Holy Chryst!

Intubator

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Feb 24, 2019
Posts
1,117
Location
Bawlmer, Merlin- Home of the "Mayor Shuffle"...
Don't know if some follow college football but I think I should have picked a different career.


I love in the article that the school owed him $19.5M for his firing, but he and the school arranged a new deal where he gets paid $11M before next February which lets him take any of these vacated jobs this year.

So Coach O at LSU gets let go and walks out with a $16.8M buyout.
Scott Frost though is the big winner as he will take home a cool $75M over the next four years...

"Son, put down that math book and let me school you on the concepts of the West Coast Offense!"

Frost won't get 75 Mil and if he were even to get 1% of that it'd be too much IMO for what he did to the program. He did get an additional 7.5 mil to his buyout for the University not waiting three weeks until 10/1 to fire him. That's how badly they wanted him gone... I think his annual was 5+ Mil.

 

Killing Floor

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Feb 3, 2021
Posts
10,437
Location
Austin, TX
I've held positions at five US Universities. Four were large State Universities in FL, OR, & NY. The Football coach has been the highest paid individual at every school, and often makes more than 10-15 times what the President or Chancellor makes.

In many states these coaches are the highest paid State employees. Many states have public salary databases. Coach salaries have begun to mysteriously drop off these public-by-statute lists.

Football coaches are often the highest paid State employees.

Big-time coaches now make $5-11 million USD a year. Kirby Smart (Univ Georgia) salary: $11.25 million.

The University of Georgia is a state/public University. It had 40,118 students 21-22. Each student paid an additional $280.42 in tuition just to support this one salary. The tuition there is already 31% more expensive than the national average public four year tuition...because...Football?

Public Universities are ostensibly not-for profit institutions. If these football programs earn so much profit for schools then it is arguable that tuition should not continue to increase. I see the struggles for resources, and battles for salaries to attract top-quality Professors first hand every day. Deans at my current Institution have to fight and justify to try to pay a entry-level Professor $65K instead of $60K.

I would argue that increasing tuition costs, and battles for budget and resource allocation to actually provide education are important to creating a better graduate, and a better future contribution to both the country and the economy. Massive Football budgets by public schools are providing what, exactly, to the mission?

The NCAA structure is easy to research. If you have not researched the NCAA and its policies and earnings I encourage you to do so and to draw your own conclusions.


You can reasonably assume 15-20% of non-athletic students at UGA chose that school because of Bulldogs football. Disagree? Yeah, it’s probably closer to 40% but less provable. Reason is the “branding” begins at an early age and runs deep in families. Wrong or right is something we could debate. But the stream of students who dream of attending UGA (a very good school) is not related to math or physics or sociology departments. Quite the opposite, the music and dance and accounting majors apply and declare because they have grown up loving the brand, the idea of that school.
It’s easy to divide the coach’s paycheck by enrollment. It’s just as easy to calculate how that enrollment would change without the program.

But here’s where the economics get harder for many of us to swallow.
Without the commercial branding, loyalty building, and indirect revenue from football tuition at UGA would need to increase significantly.

Why? Because that branding influences the legislators who approve funding from the government. That branding influences endowments. That branding influences private corporations funding of research on campus.

Also, among the reasons some football staff salaries are no longer public, and why costs of facilities are not always public is the trend toward privatization of athletics on campus.
 

Killing Floor

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Feb 3, 2021
Posts
10,437
Location
Austin, TX
In other words, if you attended a state or larger private university,
Thank that football coach for the music programs.
 

Willie Johnson

Friend of Leo's
Joined
May 24, 2016
Posts
3,036
Age
102
Location
Chicagoland
Did you see Herm Edwards get burnt on the field a couple weeks back? Brutal. Cosmic payback for squandering Trent Green and Tony Gonzalez's best years, I suppose.
 

Preacher

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Posts
5,798
Location
Big D
I do argue that these guys are under tremendous pressure to perform and to win games and represent the school, but for $5M or more a year you have to expect that.

I am not saying it is right or wrong, but I am saying that is a lot of money to make per year and if you have ONE GOOD YEAR, you can cash in for years to come!
 

Intubator

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Feb 24, 2019
Posts
1,117
Location
Bawlmer, Merlin- Home of the "Mayor Shuffle"...
The truth is Colleges with highly popular and high revenue generating football programs (think P5) are so profitable that ALL the other sports and academic programs within the college benefit from that money in huge ways. It goes against conventional wisdom but they all benefit.
 

GGardner

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Jun 22, 2017
Posts
3,836
Location
NJ
Not even close. The UW program runs at a profit. 2019 Forbes study has a 3 year average revenue of 86 milion and a profit of 48 million. Budgetarily, some of the profit subsidizes other sports.
Just hope your school is reporting the numbers correctly. Rutgers wasn't. Not sure if you can access the link so I cut and pasted the first few paragraphs.

Athletics spending was long an issue at Rutgers University, New Jersey’s public university funded with state and taxpayer money. Nevertheless, the department always reported modest deficits and stable debt.

But after a months-long investigation involving nearly a hundred public records requests and a review of thousands of Rutgers financial documents, NorthJersey.com reporters Jean Rimbach and Abbott Koloff revealed that Rutgers athletics had lost far more than it reported to the NCAA in annual reports, showing its debt had grown to more than $250 million — with half of that being loans to cover operating deficits.

The rising costs were part of joining the Big Ten Conference in 2014, with coaches’ salaries doubling and football — the sport that traditionally brings in cash for athletics divisions — losing millions of dollars.

What our reporters found by creating dozens of spreadsheets, based on audits, cash flow statements, and debt schedules, was an alarming — and until now hidden — flow of state government, taxpayer and student money to athletics. Losses were more than $73 million two years running, followed by $60 million in 2022.


 

Wound_Up

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Feb 11, 2020
Posts
1,239
Age
41
Location
Shreveport, LA
No doubt this contributes to the high cost of a college education these days.
I'm pretty sure they get paid out of what the athletic department makes. Schools pull in 85-100 million a year and much of a coaches pay, comes from that and NOT from student tuition. They're paid with things like 'Rights deals' and other forms of compensation that ARE NOT paid directly by the school from student tuition. The school might pay a base salary of 500k while the other 11.5 mil comes from "Rights deals" where they license their likeness, name, etc...and other compensation from other revenue collected BY the college.

That 12 mil doesn't come from student tuition and it is NOT why it costs so much.

All ya got to do is Google and read.

 
Last edited:

Fiesta Red

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Posts
9,550
Location
Texas
I love watching sports—American football in particular—but the money, “business”, and politics (of all persuasions) that have infected the organizations that regulate the games (whether pro or “amateur”) has put quite a damper on my enthusiasm.

It’s not jealousy or sour grapes…it truly is disgusting how the rules of society are bent and broke to allow pampered billionaires arguing with spoiled millionaires to harm their own minds and bodies.

Every year, it’s getting harder and harder to give a crap.
 




Top