PITT FOOTBALL FINANCIALS

[kimchae]

HBO piece on REAL SPORTS called COLLEGE SPORTS ARMS RACE talks about the profit vs loss of most athletic depts as it relates to football programs. So I did a little further research on the net and was surprised there is no disclosure by Pitt. Does this surprise you? Or am I missing something?



ACC 2014 Profit Loss (● Deficit ●Profit)

First Column 2004 / Second 2014

Florida State 39.3 ● ● 96.8

North Carolina 56.3 ● ● 76.5

Virginia 61.8 ● ● 70.5

Clemson 49.0 ● ● 70.4

Virginia Tech 41.0 ● ● 65.0

Georgia Tech 50.2 ● ● 61.4

Louisville N/A ● 84.7

N.C. State N/A ● 63.8

Pittsburgh N/A N/A

Note: N/A partial or no data.

 

[kimchae]

Seems odd

 

[Swervin27]

nope, they don't have to disclose any financial info and pitt being pitt, they wont.. It's all top secret info, just like salaries of asst coaches and access to practices by media..

 

[kimchae]

Penn State N/A ● 117.6


Just sayin!!!

 

[tps48]

HBO piece on REAL SPORTS called COLLEGE SPORTS ARMS RACE talks about the profit vs loss of most athletic depts as it relates to football programs. So I did a little further research on the net and was surprised there is no disclosure by Pitt. Does this surprise you? Or am I missing something?



ACC 2014 Profit Loss (● Deficit ●Profit)

First Column 2004 / Second 2014

Florida State 39.3 ● ● 96.8

North Carolina 56.3 ● ● 76.5

Virginia 61.8 ● ● 70.5

Clemson 49.0 ● ● 70.4

Virginia Tech 41.0 ● ● 65.0

Georgia Tech 50.2 ● ● 61.4

Louisville N/A ● 84.7

N.C. State N/A ● 63.8

Pittsburgh N/A N/A

Note: N/A partial or no data.

If orange means losses, the influx of TV money hasn't helped anyone in the ACC. Who pays for these losses? Is it time to rethink the importance of college athletics?

 

[Pittbaseball11]

Here's the best I can find. Pitt turned about a 212K profit on football in 2013-14 (that's not as impressive as it sounds, relative to the other schools):

LINK

 

[Pittbaseball11]

If orange means losses, the influx of TV money hasn't helped anyone in the ACC. Who pays for these losses? Is it time to rethink the importance of college athletics?

Donors and boosters, mostly. Football itself runs at a loss but the massive amounts of donations cover whatever shortfalls the athletic department has -- probably with money to spare.

 

[Swervin27]

the higher the revenue, the higher the expense budget goes up.. These schools are ok with running at a loss, subsidies and donations make up the difference.. No program is pocketing the surplus and putting it back into the academic side..

 

[kimchae]

I was thinking more in line to stow away the cash and build surplus to build "stadium" on campus!!!

 

[HailtoPitt]

I'm waiting for the obligatory mention of Pitt's subsidy.

 

[NTOP]

Donors and boosters, mostly. Football itself runs at a loss but the massive amounts of donations cover whatever shortfalls the athletic department has -- probably with money to spare.

"massive amount of donations"????????

 

[Pittbaseball11]

"massive amount of donations"????????

At the big, prominent programs -- yeah they're pretty massive.

Bama brought in $32MM in donations in 2014; $39MM for Auburn; $49MM for LSU.

In Pitt's bio for Steve Pederson they noted that he brought in $35MM in athletics donations over a 5 year period, which was a record for Pitt.

It's night and day what the big boys bring in compared to a school like Pitt. Pitt's athletic department would be comfortably in the black if they brought in the donations that the SEC schools did. Even Mississippi State's 2014 donations would make a big difference.

LINK

 

[NTOP]

At the big, prominent programs -- yeah they're pretty massive.

Bama brought in $32MM in donations in 2014; $39MM for Auburn; $49MM for LSU.

In Pitt's bio for Steve Pederson they noted that he brought in $35MM in athletics donations over a 5 year period, which was a record for Pitt.

It's night and day what the big boys bring in compared to a school like Pitt. Pitt's athletic department would be comfortably in the black if they brought in the donations that the SEC schools did. Even Mississippi State's 2014 donations would make a big difference.

