Big Ten Athletic Departments: A Deep Dive into 2024 Financials

The athletic departments of the Big Ten’s 16 public universities generated nearly $2.84 billion in revenue during the 2024 fiscal year, but collectively spent nearly $3 billion. This financial data, obtained through state open-records laws, underscores the financial pressures and challenges many collegiate sports programs face.

Half of the athletic departments ended the fiscal year with a deficit, with four departments running deficits of at least $15 million. These shortfalls were funded primarily by department reserves, university loans, and institutional support. Notably, private universities Northwestern and USC do not disclose their internal financial statements.

Big Ten Funding and Financial Distribution

During the 2024 fiscal year, 13 public universities received $50.8 million from the Big Ten’s media contract, along with $11 million for other disbursements, such as bowl revenue. Maryland and Rutgers, still paying off funds borrowed during their six years of non-vested membership, received smaller distributions.

The fiscal year in question started on July 1, 2023, and concluded on June 30, 2024. Data from UCLA, Oregon, and Washington, who competed in the Pac-12 during the 2024 fiscal year, was included to provide a comprehensive view of Big Ten finances.

Ohio State’s Notable Deficit and Other Trends

Ohio State, despite being crowned national champions in college football, had a significant deficit of nearly $38 million. This shortfall was attributed to a reduced number of home games and severance payments to former staff. With an expected increase in Big Ten funds and home games, Ohio State anticipates this deficit to be a one-time occurrence.

Several programs, including UCLA, Rutgers, and Maryland, have shown persistent financial deficits over the past five fiscal years. These include UCLA with a five-year loss of $200.61 million, Rutgers with over $139 million in red ink, and Maryland with $32.7 million in accumulated losses.

The eight athletic departments that generated surplus revenues averaged a $3.72 million profit over expenses, with Nebraska leading the pack with a $6.7 million surplus.

Debt and Institutional Support

The financial health of these athletic departments is intricately tied to their debt levels and the level of institutional support they receive. Ohio State and Nebraska top the list with $286.7 million and $244.4 million in total debt, respectively. Maryland and UCLA, with less debt, rely more heavily on universities to cover deficits through direct support and student fees.

Twelve athletic departments have total debt exceeding $90 million, with six having debts north of $225 million. Five departments—Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Nebraska, and Purdue—obtained no financial support through fees or direct university support, while others received varying levels of assistance.

Rising Football Recruiting Expenses

Football recruiting expenses have surged by nearly 56% over two years, with Big Ten schools collectively spending more than $30.1 million in 2024, compared to $19.35 million in 2022. This increase is driven by higher wages and costs associated with luring top talent.

In 2022, only Michigan spent more than $2 million, but by 2024, six programs did so. Expenses vary widely, from Iowa’s $638,000 to Michigan’s $1.82 million in 2024.

GO DEEPER

Class of 2026 recruiting reset: Catching up on the top prospects in the next cycle

Football Coaching Salaries and Success

There appears to be a correlation between football coaching salaries and on-field success. Ohio State spent $28.5 million on coaching salaries in 2024, the highest among the Big Ten, followed closely by Penn State, Oregon, Michigan, and Iowa.

Purdue and UCLA, among the lowest spenders, saw their coaches move on following the 2024 fiscal year, indicating a direct link between financial investment and retention of top talent.

Gate Receipts Reflect On-Field Performance

National champion Michigan led in football ticket sales with over $50.3 million, followed closely by Ohio State and Penn State. National runner-up Washington had strong sales at $31 million.

Notably, Nebraska, despite traditional sellouts, saw its revenues drop to $24.24 million, the lowest since joining the Big Ten in 2011. The four lowest-grossing programs were UCLA and Maryland.

GO DEEPER

Is NIL to blame for Alabama and Georgia losing the upper hand in college football last season?

Men’s Basketball Ticket Analysis

Indiana led in men’s basketball ticket receipts at $15.2 million, followed closely by Illinois and Purdue. NCAA Tournament runner-up Purdue saw a significant increase of $2.9 million over the previous year, while UCLA saw a slight dip.

Several teams saw increases in basketball revenues, but with lower football ticket sales,反映了 the varying financial contributions from different sports.

Performance of Non-Revenue Sports

Only two sports outside football and men’s basketball reported a profit in 2024: Minnesota men’s ice hockey and Nebraska women’s volleyball. Minnesota generated a $1.82 million surplus, while Nebraska showed a $1.34 million profit.

Several non-revenue sports showed strong financial performance, though without dedicated media contracts, they generally resulted in deficits. Notable performances included Iowa women’s basketball with $3.2 million in ticket sales and Iowa and Penn State’s wrestling teams leading in their sport.

Women’s volleyball Final Four teams Nebraska and Wisconsin led in ticket sales, followed by Minnesota, with Wisconsin and Nebraska contributing significantly to the conference revenue.

(Photo: Logan Riely / Getty Images)

Conclusion: Key Takeaways

The financial landscape of Big Ten’s athletic departments reveals a complex scenario of revenues, expenses, and sustainability challenges. While some departments thrive and generate surpluses, others struggle with deficits, debt, and financial feasibility.

Coaching salaries, recruiting expenses, and gate receipts play significant roles in determining financial health, underscored by the correlation between on-field success and financial performance.

Join the Conversation

We invite you to share your thoughts on this analysis. What do you think are the most critical financial factors for college sports departments? How do you see these trends evolving in the future?

Feel free to comment below, subscribe for updates, or share this article on social media. Your insights are valuable to our community.