Sean
* Used EADA reported expenses which may be different from NCAA reported expenses
Re: REPORT: North Dakota cutting women's hockey
I can't believe how much money UW wastes, with less to show for it.
Re: REPORT: North Dakota cutting women's hockey
Sean, about a year ago there was a discussion about schools going to "real cost" scholarships. IIRC, scholarships are now covering travel costs for student athletes getting to/from home and school. For UND with all their European players, that could have become a significant number that they were not anticipating (although I suspect they may have been helping their athletes with that cost already). You should also point out that most of the "cost" of a scholarship is just funny money - an accounting entry passing money among the various parts of the university with no real outlay.
Sean, about a year ago there was a discussion about schools going to "real cost" scholarships. IIRC, scholarships are now covering travel costs for student athletes getting to/from home and school. For UND with all their European players, that could have become a significant number that they were not anticipating (although I suspect they may have been helping their athletes with that cost already). You should also point out that most of the "cost" of a scholarship is just funny money - an accounting entry passing money among the various parts of the university with no real outlay.
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
Yes. Minnesota and Wisconsin give reciprocity to each other. Residents of those two states pay resident tuition fees whether they attend school in Minnesota or Wisconsin.
My niece, living in the Twin Cities, attended school at UW-Stevens Point, and paid the resident costs.
Re: REPORT: North Dakota cutting women's hockey
Then again it's been 7 years since your last NCAA title. Since then the Gophers have 4.
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
This is something that has always grated at me -- schools crying that scholarships cost them money.
Unless the athletes are actually taking a spot of a paying student, outside of room and board (since there are costs attached to that), it doesn't cost the school any money to allow an additional student to attend for free.
Let's say a school wants to add a sports program which requires a 20-person roster. If they simply add an additional 20 students to their total student body, it's not costing them anything to allow those 20 students to attend for free. It's only if they keep their student body exactly the same, and thus are now taking away tuition revenue and replacing it with a free student.
Again, room and board does have a cost associated with it when giving it away for free. But the cost of a complete scholarship is not the actual cost of tuition and room and board.
As you say, it's "funny" money.
Re: REPORT: North Dakota cutting women's hockey
No, it isn't. There is a marginal cost to provide an education to each additional student at the university. Classes are capped at a given size, as are sections of larger lecture classes. Add students, and you have to add instructors, who cost money. Add students, and you add administrative costs. Add students, and you need to add classrooms, and buildings that house them. The fact that adding a single additional student to an entire university adds only a fraction of each of these specific costs doesn't mean that it is free, and I've never seen a hockey team operate with only a single student-athlete.
No, it isn't. There is a marginal cost to provide an education to each additional student at the university. Classes are capped at a given size, as are sections of larger lecture classes. Add students, and you have to add instructors, who cost money. Add students, and you add administrative costs. Add students, and you need to add classrooms, and buildings that house them. The fact that adding a single additional student to an entire university adds only a fraction of each of these specific costs doesn't mean that it is free, and I've never seen a hockey team operate with only a single student-athlete.
IIRC, MN also gives reciprocity to ND, SD, IA in addition to WI. And maybe Manitoba.
Leather helmet
New member
Re: REPORT: North Dakota cutting women's hockey
Based on recent recruiting successes, I would favor MN giving reciprocity to British Columbia as well.
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
True. And I was being over simplistic. But the cost of a scholarship is not a direct dollar for dollar ratio. Yet, that is how the schools will list it.
Blackbeard
Well-known member
Re: REPORT: North Dakota cutting women's hockey
I'm not sure why you assume that the tuition that a student would have paid without a scholarship isn't a pretty good estimate for the cost of an education.
I'm not sure why you assume that the tuition that a student would have paid without a scholarship isn't a pretty good estimate for the cost of an education.
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
There is a difference between cost of an education and what it actually costs a school to let a student go for free.
Marry a Cost Accountant, and you'll understand. LOL