|
Post by beavs6 on Mar 16, 2019 18:46:10 GMT -8
" OSU leads the conference in the percentage of funds spent on administration at 50% of the budget."
Why this?
|
|
|
Post by OSUprof on Mar 16, 2019 19:26:55 GMT -8
" OSU leads the conference in the percentage of funds spent on administration at 50% of the budget." Why this? Good question - one that I cannot answer. Here's the data for fiscal year 2018 from the US Dept. of Education's web site on Equity in Athletics:
FY 2018 School Not allocated Tot Expense % OSU 44297721 88600331 50.0 Colorado 44666515 89822527 49.7 Stanford 61736623 137965999 44.7 USC 48990058 116948216 41.9 WSU 29853776 73466115 40.6 UW 46012589 126133008 36.5 Oregon 35240843 97224788 36.2 Cal 28311330 89310761 31.7 UCLA 39070660 130960560 29.8 Arizona 27490147 92693610 29.7 Utah 20737129 74368191 27.9 ASU 31099862 122327384 25.4 Mean 38125604 103318458 37.0
OSU spends 50% of the budget on expenses listed as non-allocated. According to the US Dept of Education, these expenses include:
Athletic Director's salary, bonuses & benefits Assistant Athletic Directors' salaries, bonuses & benefits Salaries, bonuses & benefits for the athletic department support staff Trainers' salaries, bonuses & benefits General administrative overhead Conference and NCAA dues Debt service
The average annual debt service in the conference is $10.5 million, while OSU is at $7.5 million. The athletic director has the second highest salary in the conference.
The other 50% is spent on sports. These expenses include appearance guarantees and options, athletically related student aid, contract services, equipment, fundraising activities, operating expenses, promotional activities, recruiting expenses, salaries and benefits, supplies, travel, and any other expenses attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities.
insert code here
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Mar 16, 2019 20:07:46 GMT -8
Beaver fans have to be the most patient in the nation. After all they endured a 28-year losing streak in football and over the last 30 years, have witnessed the fewest winning seasons in men's basketball (6) among the 65 Power 5 programs. Let's wait and see is what I hear a lot or that we're just too poor, too wet or too far from an airport to compete. These are all excuses that are used by the media and the defenders of the status quo that populate our fan base.
The AVERAGE number of winning seasons over the past 30 years for Power 5 men's basketball programs was 21. What's wrong with expecting to be average? Instead, we've had our 7th winning season in the past 31 and the defenders are celebrating!
We are dead last in football spending (65th) and just a few spots off the bottom in men's basketball spending (57th). Yet our total athletic department spending is 44th out of the 65. These schools have less money than OSU:
NC State Va Tech Purdue Oklahoma State Mississippi State Rutgers Boston College Texas Tech Syracuse Kansas State Georgia Tech Utah Vanderbilt WSU Iowa State Wake Forest
The difference is that these institutions all spend more on football and men's basketball than we do despite having less money to spend. So what do we spend the money on? OSU leads the conference in the percentage of funds spent on administration at 50% of the budget. OSU's debt service is $7.5 million per year, less than the conference average and a lot less than Oregon's annual debt service of more than $18 million. OSU spends 26% of the budget on non-revenue sports while our Pac-12 competitors average 28%. We are not too poor to compete!
As hard as it is for me to understand why anyone would chronically under fund the two most important money-making sports, I have an even harder time understanding why Beaver Nation tolerates it.
Kudos... those of us that don't support nor accept mediocrity are ignored by the Admin and excused into oblivion on here as being too critical. Hypocritical as it is... fine Admin, I'll donate outside the athletic department, cease and divest from my 3rd major sport for season tix... 18 total seats plus fees. Last year I could have attended every home game in equal or better seats x 6 than my season ticket fee. Basketball (men's and women's) is far less. If the $ are going to be misused/appropriated (didn't realize how poorly) then screw it...
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Mar 16, 2019 20:19:54 GMT -8
Beaver fans have to be the most patient in the nation. After all they endured a 28-year losing streak in football and over the last 30 years, have witnessed the fewest winning seasons in men's basketball (6) among the 65 Power 5 programs. Let's wait and see is what I hear a lot or that we're just too poor, too wet or too far from an airport to compete. These are all excuses that are used by the media and the defenders of the status quo that populate our fan base.
The AVERAGE number of winning seasons over the past 30 years for Power 5 men's basketball programs was 21. What's wrong with expecting to be average? Instead, we've had our 7th winning season in the past 31 and the defenders are celebrating!
