UCLA took more money out than received over the past five years, according to this report.
A look into the interesting information about the UCLA athletic department finances with the article titled, Big Ten athletic departments’ 2024 financial statements: Seven lessons from a data deep dive.
"UCLA, which joined the Big Ten this year, spent nearly $51.9 million more than it made. Over the past five fiscal years, the department’s losses now total $200.61 million."Scott Dochterman
Unlike private universities, like USC and Northwestern from the Big Ten, they aren’t legally required to release their financial reports. UCLA is a public university, and that is why reports and/or articles like this show the economic struggles of UCLA's athletic department over the past few years.
In comparison, according to the article, Nebraska, widely considered the Big Ten’s best example for fiscal responsibility, led all schools in the conference with a $6.7 million surplus. Granted, UCLA just joined the Big Ten in part to receive more money from television and streaming revenue and the athletic department should be able to do better financially in the near future but still, the Bruins athletic department, according to this article, is not fiscally responsible these past years.
To be fair, among the Big Ten’s 16 public schools that reported annual debt service involving new or recently completed projects, UCLA spent less than $700,000, along with Maryland. In comparison, Ohio State spent roughly 34 million and Nebraska just over 30 million. Now, that may change with Los Angeles and UCLA in part hosting the 2028 Summer Olympics, but for now, they are not spending a ton of money on new projects involving the athletic department.
UCLA, however, claims no athletic debt.
"UCLA claims no athletic debt, and Maryland lists $8 million, so their universities scrub away their financial shortfalls. UCLA received $30 million in direct institutional support and another $1.5 million in student fees."Scott Dochterman
The UCLA athletic department, according to this article, is supported by the university itself financially more than other athletic departments from various Big Ten institutions.
UCLA spends less on coaches than most other Big Ten athletic departments.
"Ohio State spent $28.5 million in 2024, which was nearly $8 million more than runner-up Penn State ($20.8 million). Oregon ($20.5 million) was third, slightly ahead of Michigan ($20.43 million) and Iowa ($19.2 million). Purdue by far spent the least ($10 million), with UCLA ($11.95 million) the next lowest. Their coaches from the 2024 fiscal year have both moved on."Scott Dochterman
Credit to the UCLA athletic department for not overspending on coaches and not having to pay massive amounts of money to coaches they relieved of their coaching duties like other Big Ten schools have. In this day of athletics, overpaying coaches, quickly firing coaches, and paying big payouts is more and more common nowadays, but UCLA has not followed that trend.
Not a shocker but UCLA can do a better job of selling tickets for their home games in football.
Four Big Ten teams sold less than $10 million in football tickets for the 2024 season, and the second lowest was UCLA, with just under eight and a half million. Only Maryland sold less, with just over seven million.
In comparison, UCLA sold just over seven million in 2024, which was fifth among the 16 Big Ten public schools in men’s basketball gate receipts. It is no surprise that a Blue Blood program like UCLA would be in the top five in basketball, and the expectation is that the football program will continue to get more fans into the Rose Bowl in the upcoming seasons.