Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
Blog Entry

Big Ten spending shows Wolverines lagging

Posted on: January 31, 2011 12:18 pm
 
Posted by Jerry Hinnen

Forbes
magazine writer Kristi Dosh has continued a series on college football spending that started with the SEC with a closer look at the Big Ten's revenues and profits , and though some of her findings and conclusions aren't surprising -- Ohio State spends more on football than any other member of the league, the average SEC team generates more revenue and spends more money than the average Big Ten team, etc. -- some of them are legitimately eyebrow-raising.

Perhaps the most intriguing number is the difference between the revenue generated by the Michigan  football program and how much the university re-invests in those same Wolverines. These are the figures for how much gross revenue each Big Ten team creates:
Penn State Univ. $70,208,584.00
Ohio State Univ. $63,750,000.00
Univ. of Michigan $63,189,417.00
Univ. of Iowa $45,854,764.00
Michigan State Univ. $44,462,659.00
Univ. of Wisconsin $38,662,971.00
Univ. of Minnesota $32,322,688.00
Univ. of Illinois $25,301,783.00
Northwestern Univ. $22,704,959.00
Indiana Univ. $21,783,185.00
Purdue Univ. $18,118,898.00
And here's how much each team spends:
Ohio State Univ. $31,763,036.00
Univ. of Wisconsin $22,041,491.00
Penn State Univ. $19,780,939.00
Univ. of Iowa $18,468,732.00
Univ. of Michigan $18,328,233.00
Michigan State Univ. $17,468,458.00
Univ. of Minnesota $17,433,699.00
Northwestern Univ. $15,733,548.00
Indiana Univ. $12,822,779.00
Purdue Univ. $11,821,265.00
Univ. of Illinois $11,092,122.00
Note that when it comes to revenue, Michigan is a solid No. 3, only narrowly behind their rivals in Columbus and nearly $18 million ahead of fourth-place Iowa. But when it comes to expenses, Michigan drops back to No. 5, and a distant No. 5 at that; they spend less than 60 percent of what the league-leading Buckeyes do, and despite their massive revenue advantage barely outspend even their in-state enemies at Michigan State.

Contrast the Wolverines' approach with that of Wisconsin. The Badgers come in just sixth in the league in revenue, but (as Dosh points out) reinvest an incredible 57 percent of that money back into the football program, a number that exceeds even the percentages in the SEC and puts the Badgers' raw investment well ahead of not only Michigan but even revenue leaders Penn State. It's hard to argue the Badgers aren't getting a return on that investment, either, when they've posted nine or more wins six of the past seven years and are coming off of a surprise Rose Bowl appearance.

Michigan's troubles go deeper than just spending money, of course, and it has to be pointed out that there are institution-wide advantages to hogging so much of the football team's revenue as (the Big Ten's second-largest pile of) profit; the athletic department sponsors a wide variety of varsity sports programs (no, there's no scholarship field hockey at, say, Tennessee) and does so without financial support from the university.

But if the Wolverines are serious about competing for not only conference championships against the likes of the Buckeyes but Rose Bowl championships against the likes of Oregon or USC, or national titles against the likes of the Big 12 or SEC, they're going to have to start putting more of their football money to use in football (particularly in the area of coaching salaries ). Greg Mattison is a nice start, but he's only a start.

(One other note worth noting: thanks to the Big Ten Network, a revenue stream that according to Dosh's figures falls outside of the football-only numbers, the average Big Ten athletic department remains more profitable overall than the average SEC athletic department by some $2.5 million. The Big Ten has the money to spend. They just spend more of it, it appears, on things that aren't football.)
Comments

Since: Aug 7, 2008
Posted on: February 1, 2011 1:59 pm
 

Big Ten spending shows Wolverines lagging

For anyone interested here is another look at the revenues.  Be sure to read the whole thing (and the additional update at the bottom) as the writer explains it is unclear what goes into the numbers and what doesn't.  Interesting that revenues from Big10 Network are not included in the football revenue.




Since: Jan 7, 2011
Posted on: February 1, 2011 1:58 pm
 

Big Ten spending shows Wolverines lagging

will if it sucks. its goes down as the greatest and  largest stadium in the country.sounds like another jealous  boy!



Since: Aug 20, 2006
Posted on: February 1, 2011 1:43 pm
 

Big Ten spending shows Wolverines lagging

SLow down on that Stadium...it kind of sucks...its a bowl with bleacher seats.



Since: Jan 7, 2011
Posted on: February 1, 2011 1:25 pm
 

Big Ten spending shows Wolverines lagging

THIS IS A VERY STUPID ATICLE IT JUST SHOWS HOW JEALOUS THEY ARE OF MICHIGAN!.MICHIGAN JUST SPENT  A HUGE FEE ON THE GREATEST FOOTBALL STADIUM IN THE COUNTRY!.COME NOWS BOYS YOU GOT TO DO BETTER THEN THIS..GO BLUE



Since: Dec 1, 2006
Posted on: February 1, 2011 12:29 pm
 

Very Stupid Article

Why doesn't the author ever explain what the money goes to.  You should not fault Penn State for spending $18M as a percentage of profits, but rather commend them for making so much money.  Perhaps the money goes to scholarships for other students, facilites for all students, keeping ticket prices low, etc. 

This article should rip into OSU a bit for spending so much of the money on the Football program.  While the program has been a success on the field, lets look at the overall state of things. 

BTW, i hate Michigan, but this article offers no help in chirping at their fans/alumni, since it lacks any depth.



Since: Aug 7, 2008
Posted on: February 1, 2011 9:35 am
 

Big Ten spending shows Wolverines lagging

I'm not sure if Michigan or any other school works the same as PSU but the football program funds every varsity sport (29 of them) at PSU.  No tuition money or state money goes to sports. 

Plus, relative to other big time universities, PSU isn't paying a lot of money for the coaching staff.  JoePa makes around $1M a year and I'm not sure what the assistants make but I doubt it is a lot.  Some universities are probably putting $6-8M just in coaching salaries.



Since: Nov 19, 2006
Posted on: February 1, 2011 9:31 am
 

Big Ten spending shows Wolverines lagging

It is interesting that Ohio State reinvests about half of it's money back into it's program, and Michigan just over a third.  Perhaps this eplains why the Ohio State football program is so successful and the Michigan fpptball program is more or less a joke now.  This study basically shows that generally speaking, the more you invest, the greater the return.  It looks as if the Michigan football program will be an also-ran for the near future if spending and recruiting have anything to say about it.



Since: Apr 3, 2007
Posted on: February 1, 2011 9:11 am
 

Big Ten spending shows Wolverines lagging

i think this is a good thing.  it shows that big ten schools are more than just football factories full of idiots who can't get into other schools academically.  these are institutions that pride themselves on academic excellence as well as athletic.  They also pride themselves on diverse athletic departments which develop student athletes in all areas of athletics.  The SEC simply proves it is a win at all cost league that completely neglects the rest of their student body and their communities.

Not to mention, it is easier to keep costs down when you don't pay each football player $180,000.   bazinga. ;)



Since: May 11, 2009
Posted on: February 1, 2011 2:16 am
 

Big Ten spending shows Wolverines lagging

Just another article taking a shot at Michigan while there is another team they should be taking a shot at. Just look at the numbers. Ridiculous.



Since: Feb 23, 2008
Posted on: January 31, 2011 11:40 pm
 

Big Ten spending shows Wolverines lagging

Huh???  Michigan just spent over $220M on renovations to the Big House.  If that isn't spending your surplus, then I don't know what is.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com