How Profitable Is Your Favorite College Basketball Team? ACC Edition
by Brian Favat on Jun 4, 2010 10:31 AM EDT
in Boston College Basketball
Email
PrintThis isn't a precise comparison, but these numbers from the Department of Education give us a glimpse into how profitable each of the ACC men's basketball programs were in 2009-2010. Now before you go flaming me after seeing Duke's figures, a word on Duke:
Some schools even make their programs look worse. Duke University, a top seed in this year's NCAA men's basketball tournament, reported the largest loss of any men's basketball program last year after years of annual profits in the $4 million to $5 million range. The school said that was due to a shift in revenue to the non-sport specific classification.
North Carolina was the conference's most profitable basketball outfit, pulling in more than $12 million last year. Here is a look at the ACC:
- North Carolina - $12,364,115
- N.C. State - $7,166,869
- Maryland - $5,902,659
- Georgia Tech - $5,334,856
- Wake Forest - $4,573,700
- Virginia Tech - $3,940,022
- Clemson - $3,433,424
- Miami - $1,929,507
- Florida State - $1,407,281
- Virginia - $1,131,216
- Boston College - $0
- Duke - (2,031,850)
BC netted out, reporting revenues and expenses that totaled $5,688,912. UNC led the conference in revenues, bringing in almost $20 million, followed by Duke (~$12 mil) and N.C. State (~$11 mil). Based on the non-GAAP approved accounting anomaly noted above, Duke was the biggest spender with over $13 million in expenses related to their basketball program. UNC comes in a distant second having spent almost $7.5 million.
The amount of money a program brings in is somewhat proportion to the size of their home arena. The Dean Dome is the largest arena in the conference, seating 21,750. N.C. State's RBC Center (19,722) and Maryland's Comcast Center (17,950) run 2-3 in the conference in terms of capacity. Those three programs also run 1-3 in profitability. More seats, more cash.
Thoughts?
H/T: Troy Nunes
3 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The problem i found
when analyzing budget figures is how they move their money around, like Duke did.
They only label it as “football” revenue if its related to a football expense or event specifically. When its something like branding on a football or basketball jersey, they can move it over somewhere else.
They ALL hide their revenues and expenses with very general labels that fall under the EADA guidelines of the NCAA.
BC comparables
BC’s hoops revenue was way less than G’Town (~ 50% less) but comparable to revenue from such lesser lights as Providence, Seton Hall and St. John’s.
BC should be able to out perform Seton Hall, SJU and Providence. Maybe this is the real reason Al Skinner got canned — empty stands and loss of revenue.
that's what Radakovich always
cited when they fired Chan. Revenues were declining but costs were going up. No one was renewing season tickets (guaranteed income) because no one was excited about football. Now, we may have less attendance at games due to scheduling but we have a lot more season ticket holders.
With no powers, comes no responsibility.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
