That I want the PAC teams in the tournament to go out in flames?

IMHO yes. If the Pac-12 teams do really well it will send a message to the media companies.

The money will go to the PAC 2 in the future, but that will offset some of the charges the wayward ten will have to pay. So yes, because only money matters.

parentswerebears said:

---

Listening to the Rodcast- yeah it's really about the money. What a bummer. I'll keep following college hoops, but I can see myself losing interest at some point because it will completely lose its magic.

---

Agreed.

Forget the money. No need to root for BiG or B12 teams.

Root for ACC teams if you want. NC State won and will play a #14 seed, Oakland, on Saturday. They better not let that Oakland kid make 10 3s like he did against Kentucky today.

I'm rooting for the PAC-12 teams as our final hurrah, and so far Colorado, Arizona, Oregon and WSU have all won.

I'm having trouble seeing ourselves as ACC and rooting for teams like Duke and UNC, especially as the latter voted against us. However, I'll root for anyone playing an SEC, B1G or B-12 team.

Bobodeluxe said:

---

The money will go to the PAC 2 in the future, but that will offset some of the charges the wayward ten will have to pay. So yes, because only money matters.

---

I thought that this year's NCAA tournament money would be divided up the old way. WSU is the only Pac 2 team playing out of 4 'Pac 12' in the tournament. Am I wrong?

bipolarbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

The money will go to the PAC 2 in the future, but that will offset some of the charges the wayward ten will have to pay. So yes, because only money matters.

---

I thought that this year's NCAA tournament money would be divided up the old way. WSU is the only Pac 2 team playing out of 4 'Pac 12' in the tournament. Am I wrong?

---

The money from this years tournament will be paid out to the PAC 2 over the next few years. I think that there is 4 units that pay out this year, and x number of units that are paid out from prior years this year - so basically about the same. But for the PAC 2, the PAC 12 doing so well means that they get at least 4 units paid out next year (which will be about 16 million each I think) and possibly more the further along they go. So it could be very good for them. That and the football money is essentially what they were fighting for. I expect that WSU and OSU will have about the same funding as Cal next year from media rights.

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

The money will go to the PAC 2 in the future, but that will offset some of the charges the wayward ten will have to pay. So yes, because only money matters.

---

I thought that this year's NCAA tournament money would be divided up the old way. WSU is the only Pac 2 team playing out of 4 'Pac 12' in the tournament. Am I wrong?

---

The money from this years tournament will be paid out to the PAC 2 over the next few years. I think that there is 4 units that pay out this year, and x number of units that are paid out from prior years this year - so basically about the same. But for the PAC 2, the PAC 12 doing so well means that they get at least 4 units paid out next year (which will be about 16 million each I think) and possibly more the further along they go. So it could be very good for them. That and the football money is essentially what they were fighting for. I expect that WSU and OSU will have about the same funding as Cal next year from media rights.

---

They have not sold their media rights yet either. They will probably make more than Cal all together for the next two years, but Cal will start making more thereafter.

Good for them! They deserve it after getting screwed.

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

The money will go to the PAC 2 in the future, but that will offset some of the charges the wayward ten will have to pay. So yes, because only money matters.

---

I thought that this year's NCAA tournament money would be divided up the old way. WSU is the only Pac 2 team playing out of 4 'Pac 12' in the tournament. Am I wrong?

---

The money from this years tournament will be paid out to the PAC 2 over the next few years. I think that there is 4 units that pay out this year, and x number of units that are paid out from prior years this year - so basically about the same. But for the PAC 2, the PAC 12 doing so well means that they get at least 4 units paid out next year (which will be about 16 million each I think) and possibly more the further along they go. So it could be very good for them. That and the football money is essentially what they were fighting for. I expect that WSU and OSU will have about the same funding as Cal next year from media rights.

---

I was not a math major + lazy. What does this mean for Cal?

I always root for the Pac teams even when cal sucks. The lack of awareness of west coast teams is real.

bipolarbear said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

The money will go to the PAC 2 in the future, but that will offset some of the charges the wayward ten will have to pay. So yes, because only money matters.

