Comments about ‘Utes rank 61st nationwide, 10th in Pac-12, 1st in Utah in 2012 public school athletic revenues’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, June 25 2013 12:00 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Snack PAC
Olympus Cove, Utah

Spokane Ute

"The numbers will continue to get better as the new facilities are completed and the TV money goes up. This really seems to bother the usual trolls; no suprise[sic] there."

Don't be so sure that Utah's new facilities will improve the product on the field/court.

Consider this from an article published today:

(continued)

Snack PAC
Olympus Cove, Utah

Cal's renovated football stadium and glistening new training center opened to rave reviews last fall, but the risky plan to pay for the facilities fared as poorly as the team itself.

The Bears hired a new coach to fix the on-field product. More importantly, they've implemented a new strategy to avoid fiscal calamity.

If the financing plan fails, the most expensive facility upgrades in college sports history -- the total cost is $474 million -- could cripple Cal athletics over time by draining tens of millions of dollars away from the operating budget.

"If it doesn't settle itself out in the next few months, I fear a disaster," said Stanford economist Roger Noll, an expert in stadium financing who has consulted with Cal's faculty budget committee on the issue.

"They took a really big shot."

(continued)

StGtoSLC
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

let's roll, Stanford's numbers may not quite be what you assume them to be. Their home football game attendance actually averaged nearly 3,000 less than Utah's, and men's basketball was 3,500 less than Utah's (the two key revenue sports). I imagine they receive enough donations to make up for deficits in direct revenue, however, so no I'm not claiming they are in bad shape by any means, but probably not at the level of USC or Oregon.

Additionally, I don't believe your fear of Utah overspending to fit in with the rest of the conference will come to fruition with Chris Hill in charge. An acquaintance working for UCLA's athletic department told me that at least a quarter of their operating budget goes toward paying salaries of alums who don't really do anything for the school, and that a few other schools in the conference do similar things. I don't see this being an issue at Utah. Yes, expenses will increase, but the revenue increases appear to be greater.

Snack PAC
Olympus Cove, Utah

The Bears planned to finance the projects through the sale of 40- and 50-year rights to approximately 2,900 high-priced seats in the renovated stadium. But with sales lagging -- only 64 percent of the premium seats have been sold -- the school abandoned its June deadline to secure commitments for the long-term equivalent of $272 million.

The Bears are $120 million short of that goal.

----------------

According to Spokane Ute's theory, the more money spent on facilities the better the chance for success on the field. Based on that theory, the $474 million California just spent on renovating their stadium and training facilities should guarantee that the Bears will be PAC 12 favorites for decades to come, right?

The Bears just spent so much more on facilities than the Utes could ever dream of spending, that the Utes might was well forget about ever beating the Bears again.

* crickets *

Spokane Ute
Spokane, WA

Snack Pac

Trolling a Utah thread trying to pick an agruement again? Read my post, maybe slower this time. I never said that it would improve the product on the field, now did I? The numbers are in reference to revenue. That's what the article is refering too. Is that your whole MO? Do you ever actaully have anything constructive to say? I've yet to see it! The usual suspect are out in force and the drivel sure grows old and tiresome. That's why I respond to very few BYU fans.

Spokane Ute
Spokane, WA

@ Snack Pack

"Crickets"? Next thing you know you will bust out the "LOL". I guess when you can't put together a well though out post, you have to post someting.

Duckhunter
Highland, UT

@Snack PAC

Good info although I don't know that the new facilities won't help utah's on field performance and recruiting, that remains to be seen. Where spokane ute, and other utah "fans", are currently failing is in their belief that "the numbers will go up", and that is hardly a given. In fact as I pointed out in my last post much of utah's current athletic department revenues are one time money being raised for this current facility upgrade, they are not permanent every year revenues.

So the assumption that utah is going to reach 60 or 70 million per year, every year, in revenue is an extremely dubious one. I would say they will remain much closer to their current level than they will ever reach those figures, at least until inflation takes them there in which case they will be in the same place they are now in relation to everyone else.

Snack PAC
Olympus Cove, Utah

Spokane Ute

"Trolling a Utah thread trying to pick an agruement[sic] again?

This is a public forum.

For someone who whines incessantly about "trolling", you've never had any qualms about making comparisons between BYU and Utah.

What really bother you so much; that non-crimson glasses wearing fans comment on "Utah" articles, or that other bloggers have the audacity to question your sacrosanct opinions?

Spokane Ute
Spokane, WA

"The main revenue streams, including television money and shared distribution from the BCS and conference championships, will add approximately $9.9 million in 2012-13; $14.5 million in 2013-14; and $23.3 million in 2014-15. From 2016 on, annual increases of approximately 4 percent are expected"

An obvious trend in the revenue stream. Pretty simple concept when you think about, but difficult for several to grasp!

Bluto
Sandy, UT

10th in Public Schools in the Pac.
Add in Stanford and USC and Utah is "Dead Last" in revenues.
Even behind, Washington State...Hilarious!
And subsidized by the taxpayers of Utah to boot, otherwise, they're losing money.

