What Utah basketball's operating budget indicates about the Utes' ability to compete in Big 12

Money is the name of the game in college sports these days.

It's nothing necessarily new; being able to boast state-of-the-art facilities and fancy locker rooms have been integral parts of recruiting for decades, along with having the necessary resources to fund expensive coaching salaries (and subsequently, their massive buyouts).

The implementation of revenue-sharing and NIL for student-athletes have changed the game, though. Donors are now being asked to help fund massive war chests to assemble rosters, recruiting is essentially a year-round endeavor and general managers have become a necessity for any program looking to keep up in the never-ending arms race.

At most schools, the football team is typically where most of the cash flows in and out from, given it has the most roster spots to fill and garners the viewership needed for conferences to secure lucrative TV contracts. Men's basketball is usually a close second on the pecking order, with NCAA Tournament units serving as a unique way for leagues to reward their members for their postseason success.

That dynamic is certainly true at Utah. According to the athletic department's 2025 fiscal year report, Utes football drove in $101,799,480 at an expense of $51,792,175 — equating to a profit of about $50 million, the highest net income the program has generated since at least the 2014 fiscal year.

The men's basketball program also had a record-setting year: it brought in $18,542,580 in total revenue and operated at a cost of $11,191,830, equating to a profit of $7,350,750. For context, the athletic department hadn't reported more than $4 million in net income in men's basketball between the fiscal years of 2014 and 2024.

When compared to the rest of the Big 12, though, the Utes' operating budget was in the middle of the pack.

Operating Budgets of Big 12 Men's Basketball Programs

Courtesy of Matt Brown of Extra Points.