OSU athletic department revenues have doubled

Data from the US Department of Education indicate that total revenues of OSU’s athletic department have doubled since the expansion of Reser Stadium in 2005.  Athletic department revenues reported in fiscal year 2015 were a record $72.1 million.  This is up by about $12 million in just the last two years.   OSU trails conference leader Stanford ($109.7 million) and the Pac-12 average ($85.6 million) but has risen in the rankings within the conference.  OSU is ahead of Colorado ($67.9 million), Washington State University ($66.1 million) and Utah ($64.6 million).  Rival Oregon has revenues just above the conference average at $85.8 million.

While OSU’s athletic department has a number of long-term financial constraints, it is encouraging to know that revenues have doubled since the expansion of Reser Stadium capacity.  And even though the Pac-12 media contract has failed to deliver the target revenues, this contract has added significantly to this gain in revenue.

The expansion of Reser Stadium capacity in 2005 and further expansion in 2007 changed the trajectory of revenue production by OSU.  The Pac-12 media contract was signed in 2011 and increased revenues were observed starting in the 2012 fiscal year.

OSU athletic department revenues

OSU and Pac-12 Football Recruiting Rankings

How does OSU’s rankings compare to the Pac 12 conference? After all, most of OSU’s schedule is against conference foes so how the program measures up against conference teams is important.

One way that we might be able to better assess how OSU has fared in recruiting is by comparing the national recruiting ranking of OSU with an index or average of the conference rankings rather than raw position in the ranking standings. The problem with using a positional ranking is that it doesn’t give you the best assessment of strength of OSU’s class relative to the strength of the conference in recruiting.

Below is a sortable table of this data for your consideration:

National Recruiting Rankings (Rivals) for OSU, Pac-10/12, Delta

YearOSU rankPac 12 MeanDelta
20025235-17
20035137-15
20054736-12
20064134-7
20074739-8
20085235-17
20095441-13
20104433-11
20115640-16
20123927-12
20133936-3
20145438-16
20157134-37
20164134-7
Mean4936-14

Compared to the Pac 12 mean national recruiting ranking, OSU averages 14 spots below the conference average in national ranking. How close OSU is to the average might be an indication of the talent level and potential competitiveness. Based on these criteria, the 2016 class ranks historically high in relation to our conference competitors and is tied for 2nd all-time in that category.

Trends in OSU Football APR

With the change in football coaching staffs from Riley to Andersen, there is inevitably the question of the effect of the new staff on academics.  The main metric used by the NCAA to evaluate academics is the academic progress rate (APR).  This assessment tool considers eligibility and retention of student-athletes on a team-wide basis in the calculation of the APR.

Trends in football APR at Oregon State, Wisconsin, Utah State, the Pac-12 average APR.

Trends in football APR at Oregon State, Wisconsin, Utah State, and the Pac-12 average APR.

The NCAA has new rules that give programs incentives to improve their APR.  Starting in this academic year, teams must have a four-year average APR of 930 or greater to participate in championships.  With that benchmark in mind, how is OSU progressing toward meeting this goal and what is Coach Andersen’s record with this metric at previous schools?

NCAA records show that OSU’s football APR has risen and fallen over the past 7 years.  The lowest APR in recent history was 930 in the academic year ending in 2008 and all years have been greater than the benchmark since that year.  There was a decline in APR since 2010 at OSU with the levels dropping below the Pac-12 average but still above the minimum 930 level.

Andersen’s previous schools (Utah State and Wisconsin) have shown increases in APR in the years that he served as head coach at the institutions.  Utah State did have a small one-year decline in APR while he was no longer coach at the school.  Both schools scored highly in the APR during Andersen’s tenure as head coach.

A renewed emphasis on academics is needed to reverse the downward trend in APR at OSU.  Coach Andersen’s past record with this metric suggests that a reversal in this trend will be evident in the future.

How did we get here?

