What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

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!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

USA TODAY Sports' College Athletics Finances

where does the subsidy come from? student fees + school funds? Is it high because of our PAC:12 move?
 
where does the subsidy come from? student fees + school funds? Is it high because of our PAC:12 move?

If you hit the plus sign it details it. Ramped up from a normal $5.9ish million to 13+ this year so i assume that had something to do with it. Typically our scholly costs out weigh the subsidy.
 
That graphic is goofed up. It says it's from 2006-2011, yet I'm certain that's not the total for all six years. An average? It also says we're in the Big 12. Incorrect again. Is that due to the fact that we were in the Big 12 for most of those years?
 
That graphic is goofed up. It says it's from 2006-2011, yet I'm certain that's not the total for all six years. An average? It also says we're in the Big 12. Incorrect again. Is that due to the fact that we were in the Big 12 for most of those years?

i noticed that too and that was my guess.
 
OK, I looked a little closer and it makes more sense now. They list all six years, but the top of the line is just from 2011. Misleading for CU, because we needed a boost in school subsidies due to the loss of revenues from the Big 12.

If you look at the numbers more closely, you'll see that the big schools like Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, Florida, Alabama, Michigan, Ohio St. Etc all take little to no subsidy from their schools. The smaller the school & conference, the larger the subsidy on a percentage basis. That seems to lend creedence to the argument that big time athletics does support academics - but only at the very top level. We're not there, but I suspect with the new contract, we will be soon.
 
I give former Enron board member and current UT president Bill Powers grief, but I can only wish his quote were attributable to Bruce Benson.

Powers is a staunch defender of the high-dollar pursuit of athletics excellence, pointing to the role of successful teams in attracting students and donors and the fact that the Texas program supports itself —and then some. Money from the Longhorn Network, for example, is going into the endowment of chairs in philosophy, physics, art, art history and other academic areas.

"It's hard to understand what's out of whack when it's a big contributor to academics rather than a drain," he says.
 
Back
Top