• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

Doublespeak on Where the Money comes from to Pay Enormous Coaches' Salaries

tornado

tornado

New member
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,512227,00.html

as we have previously shown in numerous discussions, this line that they DON'T use any taxpayer money is hard to swallow....since most universities' athletic budget IS supported by taxpayers' monies.
http://bradleyfans.com/vb/showthread.php?p=39840#post39840

Then this column, in which University of Kentucky Athletic Director says this...
"We do not use state appropriation or university funding to pay our coaches," Barnhart explained"

then in the very next sentence, he says this...
"Except for his base salary of $400,000, the bulk of this compensation is derived from our multimedia
rights contract that includes radio and television agreements, other sponsors and conference revenue sharing."

so he freely admits that at least $400,000 IS from the taxpayers' pockets!!


one other quote:
"No rational person can say paying a single coach $4 million a year is just compensation
when unemployment levels are where they're at," (Dr. Richard) Lapchick told FOXNews.com.
"Even in good economic times, it'd be hard to justify the salaries coaches and professional athletes earn."
 
Not trying to argue... just an honest question...

Couldn't that $400,000 come from ticket sales or other avenues within the athletic budget? Does alot of an athletic budget come from tax payer money? I am not very knowledgable about the topic... thats the only reason I ask.
 
creative accounting is all that is....
I prefer to believe what's been published widely that almost ALL programs are money losers and supplement what they spend with taxpayers' dollars.

...if a department is losing money and relies on the taxpayer money to bail it out...then no matter what they say is the source of the bucks paid to the coach...they are just taking money out of one pocket to put it into another, all the while taking from taxpayers.
http://ctsportslaw.com/2008/05/22/ncaa-study-shows-that-most-athletic-programs-lose-money/
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/2008-05-16-financial-study_N.htm
http://www2.kusports.com/news/2009/feb/06/athletic-departments-struggling/
http://chronicle.com/temp/email2.php?id=ynMgz4qndmcjgcRjDpMqk9wzPXGPfyfC

tell me what school you want to see...here is the proof that ISU uses a about SIX million $$ labelled...
"Direct Institutional Support" and "Student Fees" (money from tuition that's paid) and "Other"
http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/expense_stat/show?school_id=26

Memphis uses $6 as well from these taxpayer derived sources, and most other schools do the same...these are clearly NOT ticket sales dollars.
 
tornado said:
tell me what school you want to see...here is the proof that ISU uses a about SIX million $$ labelled...
"Direct Institutional Support" and "Student Fees" (money from tuition that's paid) and "Other"
http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/revenue_stat/show

.
Click to expand...

First of all, your link doesn't work.

Second of all, you are alittle loose with the term taxpayer. If a student goes to said school, of course money from fees and the sort are going to be used to pay for athletics and recreation and a bunch of other things.

The only taxpayer's that are paying for athletics are the one's who are paying for their kids's education at said school.

Tornado, unless you have a kid going to Illinois State or you went there yourself, not one cent of your taxes went to ISU athletics.
 
you can say that a million times, but I have seen evidence to the contrary and I have presented it.

Here's even more UConn now has to pay
http://www.courant.com/sports/college/husky/men/hc-uconnlegalfees0403.artapr03,0,7759919.story

use the link in the very first article if you can't get to the Indy Star data
http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/expense_stat/show?school_id=26

I can get there and here's what iot shows for ISU

Football Men's Basketball Women's Basketball Other Non Program Specific Total
Ticket Sales $202,891 $525,637 $40,809 $42,102 $0 $811,439
Student Fees $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,600,163 $4,600,163
Guarantees $250,000 $10,000 $0 $1,303 $0 $261,303
Contributions $605 $12,358 $0 $59,523 $680,544 $753,030
Third Party Support $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Government Support $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Direct Institutional Support $300,095 $52,031 $74,328 $520,330 $79,490 $1,026,274
Indirect Institutional Support $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
NCAA/Conference Distributions $118,504 $232,920 $33,000 $327,274 $188,366 $900,064
Individual School Media Rights $18,596 $26,566 $3,985 $3,985 $0 $53,132
Concessions, Programs, Parking $5,364 $4,564 $0 $0 $130,685 $140,613
Advertisements & Sponsorship $111,269 $233,937 $10,793 $35,792 $0 $391,791
Sports Camps $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,171 $120,171
Endowments/Investments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $166,700 $166,700
Subtotal $1,007,324 $1,098,013 $162,915 $990,309 $5,966,119 $9,224,680


It defines some Institutional Support as:
"Includes unrestricted funds allocated to the athletic department by the university. For example, state funds and tuition waivers."

say what??? STATE FUNDS??? how can millions of $$ of "STATE FUNDS" not be coming from the taxpayers...you realy live in some dream world if you think it doesn't!


also
"Direct State or Other Government Support" is defined as:
"Any government money specifically for the athletic department that the university has no option to use elsewhere"

every school is balancing it's athletic department budget with money coming from the taxpayers...sorry if you don't see it...
 
cpacmel said:
First of all, your link doesn't work.

