USA Today has a breakdown on Athletic Department budgets, showing who's running a surplus and who's not. Michigan fares well, as do OSU and PSU. MSU comes in at sixth, with NW is not ranked (due to being private, no doubt). Iowa comes in higher than I would have guessed, but they are about the only game in town for Iowans.
Article is here: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/story/2012-05-14/ncaa-college-athletics-finances-database/54955804/1#mainstory .
Tables (taken from a Freep article - boo Freep, but credit where credit's due - http://www.freep.com/article/20120515/SPORTS06/205150442/Fiscal-study-Michigan-athletics-are-self-reliant?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Sports ) below. The Freep article defines "subsidy" as:
Subsidies are split into four streams of allocated revenue: 1) Student fees charged for athletics, 2) direct institutional support (cash allocated to athletic department from the university), 3) direct state or government support, 4) indirect facilities and administrative support (facilities provided by university and not charged to athletic department).
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, MSU and Indiana "subsidize" quite a bit, although I'm not quite sure what all that implies (please share any insights or theories in the comments).
TOP FIVE
| School | Revenue | Expenses | Subsidies | Subsidies % |
| 1. Texas | $150,295,926 | $133,686,815 | $0 | 0% |
| 2. Ohio State | $131,815,821 | $122,286,869 | $0 | 0% |
| 3. Alabama | $124,498,616 | $105,068,152 | $5,235,300 | 4.2% |
| 4. Florida | $123,514,257 | $107,157,831 | $4,367,071 | 3.5% |
| 5. Michigan | $122,739,052 | $111,844,553 | $272,684 | 0.2% |
BIG TEN
| School | Revenue | Expenses | Subsidies | Subsidies % |
| 1. Ohio State | $131,815,821 | $122,286,869 | $0 | 0% |
| 2. Michigan | $122,739,052 | $111,844,553 | $272,684 | 0.2% |
| 3. Penn State | $116,118,025 | $101,336,483 | $0 | 0% |
| 4. Wisconsin | $96,288,191 | $95,623,345 | $7,237,901 | 7.5% |
| 5. Iowa | $93,353,561 | $88,057,486 | $564,680 | 0.6% |
| 6. Michigan State | $84,510,199 | $84,004,229 | $3,650,280 | 4.3% |
| 7. Nebraska | $83,679,756 | $81,916,484 | $0 | 0% |
| 8. Minnesota | $78,924,683 | $78,924,683 | $7,778,861 | 9.9% |
| 9. Illinois | $77,863,883 | $73,476,818 | $3,983,640 | 5.1% |
| 10. Indiana | $71,017,355 | $69,314,511 | $2,686,769 | 3.8% |
| 11. Purdue | $66,202,493 | $59,429,383 | $0 | 0% |
| Northwestern | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
With an athletic department budget as large as Texas' is, I understand the frustration of Longhorn fans with weak teams Mack Brown and Rick Barnes have fielded.
Looking at the surpluses, assuming they are accurate, many of these schools are going to struggle to provide stipends for their student-athletes, if they are required to pay all of them, regardless of sport.
For more on college football, college basketball, baseball, hockey, and more, visit Before Visiting the Sportsbook.
Follow BVTSB