---

I thought that this year's NCAA tournament money would be divided up the old way. WSU is the only Pac 2 team playing out of 4 'Pac 12' in the tournament. Am I wrong?

---

The money from this years tournament will be paid out to the PAC 2 over the next few years. I think that there is 4 units that pay out this year, and x number of units that are paid out from prior years this year - so basically about the same. But for the PAC 2, the PAC 12 doing so well means that they get at least 4 units paid out next year (which will be about 16 million each I think) and possibly more the further along they go. So it could be very good for them. That and the football money is essentially what they were fighting for. I expect that WSU and OSU will have about the same funding as Cal next year from media rights.

---

I was not a math major + lazy. What does this mean for Cal?

---

Well, Cal will get the ACC money next year. Part of what is pissing people off in the ACC who want more money is that the football and hoops money from championship competition is being further diluted by three teams - so about 20% for the rest of the ACC. And if Cal, Stanford and SMU are not going to the NCAA or the football championships, we are just taking their funds. Cal and Stanford get nothing from the old PAC 12 next year or ever again.

For the ACC, there are three sets of monies coming to Cal. The first is the tier 1 rights, which generally are 24 million dollars, but Cal is taking only 8 million for the first 5 years. Those rights increase every year for inflation, so perhaps by the time we start to get full rights, those are closer to 30 million. Then there are tier 2 rights (ACC network) which may have more money since they can now get full monies from Texas and California for the Carriage rights via ESPNs contracts. They added two big markets where the funds will be more for their media rights for the ACC networks. That probably makes up for the loss of the championship revenue. And then there is the championship revenue. The tier 2 rights and the championship revenue and other rights have been about 16 million each - so Cal is looking to get about 24 million from the ACC in year 1. Most other teams will get 40 million. And then there is the Calimony money, which I actually expect to get and I expect that to be about 10 million bringing Cal to basically where the PAC 12 is this year. Or a bit less. In 2025, the playoff revenue will increase by about 6 million per team, so that will help out as well.

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

The money will go to the PAC 2 in the future, but that will offset some of the charges the wayward ten will have to pay. So yes, because only money matters.

---

I thought that this year's NCAA tournament money would be divided up the old way. WSU is the only Pac 2 team playing out of 4 'Pac 12' in the tournament. Am I wrong?

---

The money from this years tournament will be paid out to the PAC 2 over the next few years. I think that there is 4 units that pay out this year, and x number of units that are paid out from prior years this year - so basically about the same. But for the PAC 2, the PAC 12 doing so well means that they get at least 4 units paid out next year (which will be about 16 million each I think) and possibly more the further along they go. So it could be very good for them. That and the football money is essentially what they were fighting for. I expect that WSU and OSU will have about the same funding as Cal next year from media rights.

---

I was not a math major + lazy. What does this mean for Cal?

---

Well, Cal will get the ACC money next year. Part of what is pissing people off in the ACC who want more money is that the football and hoops money from championship competition is being further diluted by three teams - so about 20% for the rest of the ACC. And if Cal, Stanford and SMU are not going to the NCAA or the football championships, we are just taking their funds. Cal and Stanford get nothing from the old PAC 12 next year or ever again.

For the ACC, there are three sets of monies coming to Cal. The first is the tier 1 rights, which generally are 24 million dollars, but Cal is taking only 8 million for the first 5 years. Those rights increase every year for inflation, so perhaps by the time we start to get full rights, those are closer to 30 million. Then there are tier 2 rights (ACC network) which may have more money since they can now get full monies from Texas and California for the Carriage rights via ESPNs contracts. They added two big markets where the funds will be more for their media rights for the ACC networks. That probably makes up for the loss of the championship revenue. And then there is the championship revenue. The tier 2 rights and the championship revenue and other rights have been about 16 million each - so Cal is looking to get about 24 million from the ACC in year 1. Most other teams will get 40 million. And then there is the Calimony money, which I actually expect to get and I expect that to be about 10 million bringing Cal to basically where the PAC 12 is this year. Or a bit less. In 2025, the playoff revenue will increase by about 6 million per team, so that will help out as well.

