Which sport brings in the most revenue?

Donate To GopherHole
G

GopherNation

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
419
Reaction score
1
Points
18
How much money does the basketball, football, and hockey team bring into the University. Does anyone have a breakdown (ranking) for each sport?
 


Football easy. Numbers make it basically impossible not to be football. After that its basketball then hockey. The U is very lucky to have a 3rd sport that it in the black. Many schools do not have that.
 


I have heard MN Men's hockey brings in about $6.5 Million per year of revenue. Highest in the nation.
 


Football $$

I remember hearing on the radio a week or so ago about how out of the top 20 revenue producing programs at universities across the nation, the top 19 came from football. There was also some statistic about how Texas football makes about 8 to 9 times as much money as Duke basketball does. Don't know the exact breakdown at the U though.
 

how about profit? football has way more expenses. More scholarships to pay out etc etc etc.
 

how about profit? football has way more expenses. More scholarships to pay out, more staff to pay etc etc. I 100% agree that football generates the most revenue, but which program has the largest profit margin?
 

According to the Equity in Athletics report that the U filed for revenue/expenses for the 2008-09 school year, the following numbers are broken out:

Football:
Revenue: $25,594,942
Expenses: $9,257,658

Men's basketball
Revenue: $12,956,390
Expenses: $5,113,345

It's too simplistic to say that football made about 14M and basketball made almost 8M because there is $38,598,637 of expenses not allocated to a specific sport. Things like facilities, academic support, administration, sports information, etc., all cost money.

There is also $23,566,070 in revenue not allocated to a sport. I would guess by the numbers for football and basketball, TV revenue and NCAA distributions are in this bucket along with Golden Gopher Fund cash.

Hockey numbers are not specifically broken out. Revenue for all other men's sports is $6,603,960. The vast majority of that, I would presume, is men's hockey, but wrestling and baseball do generate some revenue.

It's difficult to compare school to school on this because you don't know how each school categorizes revenues and expenses, so it is impossible to know if you're comparing apples and apples.

You can look at other schools here: http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/GetOneInstitutionData.aspx
 



anonymous said:
It's difficult to compare school to school on this because you don't know how each school categorizes revenues and expenses, so it is impossible to know if you're comparing apples and apples.
Click to expand...

This. It is important to note that there is NO standardized reporting system for this info. Therefore you cannot compare the numbers for school to schooll in detail. Even the Minnesota data you have to look at carefully because you DON'T know what's all in each number.

Can you group schools together by general revenue with this info? Yes, it's like comparing different types of apples. But I wouldn't go trying to compare the Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa in detail.
 

Football would obviously make the most money for obvious logistical reasons. Other than that, I not sure about any specifics.

I have no doubt that the hockey program is amongst the most profitable in the nation, if not the most profitable. And Forbes rated the men's basketball program as the 5th most profitable program in the country for this past year. So I would guess that between hockey and men's basketball, the U has two top five programs in their respective sports in terms of profitability.

As for football, that's a different story.
 

MRJ said:
Football would obviously make the most money for obvious logistical reasons. Other than that, I not sure about any specifics.

I have no doubt that the hockey program is amongst the most profitable in the nation, if not the most profitable. And Forbes rated the men's basketball program as the 5th most profitable program in the country for this past year. So I would guess that between hockey and men's basketball, the U has two top five programs in their respective sports in terms of profitability.

As for football, that's a different story.
Click to expand...

Our hockey program is the ONLY one in the US that makes what would be considered a 'signifcant' profit. And our basketball program is one of the best. (It is somewhat over-rated because we have very high ticket prices, but no donation requirements for seats, while most schools require donations but have lower ticket prices).

However, our football program's relatively small (compared to other schools) profit puts our Athletic Department at a disadvantage. The reality is that the football programs at OSU, Florida, Texas, etc. make more profit then all 3 of our revenue sports combined.
 

howeda7 said:
Our hockey program is the ONLY one in the US that makes what would be considered a 'signifcant' profit.
Click to expand...

You are trying to tell us Wisconsin, UND, Michigan, Boston College, etc. don't make a 'signifcant' (sic) profit on hockey? I'd like to see some stats to back that one up.
 



GopherJake said:
You are trying to tell us Wisconsin, UND, Michigan, Boston College, etc. don't make a 'signifcant' (sic) profit on hockey? I'd like to see some stats to back that one up.
Click to expand...

Yes. I saw the data somewhere, but I don't have it handy. At any rate, Minnesota was the only one that cleared more then a million bucks or so. Sure, to UND that might make thier whole athletic budget, but I still don't consider it significant. I was surprised at the huge gap between Minnesota and Wisconsin, but it was large.
 

howeda7 said:
Yes. I saw the data somewhere, but I don't have it handy. At any rate, Minnesota was the only one that cleared more then a million bucks or so. Sure, to UND that might make thier whole athletic budget, but I still don't consider it significant. I was surprised at the huge gap between Minnesota and Wisconsin, but it was large.
Click to expand...

I think the one I was thinking most might not fit your assertion was Wisconsin. Anyhow, I'd be curious, if you come across the list again.

Bottom line, the U gets a lot of revenue that most schools don't. "We" also have every sport under the sun, which other schools don't. I think that's a good thing.
 

GopherJake said:
I think the one I was thinking most might not fit your assertion was Wisconsin. Anyhow, I'd be curious, if you come across the list again.

Bottom line, the U gets a lot of revenue that most schools don't. "We" also have every sport under the sun, which other schools don't. I think that's a good thing.
Click to expand...

Someone linked to it on here. I honestly don't remember the source, I think it was CNBC or one of those.
 


howeda7 said:
And our basketball program is one of the best. (It is somewhat over-rated because we have very high ticket prices, but no donation requirements for seats, while most schools require donations but have lower ticket prices).
Click to expand...

howeda, I agree about the high ticket prices, but don't know what you mean when you say there is "no donation requirements for seats" - the Athletic Dept has been charging a mandatory donation of $250-$500 for lower level seats between the baselines for years now. If you're strictly talking about a financial giving history directly to the school or a scholarship fund, I suppose you have a point - some institutions use that giving history to prioritize season ticket holder seating locations.
 

Southpaw said:
howeda, I agree about the high ticket prices, but don't know what you mean when you say there is "no donation requirements for seats" - the Athletic Dept has been charging a mandatory donation of $250-$500 for lower level seats between the baselines for years now. If you're strictly talking about a financial giving history directly to the school or a scholarship fund, I suppose you have a point - some institutions use that giving history to prioritize season ticket holder seating locations.
Click to expand...

My mistake. I think it's still true that we have less donations required then most schools on average and make up for it with high per/game prices.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom