Nice work, if you can get it.

Mark Emmert pulled down close to $1.7 million in the NCAA’s last fiscal year, which was an almost 50% bump over what his predecessor made.  He probably chalks that up to hazardous duty:

The NCAA’s new tax return also provided an indication of the mounting legal pressure it has been facing.

The association reported nearly $9.5 million in legal expenses during a fiscal year that ended Aug. 31, 2012 – more than what it reported for that spending category in its two previous fiscal years, combined. (While compensation data in the federal tax returns of non-profits are for a calendar year, the revenue and expense reporting covers the organization’s fiscal year.)

The NCAA reported nearly $4.1 million in legal expenses for 2010-11 and a little more than $4.1 million for 2009-10.

Hanging out with counsel ain’t no fun, y’all.  And reviewing those bills is a real pain.  Such small print!

Kids, this is why you should cherish that amateur status.  You don’t need those pesky headaches.


Filed under The NCAA

7 responses to “Nice work, if you can get it.

  1. HVL Dawg

    The $1.7 million figure is a bogus figure that comes from the NCAA’s 990T filing. All nonprofits file a 990T which supposedly lists the compensation of key employees. I’m very familiar with this because my name apeares on a 990T along with a figure everyone thinks I make.

    His salary is $1.2 – alot of money, but let’s be honest, reasonable for an organization of this size. The rest of the balance represents costs of the employee that the IRS makes you add to the total compensation. It is cost, but not really compensation like most people think of compensation.

    Now, it’s fine to say he doesn’t do a good job, or that he makes 2x his predecessor, or that $9.5 for legal fees tells us something. But he doesn’t pull down $1.7 and so what if he does? I don’t think the NCAA should pay less, but certainly they should get better performance from the position.

    And besides, $1.7 won’t hire you a DC anymore in our league, right?


    • Hackerdog

      Perhaps he doesn’t pull down the full $1.7M. But he still makes significantly more than the last guy and one would be hard pressed to name something he’s done well in his job. Emmert oversees over 400 employees, but is paid in line with the lower-compensated CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, who are all for-profit ventures.

      It seems hard to justify to me.


    • Monday Night Frotteur

      I don’t agree $1.67 million is “bogus” (if people don’t think that $200,000+ for retirement and “other compensation” is compensation, they should), but the thing here is that he’s making that sum to enforce a pernicious cartel arrangement (supervising “amateur” sports). As Jay Bilas eloquently put it:

      “The idea that every person in the system except the athlete can be paid at market rates is just laughably stupid.”


      • 1996Dog

        Yeah, my rule of thumb is if the families in Frontline’s “Two American Families” would think it’s compensation, it’s compensation.

        Retirement? Yep. Health insurance? Probably these days. Free lodging, car, travel, membership dues, and the like? Yep. Bet there’s a lot of that in there.

        I’m reminded of a guy I heard on the radio defending Gordon Gee’s perks (free mansion, massive entertainment budget, $500,000 for private jet travel, etc.) who said “what, is he supposed to pay for that himself?” Uhhhh, for 99% of us that’s how it works.


      • Nice work if you can get it…..”Please show me how!” Senator, love that Cybil Shepherd song. I cannot say it any better than Jay and insert Lrgk9’s Gravatar.


  2. Tommy

    Heckuva job, Marky!


  3. Mayor of Dawgtown

    If salary is supposed to be based on ability Emmert is the most overpaid person in America.