BYU pays it's own way, operates at a profit and never bonds for facilities.
We love Independence and our exposure on our own Network that's on basic tier and in 70 million homes, along with our good buddies at the worldwide leader in sports....ESPN.

BYU rides it's own pony, already bought and paid for, (with maintenance endowments in place), unlike our coat-tailing, bottom-feeder neighbors Up-North.

Man is Utah's vain attempt to keep up with real football schools a losing effort.

Swoop
Salt Lake City, UT

"An obvious trend in the revenue stream. Pretty simple concept when you think about, but difficult for several to grasp!Pretty simple concept when you think about, but difficult for several to grasp!"

The gigantic hole in the revenue stream argument that is difficult for some to grasp is that there isn't ANY incremental advantage for Utah.

The Utes began their PAC 12 era significantly behind the other conference programs in facilities and those programs are spending as much or more on improvements as the Utes are spending.

So where is Utah's incremental advantage? How will Utah's new facilities improve Utah's bottom dwelling status in the conference?

Regardless of Utah's shiny new facilities, they'll never be able to out recruit USC, UCLA, Stanford, California, Washington, Oregon, ASU and Arizona on a regular basis, so the die is already cast; the Utes are destined to remain a 9th through 12th place team in the conference, with a losing conference record most years, and only slim hopes of playing in an occassional bowl game.

let's roll
LEHI, UT

StGtoSLC

Thanks for the insights. Most of the revenue differentiation isn't in gate receipts (see Oregon) but in booster contributions, where the Oregon (Phil Knight), Stanford and USC have a big advantage.

I do think Dr. Hill will do a good job managing expenses. What I'm most worried about is the mentality that increased revenue alone will lead to better teams on the field.

Everyone involved, Administration, the Athletic Department, Coaches and the athletes all need to innovate and differentiate the program, to attract the best athletes possible and allow them to perform in a innovative environment.

Uteology
East Salt Lake City, Utah

@Swoop

Regardless of exposure BYU, will never be able to out recruit Utah on a regular basis, so the die is already cast; the Cougars are destined to getting OWNED by Utah.

As far as our new conference, we won't ever out recruit USC, UCLA, Oregon, and Washington. In just 3 years our class rankings were #7 in the PAC-12 while Washington was #4, top 3rd. Yet the field Washington 14-12 and Utah 13-12.

Utah needs to continue to build depth and with better coaching we should be able to compete with the upper half of the conference in a few years. About the same time as we become a full member.

Uteology
East Salt Lake City, Utah

Out of the 222 public schools listed ONLY 7 received no subsidy. Utah was #181 receiving 24.4% subsidy (about $9.9 million).

According to USA Today from 2006-2011 (in MWC) Utah averaged:

Revenues: $38.1 million
Expenses: $36.8 million
Subsidy: 24.6% (about $9.3 million)

So BYU fans are outraged by a $600K increase in subsidies?

StGtoSLC
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

let's roll, I agree with those points. Refreshing to have an intelligent conversation based on more than emotional ties.

wer
South Jordan, UT

It doesn't matter the rankings show: pouring tens of $millions into sports is money wasted and academic responsibilities neglected.

No matter what any college or university says about their revenues, etc., they just simply collect more money for jocks while the cost of tuition continues to skyrocket,and they operate at a loss, with few exceptions.

BleedCougarBlue
Enid, OK

About the photo that accompanied this article:

It shows 4 Utes trying to return the ball while surrounded by 1 single Utah State player.

And the Aggie still made the tackle.

Poor Utes....they can't tackle (George, OT, baby!) and they can't stop from being tackled.

Typical...

Go Cougars!

(now where's Chris B. when you need him to respond?.....)

Dutchman
Murray, UT

Duckhunter et al,

The fact is, as I have pointed out, even though you and others continue to assert wrongly, the U athletic department receives no taxpayer money or subsidy from the State of Utah. Student fees are collected for a variety of purposes and some of those fees are paid to the athletic department. Students receive free admission to athletic events for the fees that they pay. The important thing is all student fees are adopted and approved by the Student Body Senate which encompasses the elected representatives of the entire student body from every academic discipline on campus. If the student body through their representatives want to pay fees and hand over some of it to the athletic department that is their democratic perogative.

giantfan
Farmington, UT

Dutchman,

The article stated "Utah received $9.9 million in subsidies, which includes students fees, direct and indirect institutional support, STATE MONEY...".

So maybe you should take up your beef with Mr. Carreon who wrote the article.

Cougsndawgs
West Point , UT

Texas Longhorns, 163.2 million in revenue, 25 million dollar profit! Now call me crazy, but I think that's the envy of every BCS or non BCS program in the country. I mean thats nearly TWICE as much as the highest revenue earners in the PAC12. Still think the PAC held the leverage in negotiations with Texas, ute fans? I think not. Utah should write a check every year to Texas thanking them for their PAC12 membership. Lol

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments