vs. Aquinas College (12/7)
- Flipper
- The Global Village Idiot

- Posts: 18346
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 1:01 am
- Location: Ida Twp, MI
Re: vs. Aquinas College (12/7)
Just so long as it isn't Pride and Prejudice...Jane Austen was a ho
It's not the fall that hurts...it's when you hit the ground.
-
HoopsFan
- Peregrine

- Posts: 1133
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 1:40 pm
- Location: Quietly living in Central Ohio
Re: vs. Aquinas College (12/7)
I watched both games on Sunday. Well, they were on and I heard them in the background. The intent of the Frack money was to bring quality teams to the arena. It makes me wonder what happened to the money? Even a lower tier Big10 team might be persuaded, or Oakland or some team from Ohio or Michigan in Division 1 might do it for money.
HoopsFan
HoopsFan
Re: vs. Aquinas College (12/7)
https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/f ... budget.pdf
Well I'll take a guess. Athletic Department contract salaries were budgeted up 11.9% in FY25 and another 7.8% in FY26. Then add in the football. men's and women's basketball NIL that takes the Non-Employee Compensation up 213% in FY26. The Revenue Over Expense figure jumps (117%) in FY26.
In other words, get ready to see more games like this than less.
Well I'll take a guess. Athletic Department contract salaries were budgeted up 11.9% in FY25 and another 7.8% in FY26. Then add in the football. men's and women's basketball NIL that takes the Non-Employee Compensation up 213% in FY26. The Revenue Over Expense figure jumps (117%) in FY26.
In other words, get ready to see more games like this than less.
Re: vs. Aquinas College (12/7)
https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/pdfs/f ... 7-2025.pdf
If you want a reality check at the future of college athletics, take a look at pages 33, 34, 35 at the athletics budget for FY26.
If you want a reality check at the future of college athletics, take a look at pages 33, 34, 35 at the athletics budget for FY26.
Re: vs. Aquinas College (12/7)
What I see is a greater than 200% increase in "Non-employee salaries" which includes NIL among other things (guessing NIL is the biggest chunk of that, but no clue where they're finding money to pay anything in NIL...well I do have a clue and it's "icky?").guest44 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 15, 2025 2:30 pm https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/pdfs/f ... 7-2025.pdf
If you want a reality check at the future of college athletics, take a look at pages 33, 34, 35 at the athletics budget for FY26.
I see a much lower game guarantee revenue, but those things are fluid and given our reliance on that money we almost certainly should be attempting to play a please destroy us without injuries game every year.
I see an 100+% increase in non-gate revenues, which is probably most largely represented by the Frack endowment outperforming expectations, but no doubt a non-zero amount of Eddie George riding OSU coattails for fundraising.
End of the day though it's $7m deficit ($4m increase from the previous year's deficit). Which means the already insane $700 per student general fund cost of athletics has to go up to $1070 to balance the budget.
I'd be curious to see better sport by sport data, but we know the entirety of the NIL increases went to football and basketball; and I suspect most of that to football.
Re: vs. Aquinas College (12/7)
It's very "icky". I couldn't believe the increase in Supplies/Athletics Equipment of 22% when you have more expenses than ever, the 7.6% increase salaries & wages should probably come with some winning in this climate. I assume the majority of the NIL was for football. I do know that Campbell NIL deal is north of 100K, not sure the exact number. I assume Towns and Wol are next in order but I'm sure it's significantly less than Campbell. Last I was told the Frack money could not be used in NIL, that could have changed but as of earlier this year it could not.hammb wrote: ↑Mon Dec 15, 2025 5:02 pmWhat I see is a greater than 200% increase in "Non-employee salaries" which includes NIL among other things (guessing NIL is the biggest chunk of that, but no clue where they're finding money to pay anything in NIL...well I do have a clue and it's "icky?").guest44 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 15, 2025 2:30 pm https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/pdfs/f ... 7-2025.pdf
If you want a reality check at the future of college athletics, take a look at pages 33, 34, 35 at the athletics budget for FY26.
I see a much lower game guarantee revenue, but those things are fluid and given our reliance on that money we almost certainly should be attempting to play a please destroy us without injuries game every year.
I see an 100+% increase in non-gate revenues, which is probably most largely represented by the Frack endowment outperforming expectations, but no doubt a non-zero amount of Eddie George riding OSU coattails for fundraising.
End of the day though it's $7m deficit ($4m increase from the previous year's deficit). Which means the already insane $700 per student general fund cost of athletics has to go up to $1070 to balance the budget.
I'd be curious to see better sport by sport data, but we know the entirety of the NIL increases went to football and basketball; and I suspect most of that to football.
Re: vs. Aquinas College (12/7)
Things are fluid with this obviously, but when I left my position at a university last year, established endowments could not be used for NIL money and there were no plans for that to change at that time.guest44 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 15, 2025 5:46 pmIt's very "icky". I couldn't believe the increase in Supplies/Athletics Equipment of 22% when you have more expenses than ever, the 7.6% increase salaries & wages should probably come with some winning in this climate. I assume the majority of the NIL was for football. I do know that Campbell NIL deal is north of 100K, not sure the exact number. I assume Towns and Wol are next in order but I'm sure it's significantly less than Campbell. Last I was told the Frack money could not be used in NIL, that could have changed but as of earlier this year it could not.hammb wrote: ↑Mon Dec 15, 2025 5:02 pmWhat I see is a greater than 200% increase in "Non-employee salaries" which includes NIL among other things (guessing NIL is the biggest chunk of that, but no clue where they're finding money to pay anything in NIL...well I do have a clue and it's "icky?").guest44 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 15, 2025 2:30 pm https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/pdfs/f ... 7-2025.pdf
If you want a reality check at the future of college athletics, take a look at pages 33, 34, 35 at the athletics budget for FY26.
I see a much lower game guarantee revenue, but those things are fluid and given our reliance on that money we almost certainly should be attempting to play a please destroy us without injuries game every year.
I see an 100+% increase in non-gate revenues, which is probably most largely represented by the Frack endowment outperforming expectations, but no doubt a non-zero amount of Eddie George riding OSU coattails for fundraising.
End of the day though it's $7m deficit ($4m increase from the previous year's deficit). Which means the already insane $700 per student general fund cost of athletics has to go up to $1070 to balance the budget.
I'd be curious to see better sport by sport data, but we know the entirety of the NIL increases went to football and basketball; and I suspect most of that to football.
BG '10
Attended more games than any responsible student should have.
Attended more games than any responsible student should have.
Re: vs. Aquinas College (12/7)
Appears the Athletic Department needs some controls put into place. For a budget deficit to grow by over 3 million in one year clearly shows a lack of being a good fiduciary.
Re: vs. Aquinas College (12/7)
Is the budget growing mostly due to opting in to the revenue share system?
BGSU '20
Re: vs. Aquinas College (12/7)
There is no revenue to “share”. Instead of sharing it they paid themselves 11% more in FY25 and nearly 8% more in FY26. Who paid for a week out stroking Urban Meyer in Las Vegas?
