data is revenue, not profit. So that means this is the amount of money that comes in, regardless of how much is spent. That said, if funds were diverted from typical revenue streams into specific building funds (donor A gives to the new laser tag facility instead of the general athletic fund), then spending would affect this number.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
University of Washington is a surprise being so high. This is also why I think Texas should go independent. I'd also like to see the math on the total costs (revenue-profit) for each school to see who is spending the most. I am just too lazy to do it.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
We have long generated more revenue than Clemson, so that didn't shock me that much. What we need though is more donor contributions, that is where Clemson has had a huge recent influx.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I'll be honest, that was my initial reaction. But then I continued to read the article and realized there was more to the story than just a high overall revenue.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Donations are not counted in revenue numbers and that is the point Hokie Fireman and I have made above. We might be ahead of Clemson in revenue, but they have had a HUGE influx of donor money following their success and we have seen a level of extreme apathy towards giving.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Makes you realize how important it is to be in a P5 conference. The highest non-P5 school is UCF at 62 (also impressive considering how horrible they were last year).
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
So, if I'm reading this correctly, ODU had around $8 million in revenue yet doesn't appear on the profit page at all. I'm assuming they're a program losing money. I know it costs a lot to start a program, but this can't be a good sign considering they want a new stadium as well.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
what you don't see is the profit made will then go right back into the athletic department to fund the softball team, womens tennis, cross country, archery team, and many others.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Comments
VT had highest among ACC members other than FSU. Not too bad.
I was (mildly) shocked that we were more profitable than Clemson.
Clemson spent a lot on some big ticket faclites.
data is revenue, not profit. So that means this is the amount of money that comes in, regardless of how much is spent. That said, if funds were diverted from typical revenue streams into specific building funds (donor A gives to the new laser tag facility instead of the general athletic fund), then spending would affect this number.
The source lists both revenue and profit. Profit listed lower on the page.
Right, I guess I was saying that we still brought in ~$6.5mil more than Clemson so their big ticket expenditures aren't why they're behind us.
You're right.
LOL at the Falcons
University of Washington is a surprise being so high. This is also why I think Texas should go independent. I'd also like to see the math on the total costs (revenue-profit) for each school to see who is spending the most. I am just too lazy to do it.
no surprise that the SEC claims the top 3 spots in spending...gotta pay those recruits somehow, I guess
gotta spend money to make money...had the same philosophy at TOTS, didn't work out too well for my bank account.
Doesn't work for ALL kinds of spending.
Nice, thank you. We're 23/24 in all three categories. Pretty solid.
Also, looks like the payrolls *cough* in Alabama are pretty high...
Alabama spends more than tech gets in revenue and 11 million more than the next closes school...
Here is Nick Saban.
via GIPHY
but for scheduling, media rights obligations, and diminished access to the CFP, they (Texas) probably could
Can we add Texas to the list of schools that do the least with the most over the past decade (Miami for talent, Texas for moolah)?
What the hell are the Falcons doing to make so little money?
Paying for their half of a $1.2 billion stadium might put a dent in their books.
We have long generated more revenue than Clemson, so that didn't shock me that much. What we need though is more donor contributions, that is where Clemson has had a huge recent influx.
Wow those are amazing numbers. Good that VT is up there.
My only worry with seeing these numbers is people will think VT is fine and think they don't need to join the Hokie Club and donate.
I'll be honest, that was my initial reaction. But then I continued to read the article and realized there was more to the story than just a high overall revenue.
I wonder if our relatively high number reflects all the donations that came in for the new indoor practice facility?
Donations are not counted in revenue numbers and that is the point Hokie Fireman and I have made above. We might be ahead of Clemson in revenue, but they have had a HUGE influx of donor money following their success and we have seen a level of extreme apathy towards giving.
Makes you realize how important it is to be in a P5 conference. The highest non-P5 school is UCF at 62 (also impressive considering how horrible they were last year).
VT should be on the phone with Texas to schedule a one-off road game for millions
Looks like we are trying to better our recruiting efforts through this new club.
A new acronym is born:
LSUAMC
So, if I'm reading this correctly, ODU had around $8 million in revenue yet doesn't appear on the profit page at all. I'm assuming they're a program losing money. I know it costs a lot to start a program, but this can't be a good sign considering they want a new stadium as well.
what you don't see is the profit made will then go right back into the athletic department to fund the softball team, womens tennis, cross country, archery team, and many others.
I'm kinda curious how that works. I mean, if they're spending the money on those teams, shouldn't that count as expenses, thus reducing profit?
in the overall scheme yes... however the numbers above look to be just football's profit not overall university's profit on athletics.