LINK

Hell, we used to pull in less than Rutgers, Providence, etc. Pitt should publish hard numbers of donations & donors every year. Maybe they're ashamed?? Perhaps Todd Turner's group could provide that service??

 

[tps48]

Donors and boosters, mostly. Football itself runs at a loss but the massive amounts of donations cover whatever shortfalls the athletic department has -- probably with money to spare.

Athletic donations run roughly $7 million/yr. I just don't see where that makes up for the kind of shortfalls that the original post states. If those kinds of losses are accurate, it's time to reel-in program costs. Kimchae ... Am I reading your original topic post correctly?

 

[Swervin27]

HBO piece on REAL SPORTS called COLLEGE SPORTS ARMS RACE talks about the profit vs loss of most athletic depts as it relates to football programs. So I did a little further research on the net and was surprised there is no disclosure by Pitt. Does this surprise you? Or am I missing something?



ACC 2014 Profit Loss (● Deficit ●Profit)

First Column 2004 / Second 2014

Florida State 39.3 ● ● 96.8

North Carolina 56.3 ● ● 76.5

Virginia 61.8 ● ● 70.5

Clemson 49.0 ● ● 70.4

Virginia Tech 41.0 ● ● 65.0

Georgia Tech 50.2 ● ● 61.4

Louisville N/A ● 84.7

N.C. State N/A ● 63.8

Pittsburgh N/A N/A

Note: N/A partial or no data.

can someone translate this.. I have no clue what these numbers are. Red dot means deficit, so is it saying Florida state had a deficit of 39.3 (in 04) and 96.8 deficit in (2014)?? 96.8 what? Million? That's ridiculous, 96.8 thousand??


there are countless articles stating what a team's revenue is vs operating expenses. Case in point, I saw one with PSU having 117 million dollar revenues and basically breaking even with their operating costs. Texas leads with operating costs exceeding 150 million but their revenue is ridiculous. I honestly have no clue what the list above shows..


Here is a list I saw from '13 - '14 season. First number is revenue, second is costs

Florida State ACC $104,774,474 $98,866,182
North Carolina ACC $83,771,913 $83,463,221
Virginia ACC $83,697,971 $87,426,105
Clemson ACC $74,793,322 $73,456,221
Maryland ACC $73,434,869 $72,952,894
Virginia Tech ACC $73,065,186 $69,597,779
North Carolina State ACC $70,500,811 $63,958,569
Georgia Tech ACC $68,469,538 $68,818,267

 

[Swervin27]

the only thing I can gather from the OP is those numbers represent, in millions, what the schools operating costs are. So for instance, his Florida State 98.6, represents in millions, their operating costs in 2014.. But it doesn't say anything about their revenue.. What an azzhole post by kimchee, posting confusing, incomplete garbage..

 

[Gary77]

the only thing I can gather from the OP is those numbers represent, in millions, what the schools operating costs are. So for instance, his Florida State 98.6, represents in millions, their operating costs in 2014.. But it doesn't say anything about their revenue.. What an azzhole post by kimchee, posting confusing, incomplete garbage..

Not surprising from a nitter.

 

[Swervin27]

Not surprising from a nitter.

good point. im trying to rationalize a post from a guy that posted about ACC being the weak sister of the big east in hoops.

 

[9nationalchampionships]

Tithe from the blind cultists

Penn State N/A ● 117.6


Just sayin!!!

 

[HailtoPitt]

Pitt's FY14 Expenses were 70.5M and their revenue was $70.5M. I believe that still includes the $7-8 million university subsidy.

 

[Gary77]

Tithe from the blind cultists

Wonder what their 'actual' figure would be if the $90M+ figure for victim payments, lost bowl revenues, attorney fees, and lost ticket sales/donations were included?

 

[CrazyPaco]

HBO piece on REAL SPORTS called COLLEGE SPORTS ARMS RACE talks about the profit vs loss of most athletic depts as it relates to football programs. So I did a little further research on the net and was surprised there is no disclosure by Pitt. Does this surprise you? Or am I missing something?



ACC 2014 Profit Loss (● Deficit ●Profit)

First Column 2004 / Second 2014

Florida State 39.3 ● ● 96.8

North Carolina 56.3 ● ● 76.5

Virginia 61.8 ● ● 70.5

Clemson 49.0 ● ● 70.4

Virginia Tech 41.0 ● ● 65.0

Georgia Tech 50.2 ● ● 61.4

Louisville N/A ● 84.7

N.C. State N/A ● 63.8

Pittsburgh N/A N/A

Note: N/A partial or no data.

There are no private schools on that list. Hint: Pitt is not a public school.

If you want Pitt's financials for athletics, google the Synder Report. Pitt reported $65.0 million in total athletic department expenses compared to $57.2 million in athletic revenue for 2014-15. The difference is made up by the university's general operations funds. You have to be careful comparing that to numbers reported elsewhere that may not be calculated the same way.

 

[PSU_Nut]

Pitt's FY14 Expenses were 70.5M and their revenue was $70.5M. I believe that still includes the $7-8 million university subsidy.

FY 2015
Revenue $57,212,520
Expenses $64,988,344
Net: $−7,775,824

FY 2014
Revenue $49,234,695
Expenses $57,023,655
Net: $−7,788,960

FY 2013
Revenue $37,809,475
Expenses $50,004,506
Net: $−12,195,031

Snyder Report:

http://www.education.pa.gov/Documen...burgh Financial Report 2014-2015 Volume I.pdf

http://www.education.pa.gov/Documen...burgh 2013-2014 Financial Report Volume I.pdf

 

[Swervin27]

So we are pretty much par with most P5 programs with our financials. Cool. I'll sleep good tonight.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

So we are pretty much par with most P5 programs with our financials. Cool. I'll sleep good tonight.

I don't think that's the case.

Pitt needs to subsidize from the general fund because the donations are so poor. Other schools are likely running at deficits but can cover with donations -- at least at the P5 level.

Pitt is probably closer to a Group of 5 school in terms of how the athletics department is run.

I believe the last release has Pitt in the bottom 5 among all P5 teams in terms of donations/support.

 

[Swervin27]

I don't think that's the case.

Pitt needs to subsidize from the general fund because the donations are so poor. Other schools are likely running at deficits but can cover with donations -- at least at the P5 level.

Pitt is probably closer to a Group of 5 school in terms of how the athletics department is run.

I believe the last release has Pitt in the bottom 5 among all P5 teams in terms of donations/support.

Yet somehow, some way, we manage to have a football program with an operating budget in the 60 million dollar range. I've been hearing for decades how our apathetic Fanbase and their tight wallets will be the cause of this programs downfall, yet every year our operating budget increases. Times are good, any shortcomings have been self inflicted, none of it being from a frugal Fanbase.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

Yet somehow, some way, we manage to have a football program with an operating budget in the 60 million dollar range. I've been hearing for decades how our apathetic Fanbase and their tight wallets will be the cause of this programs downfall, yet every year our operating budget increases. Times are good, any shortcomings have been self inflicted, none of it being from a frugal Fanbase.

That's the figure for the entire athletic department. That isn't just the football program. The $60MM in operating costs is taken from the Snyder Report, which covers the entire athletics department. Pitt is MAYBE spending half of that $60MM on the football program. In all likelihood only about 1/3 of that goes to football.

 

[Swervin27]

That's the figure for the entire athletic department. That isn't just the football program. The $60MM in operating costs is taken from the Snyder Report, which covers the entire athletics department. Pitt is MAYBE spending half of that $60MM on the football program. In all likelihood only about 1/3 of that goes to football.

Ok, my point is still valid. We will never be Texas. Even if our multi billionaire alum changes his devotion from Cmu to Pitt, still wouldn't make much difference. We have a seat at the adult table, billion dollar tv deal with hoops tourney and we are in premiere hoops league. Tens of millions annually going to members from tv deals for bcs bowl tie ins. Worrying about joe shmo giving 5k instead of 3k is a inconsequential and its silly to cry poor when we are in P5.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

Ok, my point is still valid. We will never be Texas. Even if our multi billionaire alum changes his devotion from Cmu to Pitt, still wouldn't make much difference. We have a seat at the adult table, silly to cry poor when we are in P5

I don't think anybody at Pitt is crying poor, more saying that we have a mediocre budget that will never be more than mediocre....so why expect anything more than mediocrity?

Pitt will never sustain success with a shoestring athletic department budget. Catch lightning in a bottle? Sure. Everybody does that.

But, this isn't professional sports. Wins follow money in college sports. There are no drafts to distribute talent, no salary caps, and no contracts that are fully guaranteed in order to inject competitive balance into it.

