OU votes to raise (tuition) Heupel/Novell coaching salaries

[badger]

$350k each.

Linky (http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/OU/article.aspx?subjectid=92&articleid=20120626_92_0_ARDMOR974264)

If you are fans of OU womens basketball, baseball or softball, those coaches all got extensions too.

Stay tuned as tuition goes up again. The state regents already approved it, so it's probably just a formality at this point...

[cccasooner2]

Do the professors get a raise too, or is the Lizard gone for good?

[agoo758]

Do the professors get a raise too, or is the Lizard gone for good?

Reminds me.... where IS he??

[goingoneight]

Well, at least our offense didn't have any problems last year. [/chicken little]

[SoonerBBall]

As always when these things come up, the OU Athletic Department is wholly funded by its own activities. Tuition raises have nothing to do with sports.

Also, from TFA itself:

"University President David Boren pointed out that although the raises were granted on the same day the university raised tuition prices, the athletic department is not only self-sufficient but will provide $5.7 million to the academic side — a total he believes to be either the most or second-most at universities across the country."

[kbsooner21]

Reminds me.... where IS he??

Who cares?

[yermom]

he disappeared with Osama. i'm not sold on the idea that it was a coincidence.

[badger]

As always when these things come up, the OU Athletic Department is wholly funded by its own activities. Tuition raises have nothing to do with sports.

Also, from TFA itself:

"University President David Boren pointed out that although the raises were granted on the same day the university raised tuition prices, the athletic department is not only self-sufficient but will provide $5.7 million to the academic side — a total he believes to be either the most or second-most at universities across the country."

I love me my Sooners and my alma mater, but what I think is going on is OU is trying to quiet critics that say that money pit athletic programs like OU's should not be tax-exempt like the rest of the university and thus, are trying to connect the OU athletics side with the OU academics side through subsidies like the $5.7 million.

However, I think many people consider their athletic ticket purchases and donor bonuses for extra OU-Texas tickets (or to just get out of a nosebleed section) as their donation to the university and therefore, the athletic department is in the position to get a lot of money from alumni and boosters that the academic side is not. They might also consider other OU-related purchases such as OU clothing or other memorabilia as another way of giving back to the university. Does OU logo merchandise revenue go to athletics, or to the academic side? Something tells me that those revenues go to athletics, also.

Uncle Dave, you're a very nice grandpa type figure on campus who seems to love all aspects of OU, but you know that $5.7 million is a drop in the bucket. It's about time for tax-exempt status for college athletics to go away, or you'll just see athletic authorities abuse it like the Fiesta Bowl did. :(

It's time to stop raising the price of higher education annually. Maybe if Congress fails to get the student loan interest rate thing passed by July 1 the howling from tens of thousands of dollars in loan debt from tens of thousands of students will finally get too loud to bear.

[olevetonahill]

Reminds me.... where IS he??

He kept arguing with himself so much he ate his tail and disappeared

[yermom]

I love me my Sooners and my alma mater, but what I think is going on is OU is trying to quiet critics that say that money pit athletic programs like OU's should not be tax-exempt like the rest of the university and thus, are trying to connect the OU athletics side with the OU academics side through subsidies like the $5.7 million.

However, I think many people consider their athletic ticket purchases and donor bonuses for extra OU-Texas tickets (or to just get out of a nosebleed section) as their donation to the university and therefore, the athletic department is in the position to get a lot of money from alumni and boosters that the academic side is not. They might also consider other OU-related purchases such as OU clothing or other memorabilia as another way of giving back to the university. Does OU logo merchandise revenue go to athletics, or to the academic side? Something tells me that those revenues go to athletics, also.

Uncle Dave, you're a very nice grandpa type figure on campus who seems to love all aspects of OU, but you know that $5.7 million is a drop in the bucket. It's about time for tax-exempt status for college athletics to go away, or you'll just see athletic authorities abuse it like the Fiesta Bowl did. :(

It's time to stop raising the price of higher education annually. Maybe if Congress fails to get the student loan interest rate thing passed by July 1 the howling from tens of thousands of dollars in loan debt from tens of thousands of students will finally get too loud to bear.

you are talking about different things. rising tuition isn't related to football.

as for tax exempt status, not all athletic departments make the money OU does. how do you determine which ones should lose exempt status?

[badger]

as for tax exempt status, not all athletic departments make the money OU does. how do you determine which ones should lose exempt status?