---

So without Calimony you see the athletics deficit increasing from $15 million per year to $25 million per year?

calumnus said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

The money will go to the PAC 2 in the future, but that will offset some of the charges the wayward ten will have to pay. So yes, because only money matters.

---

I thought that this year's NCAA tournament money would be divided up the old way. WSU is the only Pac 2 team playing out of 4 'Pac 12' in the tournament. Am I wrong?

---

The money from this years tournament will be paid out to the PAC 2 over the next few years. I think that there is 4 units that pay out this year, and x number of units that are paid out from prior years this year - so basically about the same. But for the PAC 2, the PAC 12 doing so well means that they get at least 4 units paid out next year (which will be about 16 million each I think) and possibly more the further along they go. So it could be very good for them. That and the football money is essentially what they were fighting for. I expect that WSU and OSU will have about the same funding as Cal next year from media rights.

---

I was not a math major + lazy. What does this mean for Cal?

---

Well, Cal will get the ACC money next year. Part of what is pissing people off in the ACC who want more money is that the football and hoops money from championship competition is being further diluted by three teams - so about 20% for the rest of the ACC. And if Cal, Stanford and SMU are not going to the NCAA or the football championships, we are just taking their funds. Cal and Stanford get nothing from the old PAC 12 next year or ever again.

For the ACC, there are three sets of monies coming to Cal. The first is the tier 1 rights, which generally are 24 million dollars, but Cal is taking only 8 million for the first 5 years. Those rights increase every year for inflation, so perhaps by the time we start to get full rights, those are closer to 30 million. Then there are tier 2 rights (ACC network) which may have more money since they can now get full monies from Texas and California for the Carriage rights via ESPNs contracts. They added two big markets where the funds will be more for their media rights for the ACC networks. That probably makes up for the loss of the championship revenue. And then there is the championship revenue. The tier 2 rights and the championship revenue and other rights have been about 16 million each - so Cal is looking to get about 24 million from the ACC in year 1. Most other teams will get 40 million. And then there is the Calimony money, which I actually expect to get and I expect that to be about 10 million bringing Cal to basically where the PAC 12 is this year. Or a bit less. In 2025, the playoff revenue will increase by about 6 million per team, so that will help out as well.

---

So without Calimony you see the athletics deficit increasing from $15 million per year to $25 million per year?

---

Knowlton put everything on the Truth Social offering. We got no worries.

calumnus said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

The money will go to the PAC 2 in the future, but that will offset some of the charges the wayward ten will have to pay. So yes, because only money matters.

---

I thought that this year's NCAA tournament money would be divided up the old way. WSU is the only Pac 2 team playing out of 4 'Pac 12' in the tournament. Am I wrong?

---

The money from this years tournament will be paid out to the PAC 2 over the next few years. I think that there is 4 units that pay out this year, and x number of units that are paid out from prior years this year - so basically about the same. But for the PAC 2, the PAC 12 doing so well means that they get at least 4 units paid out next year (which will be about 16 million each I think) and possibly more the further along they go. So it could be very good for them. That and the football money is essentially what they were fighting for. I expect that WSU and OSU will have about the same funding as Cal next year from media rights.

---

I was not a math major + lazy. What does this mean for Cal?

---

Well, Cal will get the ACC money next year. Part of what is pissing people off in the ACC who want more money is that the football and hoops money from championship competition is being further diluted by three teams - so about 20% for the rest of the ACC. And if Cal, Stanford and SMU are not going to the NCAA or the football championships, we are just taking their funds. Cal and Stanford get nothing from the old PAC 12 next year or ever again.

For the ACC, there are three sets of monies coming to Cal. The first is the tier 1 rights, which generally are 24 million dollars, but Cal is taking only 8 million for the first 5 years. Those rights increase every year for inflation, so perhaps by the time we start to get full rights, those are closer to 30 million. Then there are tier 2 rights (ACC network) which may have more money since they can now get full monies from Texas and California for the Carriage rights via ESPNs contracts. They added two big markets where the funds will be more for their media rights for the ACC networks. That probably makes up for the loss of the championship revenue. And then there is the championship revenue. The tier 2 rights and the championship revenue and other rights have been about 16 million each - so Cal is looking to get about 24 million from the ACC in year 1. Most other teams will get 40 million. And then there is the Calimony money, which I actually expect to get and I expect that to be about 10 million bringing Cal to basically where the PAC 12 is this year. Or a bit less. In 2025, the playoff revenue will increase by about 6 million per team, so that will help out as well.

---

So without Calimony you see the athletics deficit increasing from $15 million per year to $25 million per year?

---

Where does $15M come from? Last financial statement shows a deficit of $8.7M after application of $36.6M in direct institutional support. That adds up to $45M.

https://calbears.com/documents/2024/1/25/FY23_UCB_Athletics_SRE_Website_Copy.pdf

The year before it was $27M. The year before that it was $16.5M.

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

The money will go to the PAC 2 in the future, but that will offset some of the charges the wayward ten will have to pay. So yes, because only money matters.

---

I thought that this year's NCAA tournament money would be divided up the old way. WSU is the only Pac 2 team playing out of 4 'Pac 12' in the tournament. Am I wrong?

---

The money from this years tournament will be paid out to the PAC 2 over the next few years. I think that there is 4 units that pay out this year, and x number of units that are paid out from prior years this year - so basically about the same. But for the PAC 2, the PAC 12 doing so well means that they get at least 4 units paid out next year (which will be about 16 million each I think) and possibly more the further along they go. So it could be very good for them. That and the football money is essentially what they were fighting for. I expect that WSU and OSU will have about the same funding as Cal next year from media rights.

---

I was not a math major + lazy. What does this mean for Cal?

---

Well, Cal will get the ACC money next year. Part of what is pissing people off in the ACC who want more money is that the football and hoops money from championship competition is being further diluted by three teams - so about 20% for the rest of the ACC. And if Cal, Stanford and SMU are not going to the NCAA or the football championships, we are just taking their funds. Cal and Stanford get nothing from the old PAC 12 next year or ever again.

For the ACC, there are three sets of monies coming to Cal. The first is the tier 1 rights, which generally are 24 million dollars, but Cal is taking only 8 million for the first 5 years. Those rights increase every year for inflation, so perhaps by the time we start to get full rights, those are closer to 30 million. Then there are tier 2 rights (ACC network) which may have more money since they can now get full monies from Texas and California for the Carriage rights via ESPNs contracts. They added two big markets where the funds will be more for their media rights for the ACC networks. That probably makes up for the loss of the championship revenue. And then there is the championship revenue. The tier 2 rights and the championship revenue and other rights have been about 16 million each - so Cal is looking to get about 24 million from the ACC in year 1. Most other teams will get 40 million. And then there is the Calimony money, which I actually expect to get and I expect that to be about 10 million bringing Cal to basically where the PAC 12 is this year. Or a bit less. In 2025, the playoff revenue will increase by about 6 million per team, so that will help out as well.

---

So without Calimony you see the athletics deficit increasing from $15 million per year to $25 million per year?

---

Where does $15M come from? Last financial statement shows a deficit of $8.7M after application of $36.6M in direct institutional support. That adds up to $45M.

https://calbears.com/documents/2024/1/25/FY23_UCB_Athletics_SRE_Website_Copy.pdf

The year before it was $27M. The year before that it was $16.5M.

---

Many schools with huge athletic budgets are in similar situations because in 2020-2021 (maybe 2022 as well) the athletic departments had the same level of expenses with a lot less revenue. Even Ohio State took out a huge line of credit to cover the hole in their athletic budget.

On top of that, donations might be permanently lower for most athletic departments because a lot of the money formerly donated to the department is going to NIL. BiG and SEC teams might be the only ones that will see an increase in revenue large enough to eventually cover the shortfall.

BearSD said:

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

bipolarbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

The money will go to the PAC 2 in the future, but that will offset some of the charges the wayward ten will have to pay. So yes, because only money matters.

---

I thought that this year's NCAA tournament money would be divided up the old way. WSU is the only Pac 2 team playing out of 4 'Pac 12' in the tournament. Am I wrong?

