Highest 2002-23 Revenue by FCS School


Kenn Rashad said:
Nope, it has nothing to do with the numbers being "skewed" to fit a narrative. The numbers are the numbers. The numbers don't lie; it's just the interpretation of the numbers varies from person to person. One person sees the numbers and comes to one conclusion. Another person who sees the same numbers can come up with a different conclusion.
Click to expand...
I think people are just looking at the surface numbers and not looking at the numbers in greater detail. Example looking at the total, but not looking at how the numbers came to be.
 



ghostwriter said:
that same alum will drop $50 on a stuffed turkey leg and a $25 dollar drink and get into a $50K car while living in a $300k house will complain about a $100 season ticket

the white counterpart will eat cheaper, buy a 12-pack of beer and get into $80K truck they'll drive into the ground and tell you the season ticke is too cheap and you need to raise prices while buying 3
Click to expand...
Something needs to be done, as JSU expenses are out pacing their revenue, which is troubling for a long term perceptive. Hopefully some of the expenses was just a one time expense.
 
I look at these numbers and can only think of the anomaly that is Alcorn State smh
 
Tigerpride said:
How did you draw those conclusions from those numbers? JSU is the LEAST subsidized.
Click to expand...
By actual going to the website and looking at all of the data and not just revenue. JSU total expensive was 9.72 million in 2021 and 12.64 million in 2022. While inflation can account form some of it, it can not account for all of it. The thing that I like about the site is you can tell where the increases are coming from and where some expenses have not change. What will be telling is the 2023 numbers both in revenue and expenses. Hopefully there will not be an increase expenses without being offset by new revenue that is not just a one shot.
 
Last edited:
At the end of the day, these numbers are still majority horse#$@&*!

Thanks NCCU dude for sending me to the full report.
These number have never made sense to me. Nothing is normalized and the schools can report whatever they want.
 



Brave said:
So what is the point?

Sounds like a bad business model to me.
Click to expand...
It isn’t setup like a business. It’s more similar to a quasi military industrial complex for micro empires. It is an arms race where we just so happen to keep score. The powers that be in Higher Ed underlying goals are to grow the institution’s footprint so it can produce more and more influential alumna. Those alums then in turn bring in more attention and resources to keep increasing the footprint. It’s a hand in glove concept.
 
GRAM4LIFE said:
College athletics isn’t designed to make a profit. That’s literally not the point. You make more. You spend more.
Click to expand...

Brave said:
So what is the point?

Sounds like a bad business model to me.
Click to expand...
The point is college athletics is a non-profit business, and the model is LEGALLY designed for the purpose of NOT making a profit. The revenue generated is used to benefit the greater good, the social good, or in the case of a college athletic program, the good of the students. Thus, the more money an athletic program makes, the more it invests BACK into the program/university.
 
Kenn Rashad said:
The point is college athletics is a non-profit business, and the model is LEGALLY designed for the purpose of NOT making a profit. The revenue generated is used to benefit the greater good, the social good, or in the case of a college athletic program, the good of the students. Thus, the more money an athletic program makes, the more it invests BACK into the program/university.
Click to expand...

ehh I'd like to see the Power 5 reports. I get it, hence the spending.
 
Brave said:
ehh I'd like to see the Power 5 reports. I get it, hence the spending.
Click to expand...
The Knight-NewHouse College Athletics Database has all D1 schools including FCS, FBS, and FBS power 5. The only schools that won't be listed or might just have older data will be private schools. Not too long ago someone did a breakdown on Alabama and it turns out the football teams brought in a profit of around 25 million (this after expenses), but the school spent that to cover all the non-revenue sports and short falls for sports that are operating in the negative. Just to give you an example on why some sports don't generate revenue, one of the schools I went to often times the majority of the women sports and some of the male sports don't charge for admission because the fan support is not there for those sports to even charge a $1 for a ticket.

To me at some point a school or schools are going to end up suing the federal government about title 9 because it goes beyond just mandating having women sports, but rather mandating women sports based on the population of the female student body rather than having a equal number of sports to male sports. For example, I believe the softball would be gone from NCCU and ECSU if was not for title 9 and Swimming would be gone from ECU (they already cut the man's team and tried to get rid of the woman's team but got sued).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top