Chip: Can every Gophers sport survive the budget cutting ahead?

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
61,982
Reaction score
18,172
Points
113
per Chip:

The extent of those cuts hinges greatly on what happens with the football season. Not just here but across all of college sports.

If the football season is canceled, draconian measures will be necessary because football is the cash cow that drives college athletics. Hopefully that’s not the case. Different scenarios are being discussed by conference leaders including an on-time start to the season, a short delay, or possibly moving the season to winter.

Everything is so fluid that it’s hard to guess what will happen with any certainty because there are 130 FBS schools in 10 conferences plus independents and realistically, not all states will re-open at an identical pace.

But let’s focus on the Gophers and their budget as it stands. First, start with a basic premise that no school wants to eliminate sports as a response to this crisis. It’s already happened at Cincinnati and at Old Dominion, and I’m sure those won’t be isolated cases as schools wrestle with lost revenue and come to the conclusion that they have no other alternative. But that is the last resort option for most schools.

The Gophers have a $123 million budget, which ranks 8th in the Big Ten. Their 25-sport department ranks 4th in the conference in sponsored sports.


Go Gophers!!
 

If there aren't seasons, there won't be travel costs, a lot of other expenses (jerseys, laundry, food, etc.) won't exist. I would like to see the University just cover the expense of scholarships (as I've argued elsewhere, that is funny money since most costs are fixed). If that happens the athletic department should be fine for a year. If there are games, most of the revenue is from TV anyway, so it won't take a ton to keep solvent.
 

I think the U won't have to cut sports. Like Lakeville Goldy said, cancelling season reduces a lot of costs. I also think all of the coaches are team players and care about the other sports, so I could see them also taking pay cuts to help keep other coaches paid and to help make sure all the student athletes stay on scholarship.
 

I think it is possible.

The U unlike some schools has made a commitment to have a lot of sports and worked hard to do so.
 

I think it is possible.

The U unlike some schools has made a commitment to have a lot of sports and worked hard to do so.

I have been under the impression that the U has been trying to support a lot more sports then some of our counterparts but a quick look at some of the Big Ten shows otherwise.

Minnesota lists 23 sports (11 men's - 12 women's)
Wisconsin also has 23 with the same ratio. Main difference is they have men's rowing and we have baseball
Iowa - 22 (10/12 split)
Michigan - 27 (13/14 split)
Ohio State - Lists a number of what I think are probably club sports but looks to have close to 30 mainstream sports with a pretty even split.

Not sure how we compare nationally but in the Big Ten we seem pretty in line with the rest of the conference.
 


As football will be played this fall this discussion is not useful. The U, like all P5 conferences, will not pass on $75million.
 

As football will be played this fall this discussion is not useful. The U, like all P5 conferences, will not pass on $75million.

The decision to play at all (and if so with fans) may not be up entirely to the "U". Even if fans are allowed, they may be at a much less percentage (due to health, travel and economic issues) which may still require cuts. Corporate sponsorship and fund raising will also likely take big hits.
 

The decision to play at all (and if so with fans) may not be up entirely to the "U". Even if fans are allowed, they may be at a much less percentage (due to health, travel and economic issues) which may still require cuts. Corporate sponsorship and fund raising will also likely take big hits.

Suggest a cut that you think would be acceptable? Additionally, I am amazed that Gopher fans do not understand how dependent the U is on TV money over all other sources of revenue.
 

Suggest a cut that you think would be acceptable? Additionally, I am amazed that Gopher fans do not understand how dependent the U is on TV money over all other sources of revenue.

Acceptable based on what? If it's based on the fact that athletic's is facing a giant budget deficit with no help from the university because they're also in financial trouble, then you have to realize that some previously thought "unacceptable cuts" would need to become acceptable. Any sport besides football, basketball, hockey, and volleyball I could see being cut. I wouldn't like it but you can't just print money if you're athletics.
 



Suggest a cut that you think would be acceptable? Additionally, I am amazed that Gopher fans do not understand how dependent the U is on TV money over all other sources of revenue.
I totally get how much TV revenue accounts for the Gopher athletic budget. However, the other revenue streams (attendance, merch, corporate sponsors) still account for tens & tens of millions of bucks to get to $123million total.

Specific cuts? Above my pay grade. Looks like Coyle is on it.

 

I have been under the impression that the U has been trying to support a lot more sports then some of our counterparts but a quick look at some of the Big Ten shows otherwise.

Minnesota lists 23 sports (11 men's - 12 women's)

Wisconsin also has 23 with the same ratio. Main difference is they have men's rowing and we have baseball
Iowa - 22 (10/12 split)
Michigan - 27 (13/14 split)
Ohio State - Lists a number of what I think are probably club sports but looks to have close to 30 mainstream sports with a pretty even split.

