2008 contributions
- UT's athletic department transfers to general university programs
- $1.375 million - academic scholarships for non-athletes
- $1.125 million - parking garage debt service
- $1.528 million - to cover arena budget deficit
- $97,000 - admissions office/enrollment services
- $240,000 - cover Gibbs Hall deficit
- $155,000 - annual maintenance and employee salary for use of UT plane
- Source: UT Athletic Department
University of Tennessee officials are discussing how the athletic departments could increase efficiency and possibly generate more funding for academics as the UT system grapples with a projected state funding shortfall of at least $66 million.
UT President John Petersen has asked athletic directors Mike Hamilton and Joan Cronan to form a team to examine efficiencies in their departments, while UT trustee Doug Horne says the athletic departments should streamline to give more funding to academics.
"We have to look at all matters during these troubled times so everyone can be more efficient," Horne said. "The athletic department is not exempt - it is part of the university."
As the UT system prepares for the budget shortfall, which represents a 13-percent drop in state funding, Petersen said in an interview with the News Sentinel editorial board last week that his request to the athletic directors "makes sense in looking at what the athletic department can do to help academic programs."
UT is one of the few universities where the athletic department supports itself and contributes to academics, UT officials said.
"The athletic department has a separate budget and supports itself, but it could become more efficient and streamlined so it could get more for the academic side," Horne said.
A new Southeastern Conference television contract that takes effect July 1 will mean the athletic department is "going to do more" for academics, Hamilton said. He said he could not comment on the amount of funding, but he said he has begun conversations with campus leaders to determine "where and how we might have some further impact on campus through some of these dollars. …
"We are committed firmly to finding a way to provide some of that new resource toward campus initiatives," he said. "I don't think that's our place to say where that goes - I think that's the president's and chancellor's place to say where it goes."
In fiscal 2008, the UT athletic department generated a net surplus of about $5.04 million before making transfers of $4.54 million to support the UT system and Knoxville campus programs. Its operating budget is $87.8 million. Surplus funds go into what is "essentially a rainy-day fund" for the department, spokeswoman Tiffany Carpenter said.
UT says its athletics operation is among fewer than 10 departments in the country that receive no funds from state subsidies or taxes.
"I don't think there's an athletic program in this league that has done as much for the university yet gotten less credit for it - I really firmly believe that," Hamilton said. "We have historically been very much involved in being an integral part of campus life and also being a partner in relation to the financial side of the equation - much more so, in my opinion, than others in the Southeastern Conference."
Hamilton said the athletic department spends $1.375 million per year on academic scholarships for 2,400 non-athletes. In the fall, the athletic department asked staff to cut $2.5 million from the budget, "which we've done," Hamilton said.
Additionally, Hamilton said the department will give net proceeds from the spring football game to campus. He said tickets have been free for the last three years. "If fans respond to (new coach) Lane Kiffin's first spring game, I think we'll be able to give a nice-sized check (to campus)," he said.
UT-Knoxville Faculty Senate President John Nolt, who sees Neyland Stadium's Jumbotron on during the day and calls it a "visible reminder" of "unnecessary" athletic department spending, said he favors the separation of athletic and academic budgets.
But, he said, "they're very wealthy over there. I certainly would appreciate any help athletics can give us."
Horne, chairman of the Committee on Effectiveness and Efficiency for the Future, said suggestions from the UT community include eliminating "a sport or two."
"Since the athletic department is a separate part of the university's budget, the elimination of sports becomes difficult," Hamilton said.
UT-Knoxville has 20 sports. In order to be a member of Division I-A, Hamilton said a university must have at least six team sports and, as a general rule, the league tries to have two more women's sports than men's. Removal of certain sports, such as rowing and volleyball, has Title IX implications, he said.
"The elimination of sports has significant political ramifications and historical ramifications as it relates to our tradition, so we'd be changing our competitive model as it relates to our peers in the Southeastern Conference," he said.
Another efficiency suggestion was to consolidate men's and women's athletics. Hamilton manages men's sports programs and Cronan manages women's sports programs.
"While there are a few support functions that might be perceived from the outside as duplicative in nature, we have a lot of our support functions that are already consolidated," Hamilton said. "I think we have an obligation to always continue to look for those places where that makes sense, and that's what we'll be doing during this time that Dr. Petersen has suggested."
Chloe White may be reached at 865-342-6341.
Rocky Top League opening night
Old school: Archived photos of UT…
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 35
memvol writes:
first
whybenegative writes:
i undertstand looking at all ways to save money but cutting sports shouldnt even be considered.
newtonrail writes:
Have to agree with you. Tenn's BB fans are spoiled because of last 3 years success leading to more TV exposure. Result: I have plenty of legroom and empty seats to put my coat on. I do drive an hour and a half to all Football and BB games, but not sure how much longer I can continue. I don't like a lot of things Hamilton's done or not done, but he isn't stupid. They already know BB didn't sell out completely this year, and donations are down. With the Economic mess it will only get worse. I'm not sure what to do about it, but my suggestion would be to give surplus to fund Sports at Chattanooga and Martin. At those schools money is coming from taxpayer funds. It really depends which pocket you want to take it out of, IF you have enough donations and Fannies in the Seats.
utchris writes:
Things are real lean when the athletics department can generate a 5 million surplus. Eliminate two sports? That is absurd. The AD does not have to give a kick back to the University but it does anyway and Horne wants to whine that it wants more.
For those who want to say Hamilton has run the program down with spending, you are not very smart. The guy has constantly brought in more and more revenue. You can whine all you want to about a basketball arena not being sold out, but forget how much more full it is than the Pre-Pearl Era.
With the new ESPN contract, UT's budget and possibly its surplus is only going to get better. Tennessee fans demand to win (in everything) and if you want to win with the big boys, then we are going to have to spend with the big boys!
HoustonVol writes:
What about a $1 per ticket Academic surcharge that will be funneled back to the University. That would be a donation of around $360,000 for every men's basketball season, $800,000 for every football season and around 260,000 for women's basketball. Right about $1.5 million donated directly to the school every year. That would be able to fund a few chairs, scholarships, or other positions that are being eliminated. I doubt anyone is going to not go to a game over a buck.
surfmaster writes:
That's right Petersen. Bite the hand that feeds you. While you're at it, just go ahead and bleed the program dry. All these "unnecessary extravagances" are what brings the fans to town. No fans, No dinero for academics. So do me a favor and point the cannon away from the deck, and in the meantime why don't you eliminate one or two "unnecessary" academic programs.
pdhuff#552644 writes:
Couple of 100 thou went into a anger management course while wine tasting.
Puzzlin'.
Ringside writes:
Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
jcvol#215939 writes:
We are seeing the "beginning of the end" ... entitlement attitude from Horne and Peterson .... if they would fix issues within their control we wouldn't be in this mess. Are you aware virtually every other "similarly situated state Univeristy" in the south has an early admission period and gets the cream of the crop of students committed in the fall, while UT will not tell anyone who will be admitted until March?? Care to guess where the quality students go (hint to Peterson ... those quality students end up being the leaders of tomorrow who funnel funds back into academic programs at Universities.... usually with a significant amount to where they attended).
My Alma Mater needs all the help it can get - I'm not talking the football program, I'm talking the university itself. It is as badly managed as any bankrupt financial services firm or soon to be bankrupt automobile manufacturer. Call the admissions office and talk to someone for 5 minutes .. you will swear you just talked to customer service at the phone company or the cable company.... They do not CARE about students, prospective students, alumni or the university. Look for UT to take a nosedive in any academic rankings (US News, Money, etc.)in the next few years .. mark my words it is imploding before our eyes and it starts at the top.
Now - let's go kick some Gator and Elephant BUTT!!
rockytopfrog writes:
Typical comment by an academic
"UT-Knoxville Faculty Senate President John Nolt, who sees Neyland Stadium's Jumbotron on during the day and calls it a "visible reminder" of "unnecessary" athletic department spending, said he favors the separation of athletic and academic budgets.
But, he said, "they're very wealthy over there. I certainly would appreciate any help athletics can give us.""
I bet he voted for Obama too. Nothing like wanting things to be seperate but still wanting someone elses stuff. Typical.
And for the rest of you who want to see a winner but don't want to pay for it, you all must be liberals too. I am sure you can't wait until Tuesday.
I for one am willing to see a winner on the field and know that it does take spending money in order to make money or in this case win. I'm sure there are areas of improved efficiencies, but the UTAD does a lot for UT without any laws saying it has to.
One last thing you all must remember, when we're talking about UT sports, we mean football and basketball and those aren't exactly amateur sports anymore. This is a business we're talking about.
Go Vols!!!
john#208876 writes:
Can you say Golden Goose? I've coached at three schools in the SEC (MSU, AL, UT) and I can tell you that the UTAD does an unbelievable job with finances. They have a large budget yes, but they also use it wisely. They have created a competitive edge, while giving back to the Academic side more than any other school in the SEC, without receiving any state funding; that's virtually unheard of in college athletics. Could they be more frugal? Sure; at first glance the most obvious would be the separate Men's & Women's department structure, but there's less duplication than you might think. I just hope they don't cut sports, and don't make it any less affordable to see the Vols than it already is. Thanks to all the donors out there who help keep UT competitive. And to the ones that want to kill the Golden Goose, think what the financial status of the UT system would be without UT Athletics!
arkyvol writes:
ohmygod! you mean there's still a university attached to the volunteer athletic department. i guess i've been reading these comments too long.
SFOrange writes:
Its a no-brainer (or perhaps not) that UTAD exists because the University exists, not the other way around. So "supporting academics" is a requirement in this symbiotic relationship. UT(K) academics and infrustruction need to push forward (progressively) and UTAD should always "do more" and "get the credit" (ah, Hamilton sorry you don't get the love) for it.
We've just been thru a very public hiring of the coaching staff for one sport--where millions (literally) are being spent because UTAD believes thats what it takes to win. What if the State and Board of Governors took the same approach with all other aspects @ The Hill? What would happen if UT moved forward agressively and spent in "hard times"? We'd all win. A strong, vibrant, optimistic UT would support a strong, vibrant UTAD.
Go Vols! (and every time you think that or say that--think of the U as a whole).
SFOrange writes:
BTW--The Campaign for Tennessee is were WE can support the Vols too. Go to www.utk.edu and find The Campaign for Tennessee on the home page. We are UT. Go Vols.
budd#207344 writes:
Tell Horne to eliminate state reps from having flags raised up and down flag poles for their d**n egos. Trying to get money out of athletics while the state wastes money on things like this is a worthless joke. Horne and the rest of these losers need to get their own houses in order. Fire some of the sixty odd UT VPs and directors and concentrate on teaching.
The state is responsible for funding the university system NOT UT fans.
budd#207344 writes:
I can only assume you are a uga graduate. Or a high school dropout. Comparing UT academic facilites to Florida or Vandy is stupid. Florida is a much richer state than TN and Vandy is a private institution. Even ga has more money (and a state income tax). Yet their facilities are not as good as UT. There are no other SEC schools that outdo UT and I visit the campuses every year. The problem is the state legislature and their redneck attitude to anything they might think is above them. And the utter failure of the peterson administration. We need a new UT president and a set of representatives that can see past the end of their nose. But due to fan support and Title IV the athletics program will survive. So go pedal your lies on Watchugalickhimself.com
gohawks1 writes:
The University doesn't have the advantage of dropping several sports without considering Title IX implications. Gender equality rights also apply to sports.
serenehunter#668900 writes:
Mike"Play Money" Hamilton is talking damage control now. Giving school money from Spring football game is a cute idea but this is the same guy who stiffed students for an extra million dollars on their home game football tickets. his policies are designed to squeeze and beg for money to be directed towards athletic department. School needs to clean house , set up streamlined management do away with Title of athletic Director ( No one person should be allowed control and make dumb decisions) Trim fat from AD dept. Also, what's with this job titled "Director of Player and Student relations? How many hours do you think this guy actually spends in his office? Come on. Mike"Play Money" Hamiltons Achilles Heal: No PR skills. He cooked his own goose!
budd#207344 writes:
I'm Sorry. You are not a uga grad or dropout. You are a TN state representative.That explains everything
deakinbi writes:
Peterson continues to be demonstrate what a poor University President he has become. This is a not-so-clever attempt to show some support to the learning institution, when he and the AD have clearly put Football and BB well ahead of the learning mission at UT.
Trying anouther AD who might be a bit more concerned with the whoie university would be a good first step.
CoverOrange writes:
Out of over 300 schools with athletic programs only 17 operate in the black. The rest require the school to give money TO the athletic department. That UTAD gives to UTK is not only laudable but unique.
There are many that decry how athletic teams have overshadowed the "true" purpose of universities; to provide education. How is an "athletic scholarship" a scholarship? No degrees in football, basketball or rowing are offered at any institution I know of. A student on a music scholarship studies music do they not? Is there Basketball 101?
The true purpose of any endeavour, even noble ones, is the opportunity to make money, for the school and for the student (in a post schooling career). Footballers have a chance, though slight, at the NFL, basketballers, in the NBA. What professional career does a swimmer have to look forward to? Is there a professional rowing league? I say cut these type of programs where the athlete is not being trained in some productive field.
You might make the arguement that athletes on scholarship are receiving education as doctors, lawyers, engineers that they might not otherwise have had a chance at if it weren't for swimming or rowing scholarships. Bull. How many other non-swimmers or non-rowers were denied because slots were filled? Give scholarships to those that earn them academically.
Beyond that, the NFL, the NBA and the WNBA should pony up for their respective farm systems.
ggriggs939#223122 writes:
The old adage "Physician, Heal Thyself" would appear to be appropriate here. It is about time that academia and the University in particular realize that it cannot provide a
separate cirriculum for every individual. An individual's growth and maturity are reflected in his ability to utilize the basics to advance himself in the society.
turner_c writes:
Perhaps the Trustees and President should look in the mirror. Their conscious decisions have resulted in the flagship school losing it's status as the most populous campus to MTSU. This decision to limit enrollment by limiting growth has also restricted revenue. No big deal in a booming economy with state coffers full from business growth. Many supporters of UT athletics donate funds to both, but this is a slippery slope administrators are walking right now, and not all UT athletics supporters are UT graduates or supporters. The cost of attending UT athletic events are around the max the current economy can support and get 100,000 plus into Neyland and 20,000 plus into TBA consistently. UT athletics has already priced itself out of many families budgets.
Truth is, the taxpayers are paying for the university, but athletics are self-supporting and don't receive a penny of taxpayer money. Comparing the two is rediculous, just jealousy over the difference in public and private organizations. I suggest the "intellectual" team stop complaining about UT athletics financial success and start working as hard and intelligently to get your own financial house in order. As I recall, the "intellectual" team just agreed to pay a significant buyout to the last Chancellor and also denigrated a major donor. A tad more expensive than leaving some light on at Neyland. If these brillant folks can't get their jobs done with the resources available, perhaps it's time for the Governor to clean house with the "intelluctual" staff like Hamilton just did with the FB staff.
richvol writes:
The talk of eliminating a couple of sports is actually academic speak for dropping some men's sports. UT cannot drop any women's sports for fear of maintaining the title IX balance.
An earlier post mentioned the ridiculous number of curricula offered and the staff required to support same. It's gotten totally out of control.
This is a classic case of the have nots wanting to take what the haves enjoy. The reason the athletic department is successful is because it is run like a business. The school is run by academics and politicians...need I say more.
Oh for the days of Andy Holt and Dr. Boling and Johnson.
Chartervol writes:
Some challenges for those espousing conventional wisdom.
One. Tennessee taxpayers aren't paying for as much as they think they are. They pay for nothing at UTAD, and only about a fourth of the budget on the academic side. "Taxpayers" need to pipe down.
Two. The more a state-aided university relies on state funds, the weaker it is academically. Sounds wrong but look: the state pays for about one fourth of academics at UT, two-thirds at the directional universities, and just about 100 percent at the community colleges. Which would you rather attend?
Three. You don't measure the success of a school by how many undergrads you can pack into it. I was at MTSU Friday. It has a larger undergraduate enrollment than UT Knoxville, but it is a dump. More students mean more fuding? No. More students mean more underfunding.
Four. UT's infrastructure is getting better, not worse. They just redid Alumni Gym, the biology building and Glocker. All very nice. They've spent millions on "curb appeal." The brick and stone entrances are first class, the pedestrian mall is an improvement, and the parking garages on the perimiter of the campus have decongested the place. They overhauled and expanded the law school. They just opened a brand new plant biotech building on the ag campus. They just bought Volunteer Hall and redid the old married student apartments on Laurel Ave. for sorority use. Ayres Hall needs to be next, is about all that's lagging.
Five. Mike Hamilton is not just "spending money." He is investing money to bring more success. What would the athletics budget look like if he hadn't improved the venues? UTAD is the most entrepreneurial, free-enterprise setup on the campus, and needs to be emulated, not looted.
Six. "Fannies in seats" is overrated. Television is where the money is. Neyland Stadium will eventually seat in the 80,000 range. Most of the seats will be chair backed with club amenities, and generate more money than the current 15 inches of bare aluminum.
Seven. UT sports are not operated for the convenience of local folks looking for cheap entertainment.
I'm not blindly touting everything UT. There are a bunch of problems. There needs to be one athletics department, period. They also need to clean house in Andy Holt Tower. The National Alumni Association is dead wood. I have problems with the "UT System." Martin and Chattanooga don't need UTAD money, they need to be in the Board of Regents System.
sayhitomaggie writes:
Is John Peterson seriously getting onto the athletic department for not giving enough money to the university? I swear each day this man proves to me he is dumber than a box of hammers. The atheletic department supports itself and while I would like it if they gave more money to the entire university (O/W ticket price is a fantastic idea IMO), I would not complain to the AD for not being "supportive enough" and what not. And while leaving the lights on in Neyland is pretty pricey on its own (and I certainly did not want a two week reminder of the Florida game everytime I looked outside of the gym window) scaring off and angering huge university donors (as Peterson's wife has done) and removing the 12 hour tuition cap (making it impossible to graduate in 4 years unless you're willing to pay a lot more money) is going to do more damage to the university financially.
Cutting other athletic programs is out of the question. The more successful the university is in any and every field, it brings more attention as well as money to the university. So what if sports like tennis or swimming do not generate the sort of buzz that football and basketball do? It does not make them THAT much less significant. Not too many people care about the fact that our tennis team was ranked 8th at the beginning of the season or that the Lady Vols swim team is ranked 13th and is undefeated at the moment (and produced a Beijing silver medalist from last season) but it brings attention to the university and Mike Hamilton being an AD knows this and would not want to cut any athletic programs.
*sigh* I really hope that John Peterson's years as UT president is coming to a close.
TommyJack writes:
A well reasoned post. Are you sure you're on the right site?
Ringside writes:
Maybe you're not.
jcvol#215939 writes:
And Jack Reese.
utchris writes:
I believe they call that the Vandy model and it has really vaulted them right to the top of the SEC..haha
You can say what you will about Hamilton, but you can not deny the fact that no matter how he does it, he has steadily increased revenue and profit in the AD.
Also, you can read whatever you want into the different titles that people hold, but it does not mean that they do nothing. A lot of the titles are created as ways to bridge two different jobs. Generally with football, you are allowed only to have 9 listed coaches, but some of these support people are very valuable assets to the program. You would be amazed at how much they do.
Finally, until you have been apart of a program of this magnitude and been behind the scenes, you have no way of making a valid assessment of the the ways things are done.
utchris writes:
Actually that 17 out of 300 number is a little misleading. While in college (this decade), I took a couple of sports management classes. In one of them, we examined this very statistic that you mentioned. At the time is was only about 5 schools. However, the vast majority of the numbers were taken without any numbers to back them up. When you looked at the numbers, there was only 1 school that actually operated in the black and that was Tennessee. Ohio St. for example had always claimed to operate in the black, but they did this by shifting around some of the numbers. I beleive that we found TN only profited about 100K that year, which was what they reported. So if they have translated that into 5 mill in the last 5 or 6 years, then things are really looking up. Especially considering the budget has gone up at least 10 mill over that time. The thing that really benefited UT was that the Lady Vols netted a profit whereas almost every other program in the country reported a loss there (I think UCONN was the other but there FB was losing money).
As far as the smaller sports, they lose money for the most part, but still bring in their set of fans and donors in their own right. The common fan may not understand why UT would have a sport like Rowing, but the AD sees it as a way to really of set Title IX requirements.
While Horne wants to cut a sport or two, he would really flip if he knew that Hamilton has mentioned to some donors that he wants to add Men's Soccer and Women's Lacrosse in the very near future. It would have been slated as early as next year, but I do think that it will be slowed down bc of the budget issues.
Anybody out there know if Horne receives any compensation or perks for his position?
CoverOrange writes:
UTChris, good info and I knew that there was more to the story. I had gotten the 17 of 300 from a local editorial but I knew some of the background you mentioned from other articles in the past year or two. Like some institutions don't actually have an athletic dept, and many private schools don't publish their budgets.
That Tennesse is the only truly AD operating in the black sheds light on why Hamilton pulled the trigger on Fulmer so easily.
Is rowing a female only sport at UT? I applaud the advances that have been brought about by Title IX but at some point you have to ask how does rowing advance one's career? (rowing is just an example sport, the dollars spent on rowing probably are just a spit in the pool compared to, say, swimming)
sayhitomaggie writes:
I think that there's a Men's Rowing team but not as an actual NCAA sport but a club sport (which there are TONS of those at UT). I like the idea of adding a Men's Soccer team and Women's Lacrosee. We're one of the few school that do not have a Men's Soccer team and I am just personally a big lacrosse fan. :-)
But that's beside the point. Just because a person does not turn pro in the specific sport that they play in college does not mean it doesn't "advance their career" What about the players that strive to become coaches or become physical therapists or doctors for athletes? This experience in college can't duplicated in any other way other than a collegiate sports experience. And if that's the approach that the AD will be taking that "only if they will advance their careers" then stop letting walk-ons on the football team. The aren't all going to the NFL afterwards so why are there 100 plus players on the roster when only about 40 (at the MOST) play? It's a two way street and you have to look at all the aspects of it before wanting to cut any sports. Hell if anything downsize the football team, then technically you could cut out a few women's sports without intruding upon Title IX but no one wants that to happen (myself included) and Hamilton knows this which is why insteading of proposing adding two sports not cutting a few. There's a reason that he is the AD and not that Horne guy.
CoverOrange writes:
Maggie,
Thanks for the info on rowing.
To clear up some discussion points:
1. I was talking about opportunity to play pro, not just the few that will. Nobody, no matter how good they are, will ever go pro in rowing.
2. Walk-ons pay their own way so they are like any other student. Sports are a sidelight, not the reason they are there.
3. If athletes strive to become coaches, physical therapists or sports medicine, then give scholarships specifically for that based on academics. I'm sure there are plenty of good doctors, therapists, coaches that weren't gifted athletes.
If UTAD can afford a men's soccer team and/or lacrosse, go for it. But decide what it is that you are really trying to accomplish: to give an education or to be entertained?
Volgrad777 writes:
AreyouKiffinme, Are you kiddin me??? Ludicrous to think that basketball and football are the only two sports to survive. The athletic dept will continue to do well and thrive because of that success. The smaller sports will continue to reap the benefits of the football and basketball teams. Possibly one minor sport gets cut and that at most is doubtful. Folks are losing jobs , yup its happening , generally because they just arent turning a profit. The athletic department generally has large surplus's. I challenge you to show me the next time basketball and football attendance isnt up to snuff. With Kiffin its back to sold out games again , basketball sells out. Folks will still attend games just as they have in the past and just as they will in the future.
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.