I would say that athletics departments that turn profit, by definition, should not be considered non-profit, but that might just cause those athletic departments to suddenly give themselves all raises or fudge the books so that they're never turning profits.

I'd have to say that everything beyond NCAA allowed scholarship costs should not be considered non-profit. For example, the cost of football tickets is not entirely tax-exempt. Why not? Because it's a football ticket, not a donation to a non-profit organization! Thus, I think it's very easy to consider some parts of a college athletics operation as for-profit and others as non-profit.

And let's face it, it's gonna happen. Governments need money now more than ever, and they can't look at money pits like college athletics without licking their chops. Might as well prepare to be taxified now rather than try to cling to non-profit status. Then again, Notre Dame's been clinging to independence when being in conference in inevitable :P

[C&CDean]

Who cares? I already got my degrees. Let the youngsters worry about it. I wanna see a monster football team again.

[yermom]

i don't think money pit means what you think it means...

and they should go after churches before college football ;)

[nativesooner]

Remember when they said "We are doing an academic enhancement fee on your season tickets so we won't have to raise tuition on these kids! If you don't like it, think of the kids!" then they raised tuition anyway? :apathy:

[badger]

Remember when they said "We are doing an academic enhancement fee on your season tickets so we won't have to raise tuition on these kids! If you don't like it, think of the kids!" then they raised tuition anyway? :apathy:

I also remember when Uncle Dave told the legislature if they raised higher education funds by X amount of dollars, they would not raise tuition that year.

And then, the Great Recession happened and like most higher ed institutions across the country, they froze tuition.... but higher ed funding was still cut as it is every year.

Food for thought: Wouldn't it be funny if like OU's tuition, that the OU football ticket cost was surpassed by all of the fees attached to it?

OU: We have the lowest tuition AND the lowest ticket prices!
Students and fans: BUT OUR FEES ARE ASTRONOMICAL!!!!!!

[BetterSoonerThanLater]

Who cares? I already got my degrees. Let the youngsters worry about it. I wanna see a monster football team again.

this ^ :^)

[MI Sooner]

I love me my Sooners and my alma mater, but what I think is going on is OU is trying to quiet critics that say that money pit athletic programs like OU's should not be tax-exempt like the rest of the university and thus, are trying to connect the OU athletics side with the OU academics side through subsidies like the $5.7 million.

However, I think many people consider their athletic ticket purchases and donor bonuses for extra OU-Texas tickets (or to just get out of a nosebleed section) as their donation to the university and therefore, the athletic department is in the position to get a lot of money from alumni and boosters that the academic side is not. They might also consider other OU-related purchases such as OU clothing or other memorabilia as another way of giving back to the university. Does OU logo merchandise revenue go to athletics, or to the academic side? Something tells me that those revenues go to athletics, also.

Uncle Dave, you're a very nice grandpa type figure on campus who seems to love all aspects of OU, but you know that $5.7 million is a drop in the bucket. It's about time for tax-exempt status for college athletics to go away, or you'll just see athletic authorities abuse it like the Fiesta Bowl did. :(

It's time to stop raising the price of higher education annually. Maybe if Congress fails to get the student loan interest rate thing passed by July 1 the howling from tens of thousands of dollars in loan debt from tens of thousands of students will finally get too loud to bear.

Do you fail to see the connection between subsidies for college attendance (loan guarantees, etc.) and increase in cost? Also if 5.7 million is a drop in the bucket, how would taking 35% of that in taxes change anything? What about the vast majority of athletic departments that are unprofitable? 35% x $0 doesn't add up to a whole lot of tax dollars.

[badger]

Do you fail to see the connection between subsidies for college attendance (loan guarantees, etc.) and increase in cost?
Nah, I don't. I think the cash cow is dying and government student loans are going to be cut back drastically soon. For example, Georgia used to fund every student with a certain GPA, regardless of income level via their lottery. When money dried up, they cut it back to just the ones that had the greatest financial need.


Also if 5.7 million is a drop in the bucket, how would taking 35% of that in taxes change anything?
I'm thinking 35 percent of about $100 million, all revenues of athletic departments, not just whatever they want to toss at academics (and is probably mostly covered by the football ticket "academic enhancement fee," anyways).



What about the vast majority of athletic departments that are unprofitable? 35% x $0 doesn't add up to a whole lot of tax dollars.
I think more programs would be in the black if there was something to reel in ballooning coaching salaries or programs were pressed to find ways to be more efficient and raise revenue.

I am not trying to knock athletics. I love football a lot. I just grumble about college financing around this time of year when regents do their annual tuition hike. The timing of coaching raises and announcements of big athletic facility projects is terrible.

In a nutshell, the system is broken. State governments can no longer afford to fully fund state higher ed institutions, so they raise tuition. Colleges are in an arms race to increase prestige through better faculty, better programs and better facilities, so they raise tuition. Students of varying income levels (or rather, their families) need more money to attend college because of rising tuition so, government provides student loans that you can practically NEVER default on, even with bankruptcy. And colleges raise tuition again, because students have a new source of income.

And unfortunately, while we're all fuming about that, college athletic programs announce better pay for already highly paid coaches :(

[Widescreen]

I would say that athletics departments that turn profit, by definition, should not be considered non-profit, but that might just cause those athletic departments to suddenly give themselves all raises or fudge the books so that they're never turning profits.
That is EXACTLY what would happen. I can assure you that if athletic departments got listed as for-profit, you would never see an athletic department make money again. The reason they're making money is because they're taking in more than they're spending. Spending would go up to match the overage. Easy. In this case, it would be penalizing academics because they wouldn't be receiving the athletic windfall.

[badger]

Just curious... what exactly IS the academic enhancement fee now for football tickets?

[soonervegas]

Coaching raises?

I guess 11-2 seasons aren't going to continue unless we pony up.

[BajaOklahoma]

My husband and sons were in Montreal earlier this month. They were entertained by the riot squads dealing with protesting students. The students are furious that tuition is going up again.
They currently pay 3,500 a year in tuition. The increase is 1,700 and will take effect in 2017.
The students didn't understand why the American tourists were pointing and laughing at them.

[badger]

My husband and sons were in Montreal earlier this month. They were entertained by the riot squads dealing with protesting students. The students are furious that tuition is going up again.
They currently pay 3,500 a year in tuition. The increase is 1,700 and will take effect in 2017.
The students didn't understand why the American tourists were pointing and laughing at them.

The rest of the world probably laughs at us when they hear we're complaining about $3.50 per gallon gas :)

[ouflak]

Our program is one of the few that make money. If I remember correctly, they get no money from the rest of the university (there was a breakdown of this in an article on money making college athletic programs). So I'm not sure how tuition rises are connected to football revenues and salaries. Not saying there perhaps isn't some kind of a loophole way it happens, but I don't see it directly.

[ouflak]

Here's a link (http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011/06/16/self-sustaining-athletic-departments-more-than-what-meets-the-eye/) to an article on 2011 athletic department revenues. The column 'Allocated revenue' is the part that comes from tuition and other university sources. OU's allocated revenue is zero.

[SoonerAtKU]

I think it's really funny that we have complaints that Athletics is making too much money. If you had asked that question in 1994-95, you would have had many more people upset that the University was paying too much to support the Athletics side of things.

You can argue that it's inflated somewhat by the fees charged, but any donation made to Athletics in the form of merchandise, tickets, or straight cash, homey is purely optional.

[nativesooner]

Just curious... what exactly IS the academic enhancement fee now for football tickets?

Dang, never answered this! It's $30 per ticket. And really that's not a whole lot, until you add up how many tickets we sell. lol!

[badger]

Dang, never answered this! It's $30 per ticket. And really that's not a whole lot, until you add up how many tickets we sell. lol!

So... do I need to do the math, or is athletic allocating exactly as much as they should be --- the $30 per ticket enhancement fee. I wonder how much, if any, beyond that fee athletics is donating back to academics. If that number is zero or close to it, I wouldn't be patting athletics on the back too much over this. Gee, you're donating the academic enhancement fee to academics? Thanks :P

[Sooner24]

So... do I need to do the math, or is athletic allocating exactly as much as they should be --- the $30 per ticket enhancement fee. I wonder how much, if any, beyond that fee athletics is donating back to academics. If that number is zero or close to it, I wouldn't be patting athletics on the back too much over this. Gee, you're donating the academic enhancement fee to academics? Thanks :P

You act like the athletic department should be funding the academic side of the house.

[badger]

You act like the athletic department should be funding the academic side of the house.

I dunno... should they be? After all, a previous poster mentioned that the academic side had to subsidize the athletic side back in the 90s and I assume that sports usually was supported by the rest of the university back in the early days, before the big TV contracts and the big stadiums. It's something to think about.

[Harry Beanbag]

This thread is retarded.

