Football is big breadwinner for USC athletics

USC makes millions on football. Other sports? Not so much.

From July 2007 through June 2008, USC's athletics budget came in at just over $76 million. No surprise, football grossed the highest of any sport with over $28 million in revenue, followed by men's basketball at just shy of $4.5 million and baseball with almost $1.9 million. The women's sport with the highest revenue was golf, at $311,633, good for sixth overall at USC.

Of course, the numbers have a different feel when you look at net profit, where football was the only sport making money.

A majority of revenue was classified by the school as "not allocated by gender/sport" because it comes from general athletic support groups. Memberships to Cardinal and Gold or The Committee aren't tied to one sport and the school isn't making any assumptions about that (we'll leave it up to you). Unallocated expenses include overhead and general services (legal, public relations, etc.). Here's how it all breaks down:

Sport	Revenue	Total Expenses	Net Profit
Not allocated	$39,064,294	$30,995,159	$8,069,135
Football	28,595,881	20,963,700	7,632,181
M Track/Field (Indoor)	2,000	2,000	0
W Track/Field (Indoor)	5,000	6,000	-1,000
W X Country	2,000	4,000	-2,000
M Basketball	4,457,028	4,764,822	-307,794
M Water Polo	122,602	608,166	-485,564
M Golf	331,298	855,380	-524,082
M Volleyball	164,108	740,666	-576,558
W Water Polo	122,602	709,284	-586,682
M Tennis	319,923	935,302	-615,379
W Golf	311,633	972,018	-660,385
W Tennis	181,380	914,167	-732,787
W Swim/Dive	195,734	1,043,370	-847,636
M Swim/Dive	50,502	1,011,329	-960,827
M Track/Field (Outdoor)	30,334	1,063,805	-1,033,471
W Track/Field (Outdoor)	73,707	1,258,530	-1,184,823
W Soccer	26,604	1,245,924	-1,219,320
Baseball	1,888,722	3,153,795	-1,265,073
W Rowing	108,317	1,497,258	-1,388,941
W Volleyball	162,104	1,631,036	-1,468,932
W Basketball	194,146	2,036,208	-1,842,062
TOTALS	76,409,919	76,409,919	0

The revenue and expense figures come from an annual filing the school made today in compliance with the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act. The reports were originally designed to help gauge the success of Title IX. Excluding football and basketball, USC's women's sports brought in about 40% of what the men's sports did. At the same time, the school spent almost $1 million more on women's sports than men's.

Also worth noting, the school spent $653,894 on recruiting for men's sports and $317,873 on women's sports. Out of 21 head coaches last year, only one was a woman.

USC had 649 student-athletes in 2007-08.

-- Adam Rose

Comments

[Duscany]

Why are women's sports so much more expensive than men's sports? I notice that men's volleyball and women's volleyball both earned nearly the same revenue--a little over $160,000. But the expenses for men's volleyball were only $741,000, while the expenses for women's volleyball were $1,631,000. Why is women's volleyball so much more expensive? Private dressing rooms? Individual air dryers? Higher priced coaches?

[Zmaster]

The women's sports have more scholraships.
Men's volleyball = 8 allowed by NCAA, Women's volleyball =12

The profit is low. We need to schedule all of our nonconference games at home and we would easily generate more revenue.

[Bret]

In general women's sports have more athletic scholarships available than their men's counterparts. That would explain a good portion of the difference but the rest is probably travel related expenses.

[Mike in SD]

Wasn't it Jack Kent Cooke that was trying to really press soccer because he could dress an entire soccer team for the cost of what it took to dress one of 65 football players?

It's unfortunate the women's team (national champs, to boot, I believe) program loses that amount of money. But I think the cost is well worth it. Perhaps one of the more well-heeled alums can start endowing their scholarships as it is a successful program in terms of wins and losses -- if not on the balance sheet??