Not sure how we compare nationally but in the Big Ten we seem pretty in line with the rest of the conference.
Indoor track isn't usually listed on athletics websites as a separate sport, but it is allowed to be counted as a separate sports by the NCAA. So with the men's/women's indoor teams, is where we get to the official number of 25.
 

If there aren't seasons, there won't be travel costs, a lot of other expenses (jerseys, laundry, food, etc.) won't exist. I would like to see the University just cover the expense of scholarships (as I've argued elsewhere, that is funny money since most costs are fixed). If that happens the athletic department should be fine for a year. If there are games, most of the revenue is from TV anyway, so it won't take a ton to keep solvent.
I like this idea, on paper.

But it would take some kind of waiver or allowance by the NCAA. Because, each sport as a minimum number of competitions/games that it has to participate in, by rule, in order to count towards the minimum number of sponsored sports that a school has to sponsor to qualify for Division I/FCS/FBS.

I'm sure the NCAA would allow it, if that was needed, so long as it was understood that it was a special, one-year deal.


They would still need to honor the salaries of the employees, as well. But it would still save a chunk of cost. For sports that bring in little to no revenue - do they even charge people to get in at swim, tennis, golf, track/CC, gymnastics meets? - that would legitimately be a savings. For sports that do bring in revenue, you'd have to do the cost/benefit analysis.


As far as your "funny money" comment, it just depends on the viewpoint. If you were talking about tuition waivers for athletes, I think you'd be more correct. But the way the system is setup now, it's as if the athletics dept brings in its own revenue, isolated from the school, and it does indeed pay the school the respective costs for its athletes to attend.
 

I totally get how much TV revenue accounts for the Gopher athletic budget. However, the other revenue streams (attendance, merch, corporate sponsors) still account for tens & tens of millions of bucks to get to $123million total.

Specific cuts? Above my pay grade. Looks like Coyle is on it.


TV is three fifths of the total budget. This is why I am certain the football, BB and men's hockey games will be played this year even if no fans are allowed all year in all sports.
 



Acceptable based on what? If it's based on the fact that athletic's is facing a giant budget deficit with no help from the university because they're also in financial trouble, then you have to realize that some previously thought "unacceptable cuts" would need to become acceptable. Any sport besides football, basketball, hockey, and volleyball I could see being cut. I wouldn't like it but you can't just print money if you're athletics.

I agree compleatly. I just think when a person names the sports to be cut it quickly becomes clear that cutting that particular sport will not be allowed, thus, the football games will be played to avoid that disaster, fans or no fans. If you name the sports you think could be cut I will tell you why they will not be cut. Title IX alone will protect those sports which bring in the least income. How about the men's baseball team? How about wrestling? Etc. Just not going to happen when compared to the relative ease of playing football for TV money.
 

I think the second-tier and non-revenue sports will all be looked at closely. I worry most about baseball. That seems to have become a largely "southern" sport in the national scheme of things.
 

Do you have any idea the logistics of playing football in the middle of a pandemic?
All of the players, coaches, trainers etc etc would have to be tested frequently for the virus and positive players isolated as well as their contacts and that would have persist during the whole season. And every opposition team would have to go through the same protocol.
It is hard enough to fill the stadium now. How many people are going to risk their health and their lives and those of their friends and families to sit in the stadium and watch a game?
The AD budget also depends on fan's ticket money.
 

Do you have any idea the logistics of playing football in the middle of a pandemic?
All of the players, coaches, trainers etc etc would have to be tested frequently for the virus and positive players isolated as well as their contacts and that would have persist during the whole season. And every opposition team would have to go through the same protocol.
It is hard enough to fill the stadium now. How many people are going to risk their health and their lives and those of their friends and families to sit in the stadium and watch a game?
The AD budget also depends on fan's ticket money.
These are valid questions/concerns, but not at all insurmountable or impossible.

They will be done, by every Big Ten team.

If the St Paul Saints can figure out how to get some fans in the stands, I have no doubt that Big Ten athletics departments can figure it out.

F8j9Bin.png



I guarantee you, the tickets will be purchased. People have had enough, and most people largely do not believe there is any real risk of death to themselves or family members, just at worse maybe a bad cold for a few days.
 

If the football games aren't played and if the TV contract payments are dependant on those games being played (which you'd think they would be), there will have to be massive cuts in athletic programs across the country. Many schools were having a difficult time as it was, and this will push many over the edge.
 

For those wondering how many varsity sports each team in the Big Ten sponsors, here is a great visual aid:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Ten_Conference#Men's_sponsored_sports_by_school
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Ten_Conference#Women's_sponsored_sports_by_school

Big Ten averages and Minnesota:

Men:
Big Ten avg - 11.07 teams (+ 0.64 teams outside conf)
Minnesota - 12 teams (+ 0)

Women:
Big Ten avg - 12.5 teams (+ 1.21 teams outside conf)
Minnesota - 12 teams (+ 1, women's ice hockey)
 

These are valid questions/concerns, but not at all insurmountable or impossible.