[marfacowboy]

It's time to stop raising the price of higher education annually. Maybe if Congress fails to get the student loan interest rate thing passed by July 1 the howling from tens of thousands of dollars in loan debt from tens of thousands of students will finally get too loud to bear.

I agree. It's a big, big problem nationwide.
And the fact of the matter is athletic departments do in fact help fund academic programs. I'm not sure about OU, but I know that UT Knoxville and Arkansas football revenues are what fund graduate TA's. The schools obviously have to have the revenue for academics as well as other things. But something has to be done, because most middle class families can't afford to send two or three kids to schools and pay these rates. Scholarships help, but the fact of the matter is a high percentage are taking out big loans and then can't find the jobs to pay them back after graduation. It's a real crisis.

[pphilfran]

I love me my Sooners and my alma mater, but what I think is going on is OU is trying to quiet critics that say that money pit athletic programs like OU's should not be tax-exempt like the rest of the university and thus, are trying to connect the OU athletics side with the OU academics side through subsidies like the $5.7 million.

However, I think many people consider their athletic ticket purchases and donor bonuses for extra OU-Texas tickets (or to just get out of a nosebleed section) as their donation to the university and therefore, the athletic department is in the position to get a lot of money from alumni and boosters that the academic side is not. They might also consider other OU-related purchases such as OU clothing or other memorabilia as another way of giving back to the university. Does OU logo merchandise revenue go to athletics, or to the academic side? Something tells me that those revenues go to athletics, also.

Uncle Dave, you're a very nice grandpa type figure on campus who seems to love all aspects of OU, but you know that $5.7 million is a drop in the bucket. It's about time for tax-exempt status for college athletics to go away, or you'll just see athletic authorities abuse it like the Fiesta Bowl did. :(

It's time to stop raising the price of higher education annually. Maybe if Congress fails to get the student loan interest rate thing passed by July 1 the howling from tens of thousands of dollars in loan debt from tens of thousands of students will finally get too loud to bear.

Get rid of the tax exempt status and you can kiss the 5.7 million from sports to the school goodbye...

[Soonerfan88]

So... do I need to do the math, or is athletic allocating exactly as much as they should be --- the $30 per ticket enhancement fee. I wonder how much, if any, beyond that fee athletics is donating back to academics. If that number is zero or close to it, I wouldn't be patting athletics on the back too much over this. Gee, you're donating the academic enhancement fee to academics? Thanks :P

Just a quick calculation - assuming 78000 season tickets @ $30 is $2.34M. The athletic department is donating several million more than this to academics every year.

[badger]

Just a quick calculation - assuming 78000 season tickets @ $30 is $2.34M. The athletic department is donating several million more than this to academics every year.

OK, then I'll leave them alone for now :D

I have probably been too critical of coaching salaries. It's not like any of us would turn down millions if offered them. This is all on the schools to reign in costs of both academics and athletics.

Now, if we were whorn and paying our head football coach $5 million to get 5 wins in a season (http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/mack-browns-salary-deemed-unseemly-121287.html), I would hope more people would be screaming WTF. But, as the situation is now, we are a winning program in a very competitive sport that reels in millions to support itself, as well as the non-revenues and even kicks in a little to academics.

Let's table this discussion till after this season. Then we can either praise the university or get mad at it. Based on this (http://www.philsteele.com/Blogs/2012/Mar12/DBMar15.html), we better have a kick arse season. :)

[humblesooner]

Just a quick calculation - assuming 78000 season tickets @ $30 is $2.34M. The athletic department is donating several million more than this to academics every year.

That is just one game per year. Multiply that by 6 games and you get $14 Million. By 7 games (occasionally) and you get $16.3 Million.
And why only season tickets? All tickets sold are at the same price, so every ticket has the fee included.
What is capacity now - 85,000?
These numbers now become $15.3 Million and $17.8 Million - annually.

[badger]

I actually thought it was $5 per ticket, or is it different depending on if you're a nosebleed seater or 50 yard line skybox?

[humblesooner]

I actually thought it was $5 per ticket, or is it different depending on if you're a nosebleed seater or 50 yard line skybox?

You're probably right.
I'm not a season ticket holder. I was reading it as $30/ticket. That is probably $5/ticket for 6 games = $30 per season ticket.
My bad.

[Soonerfan88]

I am invoiced an additional $30 for every season ticket I purchase and am not aware of a charge applied to individual game sales.