Second of all, you are alittle loose with the term taxpayer. If a student goes to said school, of course money from fees and the sort are going to be used to pay for athletics and recreation and a bunch of other things.

The only taxpayer's that are paying for athletics are the one's who are paying for their kids's education at said school.

Tornado, unless you have a kid going to Illinois State or you went there yourself, not one cent of your taxes went to ISU athletics.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is true, but it certainly depends on how you do your accounting and budget allocation. How about this:

You and your wife both work and have your checks direct deposited into a single checking account. You decide to buy a new Porsche against her wishes. You have the payment made through payroll deduction before the rest of your check is deposited into the joint checking account. You can not understand why your wife would be upset - you are not using a dime of her money!

What do you think of this situation?
 
tornado said:
use the link in the very first article if you can't get to the Indy Star data
http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/expense_stat/show?school_id=26

I can get there and here's what iot shows for ISU

Football Men's Basketball Women's Basketball Other Non Program Specific Total
Ticket Sales $202,891 $525,637 $40,809 $42,102 $0 $811,439
Student Fees $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,600,163 $4,600,163
Guarantees $250,000 $10,000 $0 $1,303 $0 $261,303
Contributions $605 $12,358 $0 $59,523 $680,544 $753,030
Third Party Support $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Government Support $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Direct Institutional Support $300,095 $52,031 $74,328 $520,330 $79,490 $1,026,274
Indirect Institutional Support $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
NCAA/Conference Distributions $118,504 $232,920 $33,000 $327,274 $188,366 $900,064
Individual School Media Rights $18,596 $26,566 $3,985 $3,985 $0 $53,132
Concessions, Programs, Parking $5,364 $4,564 $0 $0 $130,685 $140,613
Advertisements & Sponsorship $111,269 $233,937 $10,793 $35,792 $0 $391,791
Sports Camps $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,171 $120,171
Endowments/Investments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Other $0 $0 $0 $0 $166,700 $166,700
Subtotal $1,007,324 $1,098,013 $162,915 $990,309 $5,966,119 $9,224,680
Click to expand...

I see alot of Zeros under government support. :-D

It defines some Institutional Support as:
"Includes unrestricted funds allocated to the athletic department by the university. For example, state funds and tuition waivers."

say what??? STATE FUNDS??? how can millions of $$ of "STATE FUNDS" not be coming from the taxpayers...you realy live in some dream world if you think it doesn't!
Click to expand...

#1 You have no proof that money came from state funds though. You are living off the words FOR EXAMPLE.

#2 There are plenty of times where the University and Athletics share facilites, staff, and resources. This allocation of those funds could be a shared venture. Like for the ISU Golf Course. Which is used both by athletes, students, and the general public. That doesn't mean it came from State Funds either.

also
"Direct State or Other Government Support" is defined as:
"Any government money specifically for the athletic department that the university has no option to use elsewhere"
Click to expand...


Does this column even show up on your link for ISU?
every school is balancing it's athletic department budget with money coming from the taxpayers...sorry if you don't see it...
Click to expand...

I really don't want to get in a pissing contest with you when it comes to Public vs. Private schools. You've made your view known hundreds if not 1000's of times over. Be it at the high school or college level. You are beyond biased when it comes to your views of the whole situation. And that's fine.

But until I see a link that says that ISU is using money from taxpayers (non-ISU students) all you have is innuendo that can be proven.
 
BU Firsty said:
I don't think that is true, but it certainly depends on how you do your accounting and budget allocation. How about this:

You and your wife both work and have your checks direct deposited into a single checking account. You decide to buy a new Porsche against her wishes. You have the payment made through payroll deduction before the rest of your check is deposited into the joint checking account. You can not understand why your wife would be upset - you are not using a dime of her money!

What do you think of this situation?
Click to expand...

I think this situation is alittle far-fetched for what we are talking about. But I will play along.

Since I have direct deposit, I can easily go back and show her that all funds for the car were paid for by checks I had direct deposited. Now if my checks don't add up to the cost of the Porsche, then we have a problem.
 
cpacmel said:
First of all, your link doesn't work.

Second of all, you are alittle loose with the term taxpayer. If a student goes to said school, of course money from fees and the sort are going to be used to pay for athletics and recreation and a bunch of other things.

The only taxpayer's that are paying for athletics are the one's who are paying for their kids's education at said school.

Tornado, unless you have a kid going to Illinois State or you went there yourself, not one cent of your taxes went to ISU athletics.
Click to expand...

Every student who attends ISU, including athletes, has to have tuition paid for them. Most students pay their own tuition, but at a state school like ISU, the amount the student pays is only a small fraction of the real cost. The taxpayers pay that difference. No students at ISU pay their full costs.

Scholarship athletes have their tuition, housing, and fees paid for them by the athletic department scholarship. But again, the tuition paid by the scholarship is not the entire cost of educating that kid, but rather the discounted tuition cost that all state-supported schools have.
Taxpayers subsidize the biggest portion of the tuition for every athlete, including those getting scholarships.
In other words, an athletic scholarship to ISU costs say $3,000 for the athletic department, and an athletic scholarship to Bradley costs $25,000 to the athletic dept. The reason for the difference is because taxpayers have paid the difference for the ISU scholarship kids.

There are other fallacies regarding this notion that tax money doesn't suppot the athletic department, but we have been through this all before. I will be happy to dig up some old posts that outline several other ways this fallacy can be supported simply by shuffling monies from one column to another at state colleges.
 
Yup - the reason ALL private universities have higher tuition is because they DO NOT get state funds, it's just simply that easy.
Anytime an athlete gets a scholarship to a public school, he is getting education that's largely subsidized by the public, and that's exactly what they are called - PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

I kinda see it like a claim that kids in public schools are NOT supported by taxpayer money.....duh what?? Of course they are. and so is every department in the school, including their athletic department.
 
Good post DaCoach. Never thought of it that way before.

That kind of makes it hard to compete doesn't it?

I guess private schools like Bradley have one advantage state schools with state dollars don't have. Private schools provide a better education and thus have more highly educated alumni. Alumni with a better education will make more money and thus have more money to support their school financially. Give freely you highly educated BU grads! We have to compete with the welfare state.
 
cpacmel said:
#1 You have no proof that money came from state funds though. You are living off the words FOR EXAMPLE.

#2 There are plenty of times where the University and Athletics share facilites, staff, and resources. This allocation of those funds could be a shared venture. Like for the ISU Golf Course. Which is used both by athletes, students, and the general public. That doesn't mean it came from State Funds either.


But until I see a link that says that ISU is using money from taxpayers (non-ISU students) all you have is innuendo that can be proven.
Click to expand...

You're kidding right cpacmel? :o

You really think Bradley charges 5x more tuition just for the sake of being elitist? It's because 100% of the education cost is paid by the enrolled students. If ISU, Illinois, Western, Eastern, etc. didn't receive State money they would have to charge about the same as Bradley and any other private school. Why do you think Illinois State schools charge one tuition rate for in-state students (who pay Illinois state taxes) and a much higher rate for out-of-state students (who don't pay state tax)?

Geez! My 13-year old knows this; I thought everyone did :o . In fact, I've been indirectly paying for a public school education and directly for a Catholic school education for years. Next time you see a Bradley student or Alum you should thank them for paying part of your tuition as well.
 
For everything we are talking about let's get the situation 100% correct. There are also state and federal funds that go to all educational institutions regardless of state or private. The problem with our overall higher ed is that less money is making it's way to the schools period so public schools either raise tuition and everyone gripes and or lower services (less classes, less pay etc...) Private schools usually raise tuition to cover immediate expenses and then dives into their endowment. I'm not sure what the percentages are but public university costs the society a lot more per pupil then a private education but BU does receive money from the fed otherwise there are tons of regulation we would not be following such as Title 9.

I wish we would fund the schools much more at all levels then waste it on pure pork! Schools should be first and foremost for education and athletics should be a way of driving certain behavior toward that end, not the other way around. As far as which school is superior, the proof is in the citizens it has produced over the years. BU hands down!:-P

Next!
 
What state taxpayer money does a private school like Bradley get?


The Federal government does award grants to schools, public or private, but schools must compete for this federal money, and they must perform and meet standards set by the government. It is not just given to them with no strings like the pipeline of state taxpayer money that constantly feeds into the state schools.
 
ISU fans, are going to come on here and respond to Da Coach with limited examples of (comparatively) small amounts of funds BU has received and say that we get money too. Which, in theory, they're right but those are always for special projects and never standard operating costs. That being said I have no problem with state schools. If I hadn't worked my butt off theres no way I could have afforded to go to BU, let alone some of the other schools I looked at. Without scholarships going to Purdue (I'm from Indiana) would have been much more affordable, state school's bring higher education to a larger group of people, not just the upper middle class and above. However, there are large trade-offs, no one can honestly say a public school education is as invasive and well-rounded as that recieved at a private insitution. Just spend a week on one othe campus' at BU everyone's involved in something, taking on a leadership role in one way or another. At state schools, it's very different. You go to glass, get out, and then do your own thing. So going to a private vs. public school is a matter of choice and financial affordability. But just because BU is self supporting doesn't mean it ISU are the bad guys (they are, but for other reasons... ;) ). What UK is doing really is terrible, IMO. But as taxpayers in the commonwealth of Kentucky don't seem to be too outraged, and at the end of the day I'm guessing they're BBall program brings in far more than it spends, so it's in the best interests of UK to pay the best coaches and get the best playes, which is why they continue to do so. If it becomes unfavorable, or the taxpayers vote an official into office that will change that practice, it's here to say. But lets not villify all state schools and their alum for those actions.
 
here's an article detailing just another creative way the Athletic Dept. at Kansas funneled taxpayer money
silently to support athletics... until it was revealed last week.
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/apr/08/ku-shouldnt-subsidize-tickets/

I am sure all along they were saying..."but we don't use any taxpayer dollars!!!"

"What shocked me about last week’s announcement was the fact that for the
last two years university funds were transferred to KU Athletics to pay for
the faculty discount. What was the university administration thinking when it
decided to do this? ....... But for the university to
transfer unrestricted funds ......is, to my mind, evidence of a
total lack of perspective and priorities and ranks up there with the
administration taking so many people down to Florida for a bowl game.

I sometimes think that university administrators forget that the money they
spend is not theirs. It belongs to the people of Kansas and it comes from
tuition, state grants, sponsored research, and donations from alumni and
friends of the university. It seems to me that the only purpose for which
university funds should be spent are those that support the educational,
research, and service mission of the university."
 
this money is just chump change to Bill Self and his sources,
http://www.ksufans.com/forums/index.php?topic=40195.0

but I'll bet the taxpayers still are on the hook for all of it...regardless of the spin they put on it...
$3.59 million just to pay the Athletic Director who is leaving in about a month.
KK should check into the position....after all we beat Kansas every time we've played them this decade.
 
Of course they all tell you that their athletic budgets don't come from taxpayer dollars...
and that their athletic departments are all self supporting or funded by outside sources or private sources
...and if there's still those out there who believe it....here's even more undeniable proof as it comes from the very people who know...

... every once in a while, they actually speak the truth, like this time...

"Paul Kowalczyk (Colorado State University Athletic Director - who used to be SIU's AD)...
had to cut $160,000 from his proposed budget for next year because of reduced state funding"

"Given the state of funding for higher education in Colorado as well as, of course, the economy,
I think it's going to be difficult for the next year or two, hopefully no longer than that," Kowalczyk said."

http://www.coloradoan.com/article/20090531/SPORTS/905310333/1006/SPORTS

and he even includes all the new, on-campus facilities as being funded by state and taxpayer funds
 
There was an article in a paper and not sure which one which said the The University of New Orleans will be cutting most of their sports program because the student refused a hike in their fees to cover said expenses. Fees to me are a tax! It also said do to the cuts from most states to higher ed other schools are also cutting sports program (some have already been mentioned on here). If there was no direct correlation between tax payer money and the sports program at state sponsored higher ed these type of cuts would not be happening. Anyone who says that a coaches salary is not paid by the state is really not looking at the reality of the situation. A good coach though is a great investment for a school to make more money for the school from various sources (i.e. better attendance, greater chance of alumni contributing, name recognition which will attract better students etc..). At the end of the day the salary is coming from a state institution which is primarily funded by state tax payers. Forget about accounting principles. If your costs exceeds your revenue and the state makes up that difference it's a bailout by the tax payers. Well guess what every state university, college and community college falls under that. I have no idea who would argue anything differently. Let's face it the only reason that public universities keep their sports program, has nothing to do with economics or real education, but the state legislature keeping their constituents happy! It is all PORK when it is all said and done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top