Scrolling Headlines:

Anthropology professor holds lecture on violence and policymaking -

March 27, 2017

Student Activism Special Issue 2017 -

March 27, 2017

Congressmen McGovern and Ellison discuss progressive politics under Trump administration on Saturday -

March 27, 2017

SGA President Anthony Vitale and Vice President Lily Wallace promise to improve assistance to student activists next year -

March 27, 2017

Editor’s note: UMass works because they do -

March 27, 2017

The UMass club that is un-beelievable -

March 27, 2017

Interview with Ghazah Abbasi, Sanctuary Campus Movement organizer -

March 27, 2017

Association of Diversity in Sport draws competition in FIFA Tournament -

March 27, 2017

UMass men’s lacrosse falls to Brown University in OT thriller -

March 27, 2017

Real Estate finds tranquility, but breaks little new ground on ‘In Mind’ -

March 27, 2017

UMass baseball takes series behind two straight wins over George Washington -

March 27, 2017

Letter to the Editor: Amherst should vote no on education referendum -

March 27, 2017

Make small-scale activism sexy again -

March 27, 2017

Defense holds strong for UMass men’s lacrosse in loss to Brown -

March 27, 2017

Strong second half lifts UMass women’s lacrosse past Marist, 10-7 -

March 27, 2017

Letter to the Editor: UMass alum reflects on his time at the Collegian -

March 27, 2017

Environmental journalists face challenges under Trump administration -

March 25, 2017

An open letter to the students of UMass -

March 24, 2017

Pat Kelsey informs UMass AD Ryan Bamford of change of heart just 35 minutes before scheduled press conference -

March 23, 2017

Past and present UMass football players participate in 2017 Pro Day Thursday -

March 23, 2017

Committee to evaluate finances of football program next week

Maria Uminski/Collegian

A committee formed to assess the costs associated with the football program’s move to the Football Bowl Subdivision will present a report to the University’s Faculty Senate next week evaluating the program’s budget from its inaugural season in the league.

The committee — which is composed of 19 members representing the faculty, administration and student body — was established by the Faculty Senate in December of last year with the aim of regularly reviewing the program’s finances. The report presented at next week’s meeting will be the first one issued by the committee since its formation.

Preliminary figures compiled by the athletic department from this past season – which was the program’s first in the league – show that expenses associated with the program totaled $7,160,339 while revenue streams, which include funding from the state and University, came in at $6,445,271. That means that the program is currently carrying a $715,068 deficit – a figure that Athletic Director John McCutcheon has largely attributed to a lag in ticket sales at Gillette Stadium in Foxborough, the team’s home field.

The football program’s decision to jump to the FBS in the Mid-American Conference has drawn fire from some faculty members — who have contended that it’s a move that will require more University funding for the program — since it was announced in April of 2011. The program, which had a 1-11 record this past season, was previously a member of the Football Championship Subdivision in the Colonial Athletic Association.

The full report by the committee will be presented to the Faculty Senate Tuesday at 3:30 p.m. in Herter 227.

Comments
2 Responses to “Committee to evaluate finances of football program next week”
  1. Dr. Ed Cutting says:

    No. Expenses from the football program actually totaled $14,320,678 — not $7,160,339 because Title IX requires that for every dollar you spend on men’s athletics, you must also spend a dollar on female athletics.

    Even if the football program was self-supporting and it raised the entire $7M itself (and actually did so, without cost-shifting to make it just look that way), there still would be the need to come up with the other $7M for the girls.

    THAT is the money that is going to cause the problem, and everyone involved — the football people, the women’s sports people — everyone would like to have us overlook this.

  2. JK says:

    “Revenue” from the university and from the state is not real revenue. It’s a subsidy.

    To understand how much football is actually costing, “revenue” cannot include funding from the state and from UMass.

    Can the Collegian find out how much the football program actually took in from real revenue, like from ticket sales, NOT INCLUDING the handouts from UMass and from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts?

Leave A Comment