We are dead last in football spending (65th) and just a few spots off the bottom in men's basketball spending (57th). Yet our total athletic department spending is 44th out of the 65. These schools have less money than OSU:
NC State Va Tech Purdue Oklahoma State Mississippi State Rutgers Boston College Texas Tech Syracuse Kansas State Georgia Tech Utah Vanderbilt WSU Iowa State Wake Forest
The difference is that these institutions all spend more on football and men's basketball than we do despite having less money to spend. So what do we spend the money on? OSU leads the conference in the percentage of funds spent on administration at 50% of the budget. OSU's debt service is $7.5 million per year, less than the conference average and a lot less than Oregon's annual debt service of more than $18 million. OSU spends 26% of the budget on non-revenue sports while our Pac-12 competitors average 28%. We are not too poor to compete!
As hard as it is for me to understand why anyone would chronically under fund the two most important money-making sports, I have an even harder time understanding why Beaver Nation tolerates it.
Kudos... those of us that don't support nor accept mediocrity are ignored by the Admin and excused into oblivion on here as being too critical. Hypocritical as it is... fine Admin, I'll donate outside the athletic department, cease and divest from my 3rd major sport for season tix... 18 total seats plus fees. Last year I could have attended every home game in equal or better seats x 6 than my season ticket fee. Basketball (men's and women's) is far less. If the $ are going to be misused/appropriated (didn't realize how poorly) then screw it... I’m kind of a big deal. My office is full of leather bound books and smells of rich mahogany.
|
|
gzr
Freshman
Posts: 106
|
Post by gzr on Mar 16, 2019 20:32:02 GMT -8
" OSU leads the conference in the percentage of funds spent on administration at 50% of the budget." Why this? Good question - one that I cannot answer. Here's the data for fiscal year 2018 from the US Dept. of Education's web site on Equity in Athletics:
FY 2018 School Not allocated Tot Expense % OSU 44297721 88600331 50.0 Colorado 44666515 89822527 49.7 Stanford 61736623 137965999 44.7 USC 48990058 116948216 41.9 WSU 29853776 73466115 40.6 UW 46012589 126133008 36.5 Oregon 35240843 97224788 36.2 Cal 28311330 89310761 31.7 UCLA 39070660 130960560 29.8 Arizona 27490147 92693610 29.7 Utah 20737129 74368191 27.9 ASU 31099862 122327384 25.4 Mean 38125604 103318458 37.0
OSU spends 50% of the budget on expenses listed as non-allocated. According to the US Dept of Education, these expenses include:
Athletic Director's salary, bonuses & benefits Assistant Athletic Directors' salaries, bonuses & benefits Salaries, bonuses & benefits for the athletic department support staff Trainers' salaries, bonuses & benefits General administrative overhead Conference and NCAA dues Debt service
The average annual debt service in the conference is $10.5 million, while OSU is at $7.5 million. The athletic director has the second highest salary in the conference.
The other 50% is spent on sports. These expenses include appearance guarantees and options, athletically related student aid, contract services, equipment, fundraising activities, operating expenses, promotional activities, recruiting expenses, salaries and benefits, supplies, travel, and any other expenses attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities.
insert code here
So, is the problem cited here a numerator problem or a denominator problem (or both)? When I first read this great information, two things stood out to me--the first was that the first four items all contain the word bonuses. I am sure some are justified, but are all of them justified or just a hidden way to increase pay? The second thing was the punctuation in the second item indicating plural Assistant Athletic Directors. I am sure there is a need for AADs. I wonder how many are really justified. Anyone have any legitimate knowledge on staffing levels needed to run the current circus?
|
|
|
Post by beavheart on Mar 17, 2019 10:49:43 GMT -8
With the resources we have at OSU it would seem reasonable to expect to be making the tournament more often than not. We weren't keeping up without a practice facility so we built a state of the art one. Gill is newly remodeled with more on the way. There's a sleeping giant of a fan base just sitting there. We know finances have been an issue, but I have faith that there's good people at OSU working hard to get us upright. Without the attendance, or because of mismanagement there's no money to spend. We suck because we aren't spending enough. Chicken or the egg?
I get the urgency that some here have to get over the hump. There's an argument to be made for several directions the program could turn right now. I believe a part of our demise could be impatience to let our investments build upon itself. Like many here I can't understand why this team was so erratic and unfocused for much of the season. That said, I would like to see what Tinkle can do with one more year. Especially if Tres comes back.