They will be done, by every Big Ten team.

If the St Paul Saints can figure out how to get some fans in the stands, I have no doubt that Big Ten athletics departments can figure it out.

F8j9Bin.png



I guarantee you, the tickets will be purchased. People have had enough, and most people largely do not believe there is any real risk of death to themselves or family members, just at worse maybe a bad cold for a few days.
Most people, that is 65% of the population believe that relaxing the isolation guidelines right now is not a good idea. And people who think being infected with the the pandemic virus are certain to only have the sniffles are not "most" people and those that do think that are living in the magical thinking world ofTrump.
 

Most people, that is 65% of the population believe that relaxing the isolation guidelines right now is not a good idea. And people who think being infected with the the pandemic virus are certain to only have the sniffles are not "most" people and those that do think that are living in the magical thinking world ofTrump.

That’s fine. Those 65% can stay home, and the rest can go to the game. That should work out quite well for a distancing plan in the stadium.
 

I had Corona want to talk to my doctor about it she said most people get in very mild symptoms like I had it is normally the older people that have issues. I had chest congestion excessive phlegm and several mild headache a day
 

Most people, that is 65% of the population believe that relaxing the isolation guidelines right now is not a good idea. And people who think being infected with the the pandemic virus are certain to only have the sniffles are not "most" people and those that do think that are living in the magical thinking world ofTrump.
We could have some unproductive argument about what "most" means and what the stats are for this moment, in early May.

I'm not interested in that, though.

I stand by my opinion. By the time late August rolls around, there will be more than enough people willing to accept the "risks" of going to the stadium, wearing masks, distancing, etc.

Guessing stadium capacity will be around 15-20% of normal, so it will have no problem selling out.


You're welcome to your opinion, just as you are welcome to watch the game from home on TV.
 

There is no substitute for experimentation.
If the AD and the University President think it would be the right thing to do to have fans in the stands - which I doubt they will do- then it will be an interesting social experiment to see how many show up wearing masks a practicing distance.
As you might expect I will not be among them.
 

There is no substitute for experimentation.
If the AD and the University President think it would be the right thing to do to have fans in the stands - which I doubt they will do- then it will be an interesting social experiment to see how many show up wearing masks a practicing distance.
As you might expect I will not be among them.
How can it possibly be the right thing for the St Paul Saints (and probably the Vikings, Wild, etc.) but not right for the Gophers?

Nonsense. *My opinion*
 

I think the second-tier and non-revenue sports will all be looked at closely. I worry most about baseball. That seems to have become a largely "southern" sport in the national scheme of things.

Baseball is almost assuredly safe. Gophers are the best program in Big Ten history, with the winningest coach in Big Ten history, and have a relatively new on-campus $8 million stadium. Baseball operates in debt year to year, but chopping the program would not make up for a $14-70 million dollar revenue shortfall.

As for baseball being largely a southern sport, that is true, and likely won't change. However, the Big Ten is improving and at least competing. Indiana was in the CWS recently, Michigan was a win away from winning the national title a year ago, and the Gophers are two years removed from a Super Regional appearance.
 

Baseball is almost assuredly safe. Gophers are the best program in Big Ten history, with the winningest coach in Big Ten history, and have a relatively new on-campus $8 million stadium. Baseball operates in debt year to year, but chopping the program would not make up for a $14-70 million dollar revenue shortfall.

As for baseball being largely a southern sport, that is true, and likely won't change. However, the Big Ten is improving and at least competing. Indiana was in the CWS recently, Michigan was a win away from winning the national title a year ago, and the Gophers are two years removed from a Super Regional appearance.

I hope you are right.
 

Baseball is almost assuredly safe. Gophers are the best program in Big Ten history, with the winningest coach in Big Ten history, and have a relatively new on-campus $8 million stadium. Baseball operates in debt year to year, but chopping the program would not make up for a $14-70 million dollar revenue shortfall.

As for baseball being largely a southern sport, that is true, and likely won't change. However, the Big Ten is improving and at least competing. Indiana was in the CWS recently, Michigan was a win away from winning the national title a year ago, and the Gophers are two years removed from a Super Regional appearance.

Baseball & Softball fill up a substantial amount of spring programming normally on BTN/ESPN, maybe that makes them a bit safer from being cut.
 

Just my guess, but a lot of men's and woman's gymnastics teams aren't going to make it through this.
 

Just my guess, but a lot of men's and woman's gymnastics teams aren't going to make it through this.

They would be the most likely cuts at Minnesota, in my opinion. Neither has any type of recent long-term investment venue. Men's/Women's Track & Field just a got a brand new stadium ($13 million), men's/women's golf just got a fancy expensive simulator ($4 million). Hard to invest like that and then drop the sport.

Nothing like that in men's/women's gymnastics. That said, when the overall athletic budget is $125 million per year and dropping men's/women's gymnastics might save you $2 million per year, is that really a solution to much?
 




Top Bottom