Forbes Ranks UoA @ 12

[HawgWild]

Forbes magazine's annual ranking of the value of big-time college athletic programs puts Arkansas, at 12th, with a value of $80 million. Are we getting our money's worth?

[ricepig]

Depends, how much are you contributing?

[HawgWild]

Tush Hog

[McKdaddy]

Tush Hog

+1

[McKdaddy]

Forbes magazine's annual ranking of the value of big-time college athletic programs puts Arkansas, at 12th, with a value of $80 million. Are we getting our money's worth?

It doesn't feel like it on the surface, but I've not looked at the various metrics to determine said ranking.

[ricepig]

Tush Hog

So, answer the question yourself, are you getting a good return on your investment?

[HawgWild]

No, I'm hoping for better. How about you?

[ricepig]

No, I'm hoping for better. How about you?

Sure I want better, but your question was our ROI. For the money I spend on donations, travel, tickets, and etc., I'm happy, or I wouldn't do it.

[HawgWild]

Actually in asking "we" I meant the program more than the individual. I think that it's generally assumed that there is some correlation between money and success. If this relationship was 1:1 then the #1 financial program would experience the #1 success in athletics. I think it speaks well of the program that we are #12 financially when not performing at that level athletically. Maybe we have lower expectations? Maybe we're long term investors?

[ricepig]

Actually in asking "we" I meant the program more than the individual. I think that it's generally assumed that there is some correlation between money and success. If this relationship was 1:1 then the #1 financial program would experience the #1 success in athletics. I think it speaks well of the program that we are #12 financially when not performing at that level athletically. Maybe we have lower expectations? Maybe we're long term investors?

I think "we" benefit from being in a state with no professional team, and also for all practical and financial implications, the only D-I program. We are also members of a conference who demands and is paid big bucks by TV. I don't think expectations enter into it for the vast majority of "investors."

[McKdaddy]

Actually in asking "we" I meant the program more than the individual. I think that it's generally assumed that there is some correlation between money and success. If this relationship was 1:1 then the #1 financial program would experience the #1 success in athletics. I think it speaks well of the program that we are #12 financially when not performing at that level athletically.

Agreed. Glad the UA athletics has the financial well-being it does, but the success on the field appears to fall short in terms of correlation.

As to Rice's point about ROI on my dollars, I'd buy tickets and make my donation regardless of the on-the-field success. It's simply what I do over the long-term, even in years when the ROI is seemingly negative.

Good discussion.

[ricepig]

I'm still wondering why the university went from budgeting nothing on sports nutrition to nearly $2 million in one year.  There may be a perfectly valid reason but it is just one of the numbers that begs for some explanation.

We are feeding them in the new Jones Center, or letting them grab a meal to go, actually pretty simple.

https://twitter.com/RazorbacksFuel/status/677940367925227520

[ricepig]

Which still suggests how was the university feeding the athletes before - on NO budget? 
Did something change financially with respect to feeding athletes in terms of the funding? 
Why is the sports budget now having to account for this (to the tune of nearly $2 million) when it did not before? 

I'm not suggesting anything sinister here, but changes like that in a revenue and expense report certainly beg for more of an explanation. 

Probably had a meal plan, or was in their "expenses" for those living off campus. The NCAA changed it in 2014.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/15/us/ncaa-athlete-meals/index.html

[ricepig]

Nueheisel thinks it's(nutrition) is a problem at UCLA.

http://coachingsearch.com/article?a=Rick-Neuheisel-rips-UCLA-explains-the-programs-biggest-problem