The NCAA's Knight Commission just released a searchable database on academic and athletic spending for all Division I schools. I have not had a chance to look at it much but thought others would like to see it.

The link to the database is here: http://spendingdatabase.knightcommission.org/

There is an article at Inside Higher Education on the database here: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013 ... c-spending

I did some comparative numbers.

http://spendingdatabase.knightcommissio ... s/85e9b1a4

http://spendingdatabase.knightcommissio ... s/5d2a67b9

http://spendingdatabase.knightcommissio ... s/5a6d03bf

Thanks guys, good reports.

Quick takeaways:

We are spending less per scholarship than our peers and our growth compared to other schools is favorable.

On the not so positive side it is time to pay down the debt before building more.

Thanks, Saint. That's what i say everytimew it is proposed to build a track on another site, lowering the field, building some seating closer to the field, tearing down Owens, or horse shoeing at one end of Kid Brewer. It's ok to have a wish list but realistic fiscal responsibility should come first.

ECU's level of athletic facility debt is just about equal to ours. The median debt on athletic facilities for FBS schools is over $33 million and under $1.5 for FCS, which at the moment includes App and any other FBS movers skewing the avg. That is a massive difference, not just in dollars, but in ideology.

GlassOnion wrote:ECU's level of athletic facility debt is just about equal to ours. The median debt on athletic facilities for FBS schools is over $33 million and under $1.5 for FCS, which at the moment includes App and any other FBS movers skewing the avg. That is a massive difference, not just in dollars, but in ideology.

I don't care to be like EZU.

JCline0429 wrote: I don't care to be like EZU.

Well let me show you my shocked face...

GlassOnion wrote:

JCline0429 wrote: I don't care to be like EZU.

Well let me show you my shocked face...

GlassOnion wrote:ECU's level of athletic facility debt is just about equal to ours. The median debt on athletic facilities for FBS schools is over $33 million and under $1.5 for FCS, which at the moment includes App and any other FBS movers skewing the avg. That is a massive difference, not just in dollars, but in ideology.

I think that's a good way to answers the question of "should App be fcs or fbs". That given our attendance, etc do we want the facilities that $1.5 in debt services brings or do we want the facilities that $33 million brings. Not that it would be at that level all the time, but I do kind of consider some amount like a car payment in that most people just expect to have one most of the time.

Saint3333 wrote:Thanks guys, good reports.

Quick takeaways:

We are spending less per scholarship than our peers and our growth compared to other schools is favorable.

On the not so positive side it is time to pay down the debt before building more.

Amen

I was watching the Rutgers/Notre Dame game lead in and I heard the announcers say the Rutgers an ND were two of only 7 non BCS bowl participants that sold their entire allotment of tickets this year.

AppSt94 wrote:I was watching the Rutgers/Notre Dame game lead in and I heard the announcers say the Rutgers an ND were two of only 7 non BCS bowl participants that sold their entire allotment of tickets this year.

It was a home game for both! (in essence)!

So was Carolina and the stadium looked Panther Blue instead of Carolina Blue.