It is suprising considering the amount of legal fees Louisville has to pay out every year for their athletic department, right @TheDeuce?

 

That's why we have beer sales. Gotta offset that cost somehow.

That's why we have beer sales. Gotta offset that cost somehow.

 

lol.

Every program gets funds from Alumni. You think Duke is getting that much more?

 

I bet they are probably top 5, if not top 3.

That and player salaries. :banana:

 

:lol2:

That and player salaries. :banana:

 

UK saves money by not having to bail out players from jail or pay for unused schollys after player gets busted for domestic violence or drugs.

 

Suprised UL makes that much since they have to do the above mentioned.

How much revenue do you think UL gets in a season from beer sales? I'd imagine it adds a couple million.

UK saves money by not having to bail out players from jail or pay for unused schollys after player gets busted for domestic violence or drugs.

 

Suprised UL makes that much since they have to do the above mentioned.

 

Imagine how much they would've made WITHOUT all that going on?!

 

At least $30 million!

I wonder if this considers the SEC Network money. The SEC Network just started while the Big Ten Network has been around for awhile. These networks are huge money. I know several teams on the list do not have boxes now.

I read an article about a year about that spoke about how many athletic departments are subsidized by the school. Louisville was one of the schools mentioned. Last year, Louisville "profited" abut 4 or 5 million dollars from athletics. But around 8 to 10 million of their revenue came from school. So in reality, they were not making any money but actually taking money from the school. A lot of schools apparently do this. UK athletics is also subsidized by the school but only around 400K a year, while they profited around 3 million.

UK saves money by not having to bail out players from jail or pay for unused schollys after player gets busted for domestic violence or drugs.

 

Suprised UL makes that much since they have to do the above mentioned.

 

Why would a school have to pay for an unused scholarship? It's the school's money... :lol2:

 

The rest has already been covered, keep up.

I read an article about a year about that spoke about how many athletic departments are subsidized by the school. Louisville was one of the schools mentioned. Last year, Louisville "profited" abut 4 or 5 million dollars from athletics. But around 8 to 10 million of their revenue came from school. So in reality, they were not making any money but actually taking money from the school. A lot of schools apparently do this. UK athletics is also subsidized by the school but only around 400K a year, while they profited around 3 million.

 

UofL collects an "athletics fee" as part of every student's tuition. I get why it was necessary when UofL was essentially a fully commuter school that was trying to prop up a football program that didn't have anywhere near the support it needed to survive. These days it just feels not only antiquated but an unnecessary drain of addition expense on students already being asked to pay too much.

Why would a school have to pay for an unused scholarship? It's the school's money... :lol2:

 

The rest has already been covered, keep up.

 

So when Chris Jones was kicked off the team for rape, he was and is still on a scholarship. Ain't being used for a player right now. Seems unused to me

This must have just been released today. Twitter is abuzz with people who don't know how

counting works being up in arms about all the programs claiming to have made zero profit last season.

Deuce, you appear to have struck a nerve. That nerve appears to be the approximate size and shape of Eddie Sutton.

UofL collects an "athletics fee" as part of every student's tuition. I get why it was necessary when UofL was essentially a fully commuter school that was trying to prop up a football program that didn't have anywhere near the support it needed to survive. These days it just feels not only antiquated but an unnecessary drain of addition expense on students already being asked to pay too much.

 

That is true. There are a bunch of schools, mainly schools in Virginia for whatever reason, who charge students nearly 1000 dollars a year in athletic fees. UK and the rest of the SEC have very low athletic fees for students. Not sure what the exact amount is though. Not sure for U of L either.

 

It should also be noted that UL wouldn't necessarily lose money if they did not receive subsidiaries. They would adjust for this and would probably still make it work.

 

Also, When Louisville joined the ACC, I remember hearing they had the largest athletic budget of any school in the conference. Is this true?