LUBBOCK, Texas — A shortfall in travel allowance given by the Big 12 Conference caused the Texas Tech football team to reach into its financial pockets after the team’s trip to the Konica Minolta Gator Bowl Jan. 1 in Jacksonville, Fla.
Bobby Gleason, Tech’s deputy athletic director, said while the numbers still may fluctuate, the athletic department spent $202,240 out of its regular operating budget of $44 million, which goes to show that the public can be misled when it sees the bowl payout numbers.
"Most fans read something that says that the Gator Bowl payout is $2.5 million," Gleason said. "Most fans think that goes to us because we’re playing in the Gator Bowl, but they don’t understand that all that money is paid to the conference."
Gleason said, in turn, the Big 12 Conference disperses a formula-based travel allowance among the teams attending bowl games.
"With (750) people traveling, it gets very expensive very quickly," Gleason said. "So we basically hope to break even on that travel allowance each year. We hope that we spend a little bit less than what it is, but it does take most of that money to travel."
Gleason said because the Gator Bowl is a tier-one bowl — a level below a BCS bowl — the formula provided Tech with a bowl appearance fee of $925,000 and a reimbursement policy that gives $199 per mile traveled.
According to the bowl’s financial report, the trip to Jacksonville equaled $239,198 in reimbursement money, so Tech received just under $1.1 million.
To put it in perspective, Gleason said the appearance fee for a BCS bowl is $1.5 million along with the reimbursement policy.
According to the report, Tech subtracted nearly $74,000 after ticket sales did not equal the total price of complimentary tickets used by the university.
Gleason said Tech used about half of the 12,000 tickets that were available to sell.
The financial report indicated that Tech spent approximately 68 percent of its allowance on transportation, meals and lodging, while roughly 27 percent went toward awards and extra compensation for staff.
"If you take away what we paid for the extra work effort, whatever the people devote to the bowl," Gleason said, "then that gets you back closer to a break even point."
The remaining five percent was spent on promotion and advertising, media guides, and training room supplies, according to the report.
Bob Burda, assistant commissioner of communications for the Big 12, said Tech’s allowance was substantially higher than most because of the distance from Lubbock to Jacksonville, which was calculated on the report as 1,202 miles.
"Obviously that reimbursement is going to be considerably higher than it would be if Texas Tech, say, played in the Cotton Bowl," he said, "where they were traveling from Lubbock to Dallas."
However, Gleason reiterated the allowance was not enough to expect a profit when the team returned from the Gator Bowl.
The same could be said for the Pacific Life Holiday Bowl in San Diego, Gleason said, where the University of Texas played Arizona State.
According to the Longhorns’ financial report, they went $68,850 over their travel allowance, which was just short of $1.2 million.
"I wouldn’t say it frustrates me," Gleason said, "but I would be supportive — we would be supportive, as a school — I think, of the conference increasing that travel allowance."
Burda said while the rise of airfare, the cost of charters and jet fuel has forced the issue of increasing the allowance, the present formulas were created to lessen the likelihood that teams lose money in a bowl game.
"There are mechanisms in place for them to minimally recoup the expenses involved," he said, "as well as the opportunity to look at travel party and number of members that traveled, so it’s hoped that teams aren’t losing money playing in bowls."
Tech Athletic Director Gerald Myers said a unanimous recommendation was made at an athletic directors’ meeting recently in Kansas City, Mo., for a retroactive expense check that can shoulder some of the financial burden.
"Our travel allowance was based on a lot lower cost for transportation," he said. "We did ask for an increase in travel allowance to the bowl games because all the schools face the same problem that the money was not enough to cover travel expenses."
Myers said the presidents of the Big 12 universities have the final say in issues that deal with expense budgets, so he said after the athletic directors vote, then the faculty athletic representatives control whether the recommendation reaches the presidents.
In this case, Myers said the faculty athletic representatives approved it, which will set up a discussion between the university presidents.
"It’s just a one-year deal, just a one-year request," he said. "We’ll have to take a look at it at the spring meeting and see if we can increase that travel allowance, we can’t predict what that cost will be next December, January, when those bowl games are played."
Tech president Jon Whitmore said the retroactive expense check was not an item at a separate board meeting between Big 12 university presidents in Kansas City, which he said probably means it will surface at the next meeting, May 23.
"Before it comes to the board of the presidents," he said, "the staff of the Big 12 puts together a report or whatever it is and it comes to the board, that’s speculation on my part."
Myers said he believes that the presidents would adjust the budget in this particular case.
"Normally, they would approve those expenses because of high cost of fuel," he said. "I think when that is finalized that we’ll get an additional expense check that will probably cover the losses of teams that had to travel to out of state games."
After everything gets finalized, Gleason said the overall exposure for the university on national television, on ESPN and in newspapers, will make it all worthwhile in an advertising sense.
"($200,000) is a lot of money, I guess you could say, but it’s in the big picture," he said. "If you were to purchase that advertising dollar, it’s not a large expense, when you look at it that way."