The football that you’re seeing this year has been several years in the making. Nearly all major performance metrics have been trending downward for years. I’ve been reporting on these for some time now with the declines in scoring defense and scoring offense among the most troubling.

Recruiting matters. There are consequences for not recruiting well. OSU’s recruiting has been on a multiyear downward slide in relation to conference peers. It’s not just about us. Our competitors are raising expectations and part of that is improved recruiting. There are now fewer programs ranked below OSU in the conference each year and more above OSU. The graphic below clearly shows the trend (regression trend is dashed line) with regard to OSU’s Rival’s ranking of recruiting within the conference.

Recruiting trends

There’s a reason why this team has seemed smaller, slower, and overall less talented than teams in the past – it is. The 2015 OSU team is drawn from weak recruiting classes and has the lowest average national ranking at 52 of any OSU team since Rivals started their database records in 2002. The Pac-12 average is 35. This is not the fault of the players – they are doing their best given the circumstances of learning a new system of offense and defense all while limited in their innate abilities. Compounding the slide in talent is that some of the team’s most talented players have been injured. Few good things happen when you’re playing backups at multiple critical positions like QB, cornerback, etc.

Coaching matters. Brand new coaching staffs need time to adapt to their environment and their players. New coaches will make mistakes not unlike inexperienced players. OSU’s only winning seasons of the past 5 years, 2012 and 2013, were marked by an unusual number of new coaches heading up programs on the schedule. The Beavers were 6-1 against new coaches over those two years, but were only 9-9 against established coaches. OSU was also 1-0 against an interim coach in the bowl game with Boise State, essentially a new head coach.

This is the start of a multiyear rebuild of the program as I indicated at the start of the season. The rebuild will not be quick because the talent level is low. Few Beaver fans recognized these trends several years ago when critical decisions could have been made to stem the tide. Even fewer fans would have supported those changes. So this rebuild could not have been avoided.

We (coaches, players, and fans) will all suffer in the short term. But I know that we will all be better because of it in the long run.

Update on OSU Conference Championships

Conference Championships by Sport:

Wrestling (22) – 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2010, 2007, 1994, 1992, 1984, 1983, 1979, 1978, 1977, 1976, 1973, 1972, 1970, 1969, 1968, 1967, 1966, 1965

Men’s Basketball (12) – 1990, 1984, 1982, 1981, 1980, 1966, 1958, 1955, 1949, 1947, 1933, 1916

Gymnastics (6) – 2013, 2011, 1996, 1994, 1992, 1991

Baseball (5) – 2014, 2013, 2006, 2005, 1952

Football (5) – 2000, 1964, 1957, 1956, 1941

Women’s Basketball (1) – 2015

Softball (1) – 2005

Conference Championships by Decade:

1910-19 1
1920-29 0
1930-39 1
1940-49 3
1950-59 5
1960-69 7
1970-79 7
1980-89 6
1990-99 7
2000-09 5
2010-19 10

Trends in OSU Football Competitiveness

The most commonly used measure of football program competitiveness is winning percentage, but winning percentage does not take into account the relative difficulty of the schedule. A ratings percentage index (RPI) could be calculated to modify a team’s winning percentage with strength of schedule elements but this approach is not common in football and RPI will not be used in the new playoff selection process. Fans and analysts often use wins against teams in the top 25 polls to measure competitiveness, but the limitation of this approach is that the polls can be subjective in nature and the membership in the poll changes over the course of the season.

One potential metric that can be used to denote quality wins and competitiveness is to determine the number of wins over conference opponents that finish the season with a record > 0.500 (overall, not conference record alone). Since the programmatic goals are to: (i) instill a winning philosophy, (ii) foster and maintain competitiveness, and (iii) win conference championships, an objective competitiveness metric is desirable to mark the progress of a program toward these goals.

OSU record vs conference opponents with >0.500 record and number of conference opponents on schedule with >0.500 record (click to enlarge)

OSU record vs conference opponents with >0.500 record and number of conference opponents on schedule with >0.500 record (click to enlarge)

Continue reading