PDA

View Full Version : NCAA Hockey - Who's Making $$$, Who's Not



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

JDUBBS1280
04-11-2012, 01:36 PM
After posting some BigTen financial numbers on USCHO.com this afternoon that added 2010 figures, I decided to see what all of MEN'S college hockey did for 2010. So I decided to get those numbers and see what they looked like. I got the numbers from the Equity in Athletics website by the Department of Education. You can find that site here: http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/

So I have the overall numbers. Then current conference numbers. Then just for fun I rearranged the conference numbers to show what it will look like in 2013 when everything changes.

Some notes on the numbers:
- This is just fun project I wanted to do. I can't officially tell you that the numbers are spot on. So don't complain to me about it. I am just giving you the numbers that I pulled from the website.

- I have no idea how or why many schools break EXACTLY even. Maybe they are just playing with the numbers or something. I really don't know. All I can do is just post the numbers I have.

- Two hockey schools do not provide numbers. Those 2 are Air Force and Army. I am guessing it has something to do with them being Military schools.

- I pulled what they call the 2010 numbers. Those are the most recent numbers available. Now I have no way of know exactly the time period for them. Are they calendar year 2010 numbers? OR are they 2009-10 school year numbers. I just don't know.

Some of my observations:
- There is little doubt that Minnesota is the big dog when it comes to money in college hockey. No one is close to them. MN made more than 3x the profit on the next closest team UND in 2010. They keep there expenses low for such a huge program and then knock it out of the park with revenue. It will be interesting to see how far the gap widens in future years with the new seating costs coming.

- The current WCHA is the KING. Profiting $9.5 million in 2010. Hockey East is the closest competitor with $1.9 million. The CCHA is getting killed by MSU, OSU and ND.

- The future WCHA will be a complete joke. The B1G and NCHC will be making all the money and Hockey East will take a hit adding Notre Dame if they can't turn their numbers around. I am guessing that with a new rink, those Notre Dame numbers will change quickly.

<a href="http://www.gopherpucklive.com/index.php?page=blogfull&id=11205">View Numbers</a>

What are your thoughts and observations?

willythekid
04-11-2012, 01:45 PM
After posting some BigTen financial numbers on USCHO.com this afternoon that added 2010 figures, I decided to see what all of MEN'S college hockey did for 2010. So I decided to get those numbers and see what they looked like. I got the numbers from the Equity in Athletics website by the Department of Education. You can find that site here: http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/

So I have the overall numbers. Then current conference numbers. Then just for fun I rearranged the conference numbers to show what it will look like in 2013 when everything changes.

Some notes on the numbers:
- This is just fun project I wanted to do. I can't officially tell you that the numbers are spot on. So don't complain to me about it. I am just giving you the numbers that I pulled from the website.

- I have no idea how or why many schools break EXACTLY even. Maybe they are just playing with the numbers or something. I really don't know. All I can do is just post the numbers I have.

- Two hockey schools do not provide numbers. Those 2 are Air Force and Army. I am guessing it has something to do with them being Military schools.

- I pulled what they call the 2010 numbers. Those are the most recent numbers available. Now I have no way of know exactly the time period for them. Are they calendar year 2010 numbers? OR are they 2009-10 school year numbers. I just don't know.

Some of my observations:
- There is little doubt that Minnesota is the big dog when it comes to money in college hockey. No one is close to them. MN made more than 3x the profit on the next closest team UND in 2010. They keep there expenses low for such a huge program and then knock it out of the park with revenue. It will be interesting to see how far the gap widens in future years with the new seating costs coming.

- The current WCHA is the KING. Profiting $9.5 million in 2010. Hockey East is the closest competitor with $1.9 million. The CCHA is getting killed by MSU, OSU and ND.

- The future WCHA will be a complete joke. The B1G and NCHC will be making all the money and Hockey East will take a hit adding Notre Dame if they can't turn their numbers around. I am guessing that with a new rink, those Notre Dame numbers will change quickly.

<a href="http://www.gopherpucklive.com/index.php?page=blogfull&id=11205">View Numbers</a>

What are your thoughts and observations?

My thoughts are that I wonder why the *cough cough* great state of hockey can not be as fiscally responsible as it's flagship D1 hockey program.

JDUBBS1280
04-11-2012, 01:52 PM
My thoughts are that I wonder why the *cough cough* great state of hockey can not be as fiscally responsible as it's flagship D1 hockey program.

Maybe we just need to find oil.

Tiggsy
04-11-2012, 01:57 PM
My thoughts are that I wonder why the *cough cough* great state of hockey can not be as fiscally responsible as it's flagship D1 hockey program.

That just proves more need to look to the program to emulate it. Look to Gopher hockey and all your problems will be solved.

Seriously though, with all the bickering going on you want to start this whole thing? Lame. :p

Alton
04-11-2012, 02:05 PM
I don't trust those numbers.