I think most people have contended that if fans want Pitt to be elite, the only way to expect that is to provide elite level support.

Giving Pitt one of the lowest operating budgets in the P5 and expecting anything more than consistent mediocrity is just totally illogical.

Expecting Pitt to win at the college level with a professional sports team mindset is just insane.

 

[Swervin27]

I don't think anybody at Pitt is crying poor, more saying that we have a mediocre budget that will never be more than mediocre....so why expect anything more than mediocrity?

Pitt will never sustain success with a shoestring athletic department budget. Catch lightning in a bottle? Sure. Everybody does that.

But, this isn't professional sports. Wins follow money in college sports. There are no drafts to distribute talent, no salary caps, and no contracts that are fully guaranteed in order to inject competitive balance into it.

I think most people have contended that if fans want Pitt to be elite, the only way to expect that is to provide elite level support.

Giving Pitt one of the lowest operating budgets in the P5 and expecting anything more than consistent mediocrity is just totally illogical.

Expecting Pitt to win at the college level with a professional sports team mindset is just insane.

Donations don't equal wins, you should know better. Again, donations from fans is a small factor. Donations are so irrelevant to wins its not even worth considering as a factor. We all double our donations, nothing changes with on field production. Any previewed mediocrity is self inflicted, nothing to do with fan donations. Psu gets triple what we do in donations, I wouldn't trade their team for ours to save my life. We are not mediocre but if you feel that way and believe the only hope is increased financial donations from Pitt fans, ill save you decades of heartbreak by strongly encouraging you to root for another team because what you see now is as good as it's gonna get.

 

[Pittbaseball11]

Donations don't equal wins, you should know better. Again, donations from fans is a small factor. Donations are so irrelevant to wins its not even worth considering as a factor. Any previewed mediocrity is self inflicted, nothing to do with fan donations.

Donations mean you can spend more. Spending more translates to more wins at the college level. Why does the SEC kick ass? Because their schools spend an absolute crapload on their teams because their fans give them the ability to do so. Better staffs, more bells and whistles, private jets for coaches that are actually owned by the school, more incentive to cheat (because they know damn well the fans will have their heads if they don't win and the fans have the money to actually matter).

What is Pitt's competitive advantage right now? If a school comes and offers Narduzzi $6MM a year and is willing to double his staff budget, how does Pitt match that? Our TV revenue is equal to all other ACC schools and is inferior to that of the B1G and SEC. Where does the extra money come from to cover that?

Ticket sales? Horrible. Merchandise? Nonexistent. It's from donations.

Pitt is already subsidizing its athletic department from University resources. They aren't just going to up the subsidy. Hell, Pederson -- the guy who apparently didn't want to win -- had to subsidize the department more than Barnes did this year (ACC money helped Barnes, but still....that's how bad things are).

Like, are we really going to pretend like Pitt having one of the lowest operating budgets in the P5 -- one that STILL leads to a university subsidy -- isn't a disadvantage when it comes to doing anything significant?

The chancellor and athletic director are running a business, and will spend where their consumers tell them to spend. Pitt fans are telling them, resoundingly, not to bother spending on athletics.

 

[Swervin27]

Donations mean you can spend more. Spending more translates to more wins at the college level. Why does the SEC kick ass? Because their schools spend an absolute crapload on their teams because their fans give them the ability to do so. Better staffs, more bells and whistles, private jets for coaches that are actually owned by the school, more incentive to cheat (because they know damn well the fans will have their heads if they don't win and the fans have the money to actually matter).

What is Pitt's competitive advantage right now? If a school comes and offers Narduzzi $6MM a year and is willing to double his staff budget, how does Pitt match that? Our TV revenue is equal to all other ACC schools and is inferior to that of the B1G and SEC. Where does the extra money come from to cover that?

Ticket sales? Horrible. Merchandise? Nonexistent. It's from donations.

Pitt is already subsidizing its athletic department from University resources. They aren't just going to up the subsidy. Hell, Pederson -- the guy who apparently didn't want to win -- had to subsidize the department more than Barnes did this year (ACC money helped Barnes, but still....that's how bad things are).

Like, are we really going to pretend like Pitt having one of the lowest operating budgets in the P5 -- one that STILL leads to a university subsidy -- isn't a disadvantage when it comes to doing anything significant?

The chancellor and athletic director are running a business, and will spend where their consumers tell them to spend. Pitt fans are telling them, resoundingly, not to bother spending on athletics.

Same argument for decades, heard this argument dating back to 90s. Doom and gloom yet many fond memories, good teams, great players. It's not that bad, I promise you. Pitt will get same donations as always but we will still get some entertainment rooting for the panthers, I promise you. If you are holding your breathe, waiting for a financial windfall from Pitt fans, it's not coming. we have a top 10 wealthiest man in world with a Pitt script helmet on his desk, right now as we speak, writing checks to Cmu business school. Doing anything significant? It's college football, we are competing for acc coastal crowns, what did you have in mind? If you are looking for story lines for future 30-30 dynasty documentaries, it's time to lower your expectations my man

 

[Pittbaseball11]

Same argument for decades, heard this argument dating back to 90s. Doom and gloom yet many fond memories, good teams, great players. It's not that bad, I promise you. Pitt will get same donations as always but we will still get some entertainment rooting for the panthers, I promise you. If you are holding your breathe, waiting for a financial windfall from Pitt fans, it's not coming. we have a top 10 wealthiest man in world with a Pitt script helmet on his desk, right now as we speak, writing checks to Cmu business school.

I agree, by and large. I love Pitt. Love watching them play. Have enjoyed watching every player that's come through.

I've never been somebody that freaks out over Pitt being -- more often than not -- mediocre. It is what it is, it's the nature of the beast. It isn't settling for mediocrity, it's just knowing what's realistic.

I WANT Pitt to be the best. My realistic expectations for Pitt are far lower than that, though.

 

[Swervin27]

I agree, by and large. I love Pitt. Love watching them play. Have enjoyed watching every player that's come through.

I've never been somebody that freaks out over Pitt being -- more often than not -- mediocre. It is what it is, it's the nature of the beast. It isn't settling for mediocrity, it's just knowing what's realistic.

I WANT Pitt to be the best. My realistic expectations for Pitt are far lower than that, though.

I'm with you, national championships are realistic for about 5 or 6 programs tops. Let's compete in coastal, win 1 or 2 of these a decade, win acc once a decade and I'm happy as hell. We are better off than 75% of the d1 college football world v

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

HBO piece on REAL SPORTS called COLLEGE SPORTS ARMS RACE talks about the profit vs loss of most athletic depts as it relates to football programs. So I did a little further research on the net and was surprised there is no disclosure by Pitt. Does this surprise you? Or am I missing something?


ACC 2014 Profit Loss (● Deficit ●Profit)

First Column 2004 / Second 2014

Florida State 39.3 ● ● 96.8

North Carolina 56.3 ● ● 76.5

Virginia 61.8 ● ● 70.5

Clemson 49.0 ● ● 70.4

Virginia Tech 41.0 ● ● 65.0

Georgia Tech 50.2 ● ● 61.4

Louisville N/A ● 84.7

N.C. State N/A ● 63.8

Pittsburgh N/A N/A

Note: N/A partial or no data.

Two Words.................CrazyPaco & Cruise66....Both know far more about aspects of the Pitt & Penn State Programs Financials than most on any Board on Rivals. I can read, learn and trust from their insights and leave it at that and so be it!

 

[HailtoPitt]

Are we sure that the Snyder report doesn't already include the subsidy? I say this because the expenses for each previous year match the revenue in the following year, indicating that the timing of athletics finances might just be different then the default univ fiscal year. Plus the report may already already reflect financial transfers, in which case we don't know the subsidy.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

Are we sure that the Snyder report doesn't already include the subsidy? I say this because the expenses for each previous year match the revenue in the following year, indicating that the timing of athletics finances might just be different then the default univ fiscal year. Plus the report may already already reflect financial transfers, in which case we don't know the subsidy.

Pitt athletics are cash poor and lack of revenue in football is the leading culprit.

Among power 5 schools, in the last published Chronicle of Higher Education that was public in,2007, Pitt ranked third to last in donations to athletics, ahead of Mississippi state and Washington state only.

I don't believe our standings have improved much, and my guess is based on hires, miss state moved ahead of us.

We are cash poor. It's okay to accept this. You have to identify the issue to resolve it.
As I've been saying for years... Pitt has been spending plenty.. We rank well in line with most peers.
We rank awfully in revenue, though.

Pitt athletics has a revenue problem.