If, for instance, this team comes back next year and turns the handful of bad losses around and makes the tourney. And starts a sustained turnaround for the program, does it really matter that things didn't go as well with the 3 sons as everyone wanted? I think the trifecta of sons somehow messed with the psyche of the team. We needed other guys to step up at times this year and they mostly didn't. Probably because one guy was taking most of the shots, for better or worse. I would like to see what a year of growth for Kelley and WW can do, along with hopefully some more consistent outside scoring. Which I think we may have with the incoming class and more time for Hollins, and Vernon and hopefully more of a team effort.
If there's no more identity to the team and better overall defensive effort next season then all bets are off.
|
|
|
Post by pitbeavs on Mar 17, 2019 11:55:23 GMT -8
With all the angst on these boards about Beaver Basketball, I have to wonder what Beaver Basketball Expectations are , where they came from, and what is realisitic. As a fan, I want to return to the days of the Orange Express. How likely is that? Very unlikely. What entitlement do we have to reach a level that only UCLA of old and maybe Arizona of semi-old have attained. Start with the basis that all the teams are tying to compete unlike some leagues where often there are one or two teams competing and dominating and the other guys just show up leading to a self-fulfilling promise of the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Without naming names, many leagues are like that. If all the teams are trying, what are realistic expectations for any team which tries to run an honest program without the Sam Gilbert effect that UCLA used to gain a huge advantage on the rest of the league. My expectations start with having a clean program with good citizens who represent the school well. I also expect them to show up every game and compete hard. I expect them to be well-coached, disciplined and unselfish. That alone will lead to lots of wins. I also expect that at OSU and at all of the other schools there will be up years and down years. I do not expect to have a program that is always at the bottom for whatever reason. Mathematically, there should be a kind of randomness to the record depending on the competence of the coaches in actual coaching and recruiting. If a team is consistently in the dumper, then replace the coaching staff and give a new guy his chance. Once a team gets down and the reputation gets around, it is very hard for a coach to work out of that situation. I look back on the last 30 years of futility and wonder what people have been thinking. We got down and have hired new coaches basically every five years. The first couple years are a fiasco, when an immediate rise to the top doesn't happen, then panic in the fan base and the administration sets in--rinse and repeat. Why does this happen? My opinion is that it is caused by unrealistic expectations. Everyone wants to win every game, I understand that. Is that going to happen? No. Are we going to ever return to respectability meaning having a chance to be in the hunt from time to time? I doubt that starting over every five years is going to get it done in today's one and done world. A consistent, persistent approach is needed with tempering of expectation at least to the realistic range. If we can not achieve realistic, then by all means make a change and start over, but we all know that has pain built in and risk that the new team will not get it done either. I think a lot of our school--I think it is an underrated institution. However, I don't see where we are entitled to be at the top of the basketball standings every year. Where did that idea come from? As I get older, I see today's sport scene more as entertainment than a personal reflection of my worthiness and standing with my peers. The scene is out of control in almost every sport. It is a wild ride. Tempering of expectations seems to be in order at least in this long-time Beaver's opinion. I would be interested in what other people think. GZR It's a refusal to accept reality. Corvallis is not a happening place. No night life, an ultra small TV market, and institutionalized mediocrity. That last point is critical. We haven't had a dynamic AD in forever. Our President is an academic who isn't interested in building a non-academic program with a national or international stature. The Benton County/Corvallis power base are pseudo-liberals that believe sports to be anti-intellectual and non-progressive. How do you build an competitive intercollegiate sports program in that environment? The fact that a lot of posters refuse to accept that reality is the problem because it creates unreasonable expectation which, when not met, we hear screams to fire someone.
|
|
|
Post by beavadelic on Mar 17, 2019 14:54:39 GMT -8
We last officially won an NCAA tournament game in 1975, so my expectations are to be better than that. The Orange Express days were great during the regular season and disappointing in the tourney. I would just like to win an NCAA tourney game for once. That is my expectation. Honest question: Did I miss something here? You said that we last officially won an NCAA tournament game in 1975, but I know that we won two in the 81’ tourney when we played Georgetown and Patrick Ewing in the regional final. Did we have to forfeit those wins later? Are you just embellishing a little in order to accentuate how little we have done in the tourney through the years, even during that strong dozen years in the late 70’s through the 89-90’ season? There is no denying that even our best teams fizzled in the Big Dance, but my frustration is just the fact that we have only been back to the tourney once in the last 29 years. For any true fan, there is no way that you can feel good about that type of futility. Considering how mediocre to worse that our conference has become in recent years, it’s that much more concerning that we can’t luck into the Big Dance once every 7 or 8 years.
