ADVERTISEMENT

Average football spending by Universities and Colleges last year - I do not know if this includes NIL

Eurocat

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
May 29, 2001
9,927
1,684
113
Big Ten beats the SEC in average spending (to my surprise frankly). Like I said I do not know if is this taking into account just coaching salaries and other expenses like recruiting, game day expenses, travel, stadium maintenance, etc., or does it include player costs (NIL) as well? Since it says "Total University Spending", it would indicate it does not also include NIL expenses, but it is just my guess





GO CATS!
 
Why do we accept this information as accurate? Is this guy a known quantity?
It's just data tabulated from two large, public sources (that he had to be asked to attribute).

I believe it does NOT include NIL based on checking the source, but it wasn't 100% clear.
 
All of this data is publicly available.

The Department of Education has it here: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/

The Knight Commission has it here: https://knightnewhousedata.org/. This website makes it very easy to look up exact definitions, original sources, and create custom reports.

But I don't understand what the conclusions anyone is drawing from these numbers. No, they don't include NIL (again, until this fall at the earliest, colleges don't pay NIL. That money comes from sources outside of the university). Don't over interpret the year to year swings since they can be affected by large, one off expenses. Most of the spending is on personnel (coaches' salaries, players scholarships, room, and board), game expenses & travel, and facilities. Then there are lot of smaller things that take up a few percentage points each of the budget (e.g. recruiting).
 
All of this data is publicly available.

The Department of Education has it here: https://ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/

The Knight Commission has it here: https://knightnewhousedata.org/. This website makes it very easy to look up exact definitions, original sources, and create custom reports.

But I don't understand what the conclusions anyone is drawing from these numbers. No, they don't include NIL (again, until this fall at the earliest, colleges don't pay NIL. That money comes from sources outside of the university). Don't over interpret the year to year swings since they can be affected by large, one off expenses. Most of the spending is on personnel (coaches' salaries, players scholarships, room, and board), game expenses & travel, and facilities. Then there are lot of smaller things that take up a few percentage points each of the budget (e.g. recruiting).
Can we presume that NU's new stadium is boosting the Big Ten's average?
 
Can we presume that NU's new stadium is boosting the Big Ten's average?
My understanding is that expenses related to facilities (e.g. debt service, leases, maintenance, etc.) are not assigned to specific sports. So debt service for a football stadium would be included as an expense for Northwestern athletics, but not as a part of the expenses related to football that are reported in the tweets above. (Another reason why you need to be careful comparing one school to another.)
 
My understanding is that expenses related to facilities (e.g. debt service, leases, maintenance, etc.) are not assigned to specific sports. So debt service for a football stadium would be included as an expense for Northwestern athletics, but not as a part of the expenses related to football that are reported in the tweets above. (Another reason why you need to be careful comparing one school to another.)
I think it's even simpler, I think the costs mentioned in the original links are yearly operating expenses, salaries, recruiting budget, travel, etc., while something like a new stadium would in a different category/list altogether, namely, "capital expenses" and would not thus be in the total listed up above. Just a guess.
 
I think it's even simpler, I think the costs mentioned in the original links are yearly operating expenses, salaries, recruiting budget, travel, etc., while something like a new stadium would in a different category/list altogether, namely, "capital expenses" and would not thus be in the total listed up above. Just a guess.
Yes, that’s pretty much what I wrote. Apologies if it wasn’t clear.
 
This is a dangerous statistic that I hope never gains traction.

Taken another way...look at recruiting. For years the recruiting game was the off-season p*ssing contest. It was the way fans measured their team's worth, by how many 5-stars they signed, rankings, etc. Never matters whether it translates into wins; just another way to compete.

I am hopeful we don't get to a point where this is the lead statistic, where recruits aren't asking, "why were y'all only 6th in the Big Ten for football budgets last year?" and/or where Athletic Departments don't use this to shame fans into "donating" more and more and more.
 
Whenever numbers are involved, you can be sure that someone will misunderstand and misinterpret them! Especially when they are trying to get clicks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: all4theillini
This is a dangerous statistic that I hope never gains traction.

Taken another way...look at recruiting. For years the recruiting game was the off-season p*ssing contest. It was the way fans measured their team's worth, by how many 5-stars they signed, rankings, etc. Never matters whether it translates into wins; just another way to compete.

I am hopeful we don't get to a point where this is the lead statistic, where recruits aren't asking, "why were y'all only 6th in the Big Ten for football budgets last year?" and/or where Athletic Departments don't use this to shame fans into "donating" more and more and more.
I mean, recruits are already asking those questions indirectly via how much they're getting paid.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT