I already addressed that. UK pays Stoops in the neighborhood of $400,000. That number wouldn't change if he made half as much in total.
"It's Not Your Money, So Who Cares...."
- Thread starter FltDoc
- Start date
Then we do agree that some of that money is funded by the state the title of this thread clearly states its not your money so why care I agree with your posts I was just trying to clarify the original post it's all good okay
No, we do not agree on what that means. UK's piece of his salary will be the same whether he makes $10 million or $5 million. So again, what he ultimately makes in total is not being funded by taxpayer money, unless you are arguing we should only pay our coach $400,000.
I hate it because he’s the highest paid coach that hasn’t been to at least a NY6 bowl. Top ten pay with top 40ish results. A coach paid as much as him should at least get to a NY6 bowl once every decade! Fans also indirectly pay for things like that through Kfund, tickets, concessions etc.
That's his base salary that's paid by t he university so yes we the tax payers has a right to complain there would not even be a university unless our tax dollars paid for it your argument is baseless I disagree no sense on continuing this we are not on the same page
Folk in this thread were complains about how much Stoops makes as our coach and you act like it’s taxpayer money being misspent - and that’s just not true. $400k wouldn’t BEGIN to cover ANY Power 4 coach salary. It is K-Fund donations, SEC/ESPN cash and advert $ from IMG
Complaining that the level of compensation to Stoops should somehow incense taxpayers has no absolutely basis in fact
Last edited:
It goes beyond disagreement. Your logic is flawed. You are saying he should make less. If he made less it wouldn’t change how much the university pays hIm. If paying him a lower amount doesn’t change the university’s cost, taxpay aren’t paying any of those incremental cost. I’m not sure taxpayers pay the base salary part. The athletic department probably pays that.
Dude has to be a troll, nobody is truly this stupid trying to claim coaches are getting tax dollars
It's more about how the money is spent. The argument has nothing to do with where the money comes from but how its used in hiring coaches to provide what all of us want ... consistent improvement and winning, year over year. If we're paying these coaches the same as other Top Ten coaches nationally, it's laughable at the results (mostly football) when compared. The monies paid to these coaches should be considered a valuable resource used to hire top-flight coaches who are going to get consistent results. To do otherwise could and should be considered to have "squandered" the resource. It doesn't really matter where the money comes from but rather how it's used to build a winning tradition.
Troll lmao and nobody can be this stupid not to realize Kentucky is a state funded school and any one they hire are paid through grants and tax dollars who in the hell approves the hiring of the presidents the governor troll I can talk Kentucky sports with you all day long you do realize the state forced Adolph Rupp into retirement when he turned 70 lmao troll what a idiot
Hahahahahahaha!!!
Yep, K-Fund donations, ESPN $, IMG $ is really just grant and tax money - you saw through the ruse!!!
Hahahahahaha!!!!!
Haha there would be no university if not for tax dollars to fund it so no athletics department hahaha
Haha there would be no university if not for tax dollars to fund it so no athletics department hahaha
So… a university doesn’t have to have a football program to exist, right? So….. why do large universities have D1 football programs? Hmmm??
If you can correctly answer this question, you’ll understand why you’re on the wrong side of the money conversation- good luck !
A quick Google search told me that KY has a population of 4.509 million people. Assuming that 75% of the population pays taxes that's 3.38175 million people. Using those numbers that comes out to 11.8 cents per tax payer per year to fund Stoops 400k salary. I know KY isn't the wealthiest state but 11.8 cents per year doesn't seem that bad to me.
BItch all you want about the taxpayers paying 11.8 cents per year for our football coach. You sound ignorant or at least ignorant about numbers.
BItch all you want about the taxpayers paying 11.8 cents per year for our football coach. You sound ignorant or at least ignorant about numbers.
State university's are primarily funded by state tax dollars pay real close attention that means without these tax dollars there would be no university pay attention because here is the big revelation no taxes no university no athletic dept no science department no nothing no d 1 because there is no university to have a d 1 lmaoSo… a university doesn’t have to have a football program to exist, right? So….. why do large universities have D1 football programs? Hmmm??
If you can correctly answer this question, you’ll understand why you’re on the wrong side of the money conversation- good luck !
State university's are primarily funded by state tax dollars pay real close attention that means without these tax dollars there would be no university pay attention because here is the big revelation no taxes no university no athletic dept no science department no nothing no d 1 because there is no university to have a d 1 lmao
All I felt was the whiff as you swung and didn’t even connect with the question that you obviously don’t even understand - have a nice life wrapped in your safety blanket of shallow comprehension
Kentucky tax dollars don't even fund 10% of the University of Kentucky *general operating fund* you uneducated ignorant fool
www.uky.edu
Fiction: A reduction in state appropriations can be easily absorbed in UK’s $3.4 billion budget.
Fact: The $280 million appropriated to the University of Kentucky from the state is the first dollar into the University’s operating and capital budget – it supports all other revenue-generating endeavors and is key to UK’s central missions of teaching, research and service.
Some $2.7 billion of the University’s budget is restricted, which means there are a strictly prescribed set of expenditures for which it can be utilized. Additionally, many of the units within this category – UK HealthCare and Athletics to name two – sustain their activity solely with the revenue they generate.
The remaining $750 million represents the funds we use to teach, discover, create, and operate the University. The state’s contribution is an essential driver of this fund pool.
Fact vs Fiction | University of Kentucky
Fiction: A reduction in state appropriations can be easily absorbed in UK’s $3.4 billion budget.
Fact: The $280 million appropriated to the University of Kentucky from the state is the first dollar into the University’s operating and capital budget – it supports all other revenue-generating endeavors and is key to UK’s central missions of teaching, research and service.
Some $2.7 billion of the University’s budget is restricted, which means there are a strictly prescribed set of expenditures for which it can be utilized. Additionally, many of the units within this category – UK HealthCare and Athletics to name two – sustain their activity solely with the revenue they generate.
The remaining $750 million represents the funds we use to teach, discover, create, and operate the University. The state’s contribution is an essential driver of this fund pool.
^
The above is true, heard the exact same thing when my daughter went to Michigan, the provost said that over about 50 years, UM had gone from a state funded school to a state "located" school, states are just not funding higher education at anywhere near the level they once did, which is at least part of the reason that tuition has gone through the roof. (Lots of other reasons too, but beyond the scope of this argument)
The above is true, heard the exact same thing when my daughter went to Michigan, the provost said that over about 50 years, UM had gone from a state funded school to a state "located" school, states are just not funding higher education at anywhere near the level they once did, which is at least part of the reason that tuition has gone through the roof. (Lots of other reasons too, but beyond the scope of this argument)
Where does Stoops and staff salaries come from? Kfund? SEC MONEY? University funds? Nike? Radio show?
Can anybody find a breakdown of which entities pays the salaries?
Can anybody find a breakdown of which entities pays the salaries?
Here's a budget from 2021-22. I can't find the new one.
On page 4 it breaks down where the football gets its money. Mostly tickets, media rights, and conference bowl distributions.
Football dwarfs basketball by about 17M making Cal's salary even more egregious. Those two sports, and non sport specific, fund everything else. Not really sure what non sport specific is, but I think it has something to do with contributions.
Page 5 is the salary breakdown for coaches and staff.
This article explains a bit about the contract structure.
Making Sense of College Coaching Contracts
The coaching business is not for the faint of heart. There is no other industry in the world where almost 20% of top-level leadership gets terminated on a yearly basis. While both universities and coaches should be optimistic about the ability to build a winning program, universities must enter...
athleticdirectoru.com
I think state appropriations account for less than 5% of the overall budget of the University.State university's are primarily funded by state tax dollars pay real close attention that means without these tax dollars there would be no university pay attention because here is the big revelation no taxes no university no athletic dept no science department no nothing no d 1 because there is no university to have a d 1 lmao
The athletics department doesn't take a single dollar of either taxpayer or tuition support.
UK has an almost $7 billion budget and nearly $4 billion of that comes from UK Healthcare.
UK Budget at a Glance
It may not be "my" money, but I still have this part of me that gets really irritated by people who throw it away in the dumbest ways possible. It's part of the reason I can't stand people like John Daly or even Phil Mickelson (who I used to love btw). I have zero sympathy for people who can't get out of their own way. Barnhart may not be on their level yet, but it's hard to argue the stupidity behind the contracts he's given out.
State university's are primarily funded by state tax dollars pay real close attention that means without these tax dollars there would be no university pay attention because here is the big revelation no taxes no university no athletic dept no science department no nothing no d 1 because there is no university to have a d 1 lmao
Again, unbelievably crazy logic. It makes no difference who funded the creation of the university with respect to who pays a coaches salary. They are two different things.State university's are primarily funded by state tax dollars pay real close attention that means without these tax dollars there would be no university pay attention because here is the big revelation no taxes no university no athletic dept no science department no nothing no d 1 because there is no university to have a d 1 lmao
Daniel Boone funded his exploration of Kentucky.
He does not pay the salaries of Kentucky’s History Center employees.
Last edited:
