Does BSU have an unfair advantage because they receive more money from the network contract?
I keep seeing posts regarding this assumption. I see it so often that I have started believing it without actually researching it myself.
It is assumed that the P5 conferences are able to recruit higher rated recruits and retain higher paid staff and coaches, because they have much larger Network contracts bringing in much larger revenue streams. Because of this abundance wealth they are able to offer much nicer facilities etc. and are therefore creating a gap between the haves and have nots. Some schools have particularly large donors such as Oregon or Oklahoma State that just add to the gap. Again, an assumed unfair advantage.
It all make sense, right? So, if BSU is receiving a huge contract compared to the other schools in the Mountain West it puts them at a huge advantage doesn’t it? .... or does it?
The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation tracks collegiate athletics money… where the money comes from and what the money is spent on. The monies reported are for ALL athletic sports at an institution.
I would argue that it is a larger total budget (or larger total income) that would give an institution an advantage. Not a single revenue stream. One school may receive 20 million from a media contract and 10 million from a single donor that combines to 30 million, another school may receive 10 million from a media contract but 20 million from 1000 donors they also have 30 million to spend. Does one have an advantage over the other? I would argue no. Where I would agree that one institution has an advantage over another is when one has revenue streams of 50 million and compared to another with 150 million. However they received that revenue I would argue it is an advantage to have a budget 3 times larger than the comparator school.
MWC athletic Budgets:
reported revenue |
rank |
|||||
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY+11% from 2013-2018 |
7 |
|||||
$43,166,257 |
$45,706,336 |
$43,858,018 |
$46,611,768 |
$45,486,486 |
$48,109,196 |
|
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY-FRESNO+54% from 2013-2018 |
5 |
|||||
$33,050,314 |
$36,436,560 |
$41,535,096 |
$44,055,912 |
$44,119,522 |
$51,050,676 |
|
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY+57% from 2013-2018 |
3 |
|||||
$34,791,926 |
$38,739,665 |
$38,451,203 |
$39,767,363 |
$44,672,317 |
$54,728,814 |
|
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY+42% from 2013-2018 |
2 |
|||||
$39,211,827 |
$46,978,189 |
$49,011,745 |
$56,551,028 |
$52,454,787 |
$55,687,184 |
|
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY+24% from 2013-2018 |
12 |
|||||
$25,854,038 |
$29,666,940 |
$28,589,341 |
$30,875,052 |
$31,252,553 |
$32,035,899 |
|
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY+54% from 2013-2018 |
1 |
|||||
$39,031,348 |
$46,577,840 |
$50,191,669 |
— |
$59,577,780 |
$60,101,907 |
|
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA+25% from 2013-2018 |
7 |
|||||
$37,017,100 |
$40,989,898 |
$43,116,142 |
$44,127,115 |
$47,780,885 |
$46,395,281 |
|
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA-LAS VEGAS-22% from 2013-2018 |
5 |
|||||
$64,513,044 |
$44,057,560 |
$45,015,536 |
$46,886,024 |
$47,327,478 |
$50,568,292 |
|
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA-RENO+29% from 2013-2018 |
11 |
|||||
$26,627,415 |
$27,324,338 |
$26,954,582 |
$31,018,290 |
$36,955,558 |
$34,288,266 |
|
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO-5% from 2013-2018 |
9 |
|||||
$44,345,840 |
$47,199,769 |
$42,353,920 |
$42,820,441 |
$44,421,019 |
$41,936,043 |
|
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING+51% from 2013-2018 |
8 |
|||||
$29,647,103 |
$32,336,367 |
$35,260,511 |
$36,878,369 |
$40,372,222 |
$44,910,641 |
|
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY+63% from 2013-2018 |
10 |
|||||
$23,684,266 |
$25,152,919 |
$30,333,172 |
$32,045,471 |
$34,398,296 |
$38,712,397 |
|
It is also important to factor in how they spend this money though. How much of this total budget does the school choose to spend on football?
Money spent on Football |
||||||
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
|
BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY+19% from 2013-2018 |
2 |
|||||
$15,208,683 |
$19,065,541 |
$16,444,287 |
$17,307,082 |
$17,382,027 |
$18,123,036 |
|
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY-FRESNO+107% from 2013-2018 |
3 |
|||||
$8,718,043 |
$10,322,556 |
$9,889,651 |
$11,581,458 |
$13,419,900 |
$18,070,018 |
|
COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY+82% from 2013-2018 |
1 |
|||||
$11,928,993 |
$12,631,192 |
$12,784,326 |
$14,170,946 |
$15,414,479 |
$21,696,560 |
|
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY+34% from 2013-2018 |
4 |
|||||
$11,582,709 |
$12,391,569 |
$13,026,414 |
$14,664,034 |
$14,635,173 |
$15,529,111 |
|
SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY+26% from 2013-2018 |
12 |
|||||
$7,572,660 |
$6,831,339 |
$7,108,789 |
$8,577,078 |
$8,228,106 |
$9,538,124 |
|
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY+5% from 2013-2018 |
11 |
|||||
$9,349,675 |
$9,366,888 |
$11,453,218 |
— |
$10,350,723 |
$9,846,121 |
|
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA+29% from 2013-2018 |
7 |
|||||
$9,063,145 |
$9,823,217 |
$10,724,823 |
$12,241,668 |
$12,048,935 |
$11,653,314 |
|
UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA-LAS VEGAS+35% from 2013-2018 |
8 |
|||||
$7,482,961 |
$9,032,545 |
$9,351,201 |
$9,414,099 |
$9,806,497 |
$10,120,375 |
|
UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA-RENO+41% from 2013-2018 |
9 |
|||||
$7,137,906 |
$7,128,903 |
$7,697,843 |
$8,718,206 |
$9,201,802 |
$10,037,079 |
|
UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO+25% from 2013-2018 |
10 |
|||||
$7,898,396 |
$7,781,906 |
$7,663,137 |
$9,322,101 |
$11,478,522 |
$9,870,786 |
|
UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING+69% from 2013-2018 |
6 |
|||||
$6,981,430 |
$7,513,394 |
$8,061,048 |
$9,273,854 |
$10,498,692 |
$11,793,724 |
|
UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY+75% from 2013-2018 |
5 |
|||||
$6,889,990 |
$7,637,966 |
$7,700,571 |
$8,720,377 |
$10,619,930 |
$12,069,847 |
One thing I notice when looking at these numbers is that even though Boise State has not had the largest revenues of the group their spending on football tends to be toward the top….
And yet looking at the Learfield Director’s cup which ranks schools for the success they have across all sports, It is typically BSU, Airforce and New Mexico outperforming everyone else in the group of 5. I also see everyone trying to spend more on Football but there is still a huge disparity with how much each school chooses to spend.
What do you see in these numbers? Does BSU have a huge advantage in income or is it that they choose to spend more on football out of what they recieve?