---

The money from this years tournament will be paid out to the PAC 2 over the next few years. I think that there is 4 units that pay out this year, and x number of units that are paid out from prior years this year - so basically about the same. But for the PAC 2, the PAC 12 doing so well means that they get at least 4 units paid out next year (which will be about 16 million each I think) and possibly more the further along they go. So it could be very good for them. That and the football money is essentially what they were fighting for. I expect that WSU and OSU will have about the same funding as Cal next year from media rights.

---

I was not a math major + lazy. What does this mean for Cal?

---

Well, Cal will get the ACC money next year. Part of what is pissing people off in the ACC who want more money is that the football and hoops money from championship competition is being further diluted by three teams - so about 20% for the rest of the ACC. And if Cal, Stanford and SMU are not going to the NCAA or the football championships, we are just taking their funds. Cal and Stanford get nothing from the old PAC 12 next year or ever again.

For the ACC, there are three sets of monies coming to Cal. The first is the tier 1 rights, which generally are 24 million dollars, but Cal is taking only 8 million for the first 5 years. Those rights increase every year for inflation, so perhaps by the time we start to get full rights, those are closer to 30 million. Then there are tier 2 rights (ACC network) which may have more money since they can now get full monies from Texas and California for the Carriage rights via ESPNs contracts. They added two big markets where the funds will be more for their media rights for the ACC networks. That probably makes up for the loss of the championship revenue. And then there is the championship revenue. The tier 2 rights and the championship revenue and other rights have been about 16 million each - so Cal is looking to get about 24 million from the ACC in year 1. Most other teams will get 40 million. And then there is the Calimony money, which I actually expect to get and I expect that to be about 10 million bringing Cal to basically where the PAC 12 is this year. Or a bit less. In 2025, the playoff revenue will increase by about 6 million per team, so that will help out as well.

---

So without Calimony you see the athletics deficit increasing from $15 million per year to $25 million per year?

---

Where does $15M come from? Last financial statement shows a deficit of $8.7M after application of $36.6M in direct institutional support. That adds up to $45M.

https://calbears.com/documents/2024/1/25/FY23_UCB_Athletics_SRE_Website_Copy.pdf

The year before it was $27M. The year before that it was $16.5M.

---

Many schools with huge athletic budgets are in similar situations because in 2020-2021 (maybe 2022 as well) the athletic departments had the same level of expenses with a lot less revenue. Even Ohio State took out a huge line of credit to cover the hole in their athletic budget.

On top of that, donations might be permanently lower for most athletic departments because a lot of the money formerly donated to the department is going to NIL. BiG and SEC teams might be the only ones that will see an increase in revenue large enough to eventually cover the shortfall.

---

Actually, that is not what Cal's financial statements show. Cal's operating expenses were significantly lower in 2020-21. $15M lower than the previous year and $25M lower than the next. Last year (2022-3) operating expenses were up another $19M. (so $44M higher than the covid year). Cal's best financial year in a while was 2020-21 because of the drop in expenses.

Further, the financial statements don't show revenue as the primary problem. They show an expense problem. Comparatively speaking, revenues have held fairly steady, but expenses have blown up. In 2022-23, Cal had operating revenue of about $93M (when you take out the "direct institutional support" line item) with operating expenses of $127M (not including the debt service which adds about another $10M). In 2018-19 (last full year before covid) Cal had $88M in revenue (not including direct institutional support) and $100M in operating expenses (not including debt service which again added about $10M)

It is a problem on both ends, because revenue did not keep up with inflation, but the expenses seems the bigger issue so far. Cal is spending a lot more and not getting increasing returns. In fact, 2022-3 looks to me to be the first non-Covid year that from a balance sheet perspective football lost money. (I would say there are revenues that are in the general bucket that are influenced by football, so I don't think football actually lost money, but this has always been the case and I don't think football has ever shown a loss before). In any case, the Covid year for sports at Cal did not actually cause bigger net losses overall.

That said, I agree that many schools (especially in the West) are having similar problems, though I don't think it is Covid. I think that Covid may have increased a trend that was already coming. I don't know that we can blame Covid for problems that occurred in 2022-3.

In any case, I'm not passing judgment here, but we do need to understand the scale of the issue and it looks to me like it is a $45M problem, not a $15M problem.