(1) The revenue numbers might be reasonably accurate (although I suspect that each school has a different way of calculating revenues), but the expenses are all over the place. I simply don't buy the idea that Wisconsin spends more than twice as much on its hockey program as Minnesota. Why? Where are those 2 million dollars being spent in Madison that aren't being spent in Minneapolis?

(2) If even one school had exactly the same revenue and expenses, it would be an amazing coincidence. However, if you look at the chart, 23 of the 56 schools list revenues and expenses the same down to the last dollar! How did BC know to spend exactly $3,702,040 on their hockey program? Amazing how they nailed that guess...too bad Denver went $1 over!

The numbers that schools report are going to be self-serving, and there is no way to ensure that they are calculated in the same way (or even a remotely similar way).

Nick Papagiorgio
04-11-2012, 02:20 PM
I sure hope Minnesota didn't make any of their revenue from out-of-state sources!

How could anyone envy something like that?

JB
04-11-2012, 02:24 PM
I don't trust those numbers.

(1) The revenue numbers might be reasonably accurate (although I suspect that each school has a different way of calculating revenues), but the expenses are all over the place. I simply don't buy the idea that Wisconsin spends more than twice as much on its hockey program as Minnesota. Why? Where are those 2 million dollars being spent in Madison that aren't being spent in Minneapolis?

(2) If even one school had exactly the same revenue and expenses, it would be an amazing coincidence. However, if you look at the chart, 23 of the 56 schools list revenues and expenses the same down to the last dollar! How did BC know to spend exactly $3,702,040 on their hockey program? Amazing how they nailed that guess...too bad Denver went $1 over!

The numbers that schools report are going to be self-serving, and there is no way to ensure that they are calculated in the same way (or even a remotely similar way).

Agree with this but JDUBBS is just reporting the numbers that were found.

For example UNH Hockey has long supported the atheletic department. Somehow UNH is moving funds from hockey to the deparment in general and poof no profit.

Tiggsy
04-11-2012, 03:25 PM
I don't trust those numbers.

(1) The revenue numbers might be reasonably accurate (although I suspect that each school has a different way of calculating revenues), but the expenses are all over the place. I simply don't buy the idea that Wisconsin spends more than twice as much on its hockey program as Minnesota. Why? Where are those 2 million dollars being spent in Madison that aren't being spent in Minneapolis?


My guess is it has something to do with the KC. You got to pay people to convert it to ice and back. With how often that happens, it could add up quickly. That and all the paint thinner they have to provide for players' post game parties. Those two facts alone could easily be 1-2 million.

bronconick
04-11-2012, 03:34 PM
Notre Dame made less in revenue than American International?

.....................the hell?

FlagDUDE08
04-11-2012, 04:19 PM
EZ$C? :p:D

Pigfarmer
04-11-2012, 04:37 PM
My observation ..... There is creative bookkeeping plus and minus at most of those universities

burd
04-11-2012, 07:22 PM
My guess is it has something to do with the KC. You got to pay people to convert it to ice and back. With how often that happens, it could add up quickly. That and all the paint thinner they have to provide for players' post game parties. Those two facts alone could easily be 1-2 million.

No--it's the diapers for the Minnesota players.

BUPhD
04-11-2012, 07:35 PM
(2) If even one school had exactly the same revenue and expenses, it would be an amazing coincidence. However, if you look at the chart, 23 of the 56 schools list revenues and expenses the same down to the last dollar! How did BC know to spend exactly $3,702,040 on their hockey program? Amazing how they nailed that guess...too bad Denver went $1 over!.

So this means that BC wins the showcase showdown and gets both showcass?

aparch
04-11-2012, 08:02 PM
So this means that BC wins the showcase showdown and gets both showcass?
No, because 22 other schools ALSO were exactly correct in spending the exact amount they reported as income. :p


Creative bookkeeping makes this report practically useless. Unless you wanted to know that the University of Minnesota openly admits that Hockey keeps their other sports programs afloat. Or that Football keeps the Notre Dame hockey program afloat.

JDUBBS1280
04-11-2012, 08:02 PM
Again, the numbers are what the schools reported to the government. I don't know how each school got the numbers they reported.

Hammer
04-11-2012, 09:17 PM
Notre Dame made less in revenue than American International?

.....................the hell?

It looks like they drew less revenue than all other reporting schools in D-1.

If that's what they're saying, I smell a rat the size of a hippopotamus.

state of hockey
04-11-2012, 09:20 PM
If that's what they're saying, I smell a rat the size of a hippopotamus.

Rodents of unusual size? I don't think they exist.

Dirty
04-11-2012, 09:26 PM
It looks like they drew less revenue than all other reporting schools in D-1.

If that's what they're saying, I smell a rat the size of a hippopotamus.

I believe the word you are looking for is capybara.

Hammer
04-11-2012, 09:30 PM
We'll go with one of them too.

scsutommyboy
04-11-2012, 10:21 PM
The question is what do they consider an expense? Is cost of scholarship money included in that? If so, that is one major factor in how much it cost a school. Of course that is funny money since the school already has teachers and classes and giving players free classes really doesn't cost the school a full cost of a regular student.