|
|
|
Post by zeroposter on Mar 17, 2019 15:06:57 GMT -8
As I remember and my memory is questionable, Mitch Barnhart cut the overhead to bare bones because of budget problems. Bobby D is the guy who exploded the administration costs.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Mar 17, 2019 15:20:48 GMT -8
We last officially won an NCAA tournament game in 1975, so my expectations are to be better than that. The Orange Express days were great during the regular season and disappointing in the tourney. I would just like to win an NCAA tourney game for once. That is my expectation. Honest question: Did I miss something here? You said that we last officially won an NCAA tournament game in 1975, but I know that we won two in the 81’ tourney when we played Georgetown and Patrick Ewing in the regional final. Did we have to forfeit those wins later? Are you just embellishing a little in order to accentuate how little we have done in the tourney through the years, even during that strong dozen years in the late 70’s through the 89-90’ season? There is no denying that even our best teams fizzled in the Big Dance, but my frustration is just the fact that we have only been back to the tourney once in the last 29 years. For any true fan, there is no way that you can feel good about that type of futility. Considering how mediocre to worse that our conference has become in recent years, it’s that much more concerning that we can’t luck into the Big Dance once every 7 or 8 years. The games you are referring to were in 1982. 1981 was the K-state loss. The 1982 wins were vacated due to NCAA violations. 1975 was our last official tourney win. I wish I was embellishing.
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Mar 17, 2019 15:31:30 GMT -8
As I remember and my memory is questionable, Mitch Barnhart cut the overhead to bare bones because of budget problems. Bobby D is the guy who exploded the administration costs. That is definitely not true. Much of the athletic-staff hiring started under Todd Stansbury. BDC ran a bare-bones ship. Football staffing exploded under Andersen. These costs also include compliance and academic support. We have not been anywhere close to a major NCAA infraction, and the tremendous academic accomplishments of our athletes speak for themselves. That has been money well-spent, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Mar 17, 2019 15:43:48 GMT -8
With all the angst on these boards about Beaver Basketball, I have to wonder what Beaver Basketball Expectations are , where they came from, and what is realisitic. As a fan, I want to return to the days of the Orange Express. How likely is that? Very unlikely. What entitlement do we have to reach a level that only UCLA of old and maybe Arizona of semi-old have attained. Start with the basis that all the teams are tying to compete unlike some leagues where often there are one or two teams competing and dominating and the other guys just show up leading to a self-fulfilling promise of the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Without naming names, many leagues are like that. If all the teams are trying, what are realistic expectations for any team which tries to run an honest program without the Sam Gilbert effect that UCLA used to gain a huge advantage on the rest of the league. My expectations start with having a clean program with good citizens who represent the school well. I also expect them to show up every game and compete hard. I expect them to be well-coached, disciplined and unselfish. That alone will lead to lots of wins. I also expect that at OSU and at all of the other schools there will be up years and down years. I do not expect to have a program that is always at the bottom for whatever reason. Mathematically, there should be a kind of randomness to the record depending on the competence of the coaches in actual coaching and recruiting. If a team is consistently in the dumper, then replace the coaching staff and give a new guy his chance. Once a team gets down and the reputation gets around, it is very hard for a coach to work out of that situation. I look back on the last 30 years of futility and wonder what people have been thinking. We got down and have hired new coaches basically every five years. The first couple years are a fiasco, when an immediate rise to the top doesn't happen, then panic in the fan base and the administration sets in--rinse and repeat. Why does this happen? My opinion is that it is caused by unrealistic expectations. Everyone wants to win every game, I understand that. Is that going to happen? No. Are we going to ever return to respectability meaning having a chance to be in the hunt from time to time? I doubt that starting over every five years is going to get it done in today's one and done world. A consistent, persistent approach is needed with tempering of expectation at least to the realistic range. If we can not achieve realistic, then by all means make a change and start over, but we all know that has pain built in and risk that the new team will not get it done either. I think a lot of our school--I think it is an underrated institution. However, I don't see where we are entitled to be at the top of the basketball standings every year. Where did that idea come from? As I get older, I see today's sport scene more as entertainment than a personal reflection of my worthiness and standing with my peers. The scene is out of control in almost every sport. It is a wild ride. Tempering of expectations seems to be in order at least in this long-time Beaver's opinion. I would be interested in what other people think. GZR It's a refusal to accept reality. Corvallis is not a happening place. No night life, an ultra small TV market, and institutionalized mediocrity. That last point is critical. We haven't had a dynamic AD in forever. Our President is an academic who isn't interested in building a non-academic program with a national or international stature. The Benton County/Corvallis power base are pseudo-liberals that believe sports to be anti-intellectual and non-progressive. How do you build an competitive intercollegiate sports program in that environment? The fact that a lot of posters refuse to accept that reality is the problem because it creates unreasonable expectation which, when not met, we hear screams to fire someone. "The Benton County/Corvallis power base are pseudo-liberals that believe sports to be anti-intellectual and non-progressive. How do you build an competitive intercollegiate sports program in that environment?" Am I reading that you think Corvallis / Benton County is more liberal than Eugene / Lane County? Are you implying that the reason money is not flowing to OSU Athletics is some undercurrent of power brokers that are liberal, and therefore anti-sports? Portland metro area contains MANY OSU alum and donors. And again, Portland is not exactly a home for the Fox News fan club. I am trying to make sense of your implication. And maybe I am left to wonder how that liberal influence you attribute to the decline of OSU sports relates to the the liberal environment in Eugene that generates a group of athletic donors that counts more individual $1,000+ donors than many other Pac-12 schools. Seriously, I highly doubt that political leanings and affiliations has ANYTHING to do with athletic department budget challenges and men's basketball success. And how is it that those influences don't affect the success of women's gymnastics, Men's wrestling, baseball, softball, women's basketball and other sports in the OSU athletic department?
|
|
|
Post by pitbeavs on Mar 17, 2019 15:46:17 GMT -8
It's a refusal to accept reality. Corvallis is not a happening place. No night life, an ultra small TV market, and institutionalized mediocrity. That last point is critical. We haven't had a dynamic AD in forever. Our President is an academic who isn't interested in building a non-academic program with a national or international stature. The Benton County/Corvallis power base are pseudo-liberals that believe sports to be anti-intellectual and non-progressive. How do you build an competitive intercollegiate sports program in that environment? The fact that a lot of posters refuse to accept that reality is the problem because it creates unreasonable expectation which, when not met, we hear screams to fire someone. "The Benton County/Corvallis power base are pseudo-liberals that believe sports to be anti-intellectual and non-progressive. How do you build an competitive intercollegiate sports program in that environment?" Am I reading that you think Corvallis / Benton County is more liberal than Eugene / Lane County? Are you implying that the reason money is not flowing to OSU Athletics is some undercurrent of power brokers that are liberal, and therefore anti-sports? Portland metro area contains MANY OSU alum and donors. And again, Portland is not exactly a home for the Fox News fan club. I am trying to make sense of your implication. And maybe I am left to wonder how that liberal influence you attribute to the decline of OSU sports relates to the the liberal environment in Eugene that generates a group of athletic donors that counts more individual $1,000+ donors than many other Pac-12 schools. Seriously, I highly doubt that political leanings and affiliations has ANYTHING to do with athletic department budget challenges and men's basketball success. And how is it that those influences don't affect the success of women's gymnastics, Men's wrestling, baseball, softball, women's basketball and other sports in the OSU athletic department? You're certainly entitled to your state of confusion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2019 15:55:16 GMT -8
I think they play in Heaven. Huge recruiting advantage. [ 😊. Love THAT movie! “Is this Heaven?” “No.....it’s Iowa.” i think it just confirms Iowa is not heaven. Been there, it's definitely not.
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Mar 17, 2019 16:30:46 GMT -8
"The Benton County/Corvallis power base are pseudo-liberals that believe sports to be anti-intellectual and non-progressive. How do you build an competitive intercollegiate sports program in that environment?" Am I reading that you think Corvallis / Benton County is more liberal than Eugene / Lane County? Are you implying that the reason money is not flowing to OSU Athletics is some undercurrent of power brokers that are liberal, and therefore anti-sports? Portland metro area contains MANY OSU alum and donors. And again, Portland is not exactly a home for the Fox News fan club. I am trying to make sense of your implication. And maybe I am left to wonder how that liberal influence you attribute to the decline of OSU sports relates to the the liberal environment in Eugene that generates a group of athletic donors that counts more individual $1,000+ donors than many other Pac-12 schools. Seriously, I highly doubt that political leanings and affiliations has ANYTHING to do with athletic department budget challenges and men's basketball success. And how is it that those influences don't affect the success of women's gymnastics, Men's wrestling, baseball, softball, women's basketball and other sports in the OSU athletic department? You're certainly entitled to your state of confusion. You kind of miss the point ... The University of Oregon is in Eugene. Eugene is as liberal or more liberal than Corvallis. Oregon just won the Pac-12 Basketball Tournament. Liberals can support a winning Pac-12 athletic department. OSU has many other successful athletic teams. How are those teams successful in the face of the great liberal anti-sport bias in Corvallis / Benton County? Answer that question and you can help me understand the influence of liberal political leanings on athletic success in a collegiate athletic department.
|
|