Recruiting Budgets: UM 57th our 124

There are some other interesting numbers in the report. On the revenue side, the same schools keep rising to the top more or less regarding Ticket Sales, Contributions and Donations, Licensing and Royalties, etc.

Hard to compare with UM though because we don't report that information.

Left out the part about hiring competent coaches. That is a big part of it. You know something we have had for over a decade.

That metric is self-reported every Saturday.

What is the point of this thread?
 
Advertisement
There are some other interesting numbers in the report. On the revenue side, the same schools keep rising to the top more or less regarding Ticket Sales, Contributions and Donations, Licensing and Royalties, etc.

Hard to compare with UM though because we don't report that information.

Left out the part about hiring competent coaches. That is a big part of it. You know something we have had for over a decade.

That metric is self-reported every Saturday.

What is the point of this thread?

Discuss various aspect of college football. Most particularly, recruiting budgets and finances.
 
There was a guy on the Canestime premium board who said that coach Golden had really been pushing the administration for more recruiting monies. When he got his extension during The Cloud phase, supposedly Golden's biggest request was for more recruiting monies. The guy went on to say that the administration got really ****ed that they agreed to some things (which included a lot more trips to the northeast) only to see golden make a play for the penn state job. I think golden burned his internal bridge on this one to an extent.


For those who remember Jason Whitlock's analysis of Al Golden from his Temple days, he noted that golden notoriously spent more on recruiting than every other team their conference.
 
This is pretty much useless information or at best a glimpse of what might be happening. First and most obviously, Miami being based in South Florida is a huge advantage, including from a cost or financial aspect. But most importantly, there is minimal uniformity from school-to-school when it comes to reporting this type of data. What might be listed as a recruiting expense by one school might show up somewhere else on another program's ledger. A lot of this data has to be reported annually to the federal government and, again, it's a hodge podge in how expenses are categorized or reported.
 
Advertisement
There are some other interesting numbers in the report. On the revenue side, the same schools keep rising to the top more or less regarding Ticket Sales, Contributions and Donations, Licensing and Royalties, etc.

Hard to compare with UM though because we don't report that information.

Left out the part about hiring competent coaches. That is a big part of it. You know something we have had for over a decade.

That metric is self-reported every Saturday.

What is the point of this thread?

Discuss various aspect of college football. Most particularly, recruiting budgets and finances.

And how it relates to us?
 
Left out the part about hiring competent coaches. That is a big part of it. You know something we have had for over a decade.

That metric is self-reported every Saturday.

What is the point of this thread?

Discuss various aspect of college football. Most particularly, recruiting budgets and finances.

And how it relates to us?

Thats up to you. I stated its challenging to draw direct comparisons as we - UM - don't report all the information public schools do. However, I think seeing where we are positioned overall, knowing it is an aggregated data point, is still interesting. And I had a disclaimer indicating the differences in accounting practices but deleted it before posting.

If you feel the thread is of no value. Thats cool. I put it out there for conversation.

Maybe I should have just started a thread about how the corches suck instead.
 
That metric is self-reported every Saturday.

What is the point of this thread?

Discuss various aspect of college football. Most particularly, recruiting budgets and finances.

And how it relates to us?

Thats up to you. I stated its challenging to draw direct comparisons as we - UM - don't report all the information public schools do. However, I think seeing where we are positioned overall, knowing it is an aggregated data point, is still interesting. And I had a disclaimer indicating the differences in accounting practices but deleted it before posting.

If you feel the thread is of no value. Thats cool. I put it out there for conversation.

Maybe I should have just started a thread about how the corches suck instead.

Interesting.
 
Is this just for football or does it include all sports - if it's for all sports it seems low. Given that Duke is listed at $1.4MM I'm assuming it includes basketball and probably all sports. Therefore very low.

Note also that some schools such as Kansas, Hawaii, Wyoming, Auburn etc. must spend significant amounts on travel. Having several major airports probably helps Miami. Whole thing is interesting, I wonder if and how private aircraft are accounted for? Nothing snows a prospect like a ride in a G4, go back a few years and Miami had what was called Curci's air force - effectively winging around the southeast. Would love to see a breakdown of expenses by type and sport. Given our numbers we're probably using the Metrorail.
 
Advertisement
I'm calling bull**** on the amount of money these schools are claiming they spend. FSU buys recruits like bags of skittles.
 
Is this just for football or does it include all sports - if it's for all sports it seems low. Given that Duke is listed at $1.4MM I'm assuming it includes basketball and probably all sports. Therefore very low.

Note also that some schools such as Kansas, Hawaii, Wyoming, Auburn etc. must spend significant amounts on travel. Having several major airports probably helps Miami. Whole thing is interesting, I wonder if and how private aircraft are accounted for? Nothing snows a prospect like a ride in a G4, go back a few years and Miami had what was called Curci's air force - effectively winging around the southeast. Would love to see a breakdown of expenses by type and sport. Given our numbers we're probably using the Metrorail.

Its aggregated for all athletics.

Dept of Ed has a site "The Equity in Athletics Data Analysis Tool" that enables a more granular view. Its pretty clunky to work with for comparative purposes but possible.

Here is a link to UM's reported information on Revenue and Expenses. I will add this to original post as well.

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/InstDet...43d392f33302f323031342031313a32363a303120414d
 
Michigan is 4th and FSU is 51st..............

And look at Kansas, Iowa State, Illinois and Vanderbilt. All Top 20 spenders for recruiting. Amazing.

Some of this has to be individual accounting practices.

I guess corching can't be overstated.

kansas, iowa state, and illinois can't get anything local, so they have to travel. vandy gets the scraps in sec country and have to deal with harder academic restrictions than um does. it's not a matter of accounting, it's a matter of having to travel around a lot to find decent players.
 
Advertisement
According to Dept. of Ed, recruiting expenses for men's athletics is only $668.082. Basketball accounts for 21% of department revenues. I wonder if basketball, along with other sports command a pro rata proportion of recruiting budget.
 
Some of these schools sponsor way more teams and sports than miami as well. It's not apples to oranges here.
 
Advertisement
The budget SHOULD BE small because they do not have to travel that far.

/******* Gilden...
 
Advertisement
Back
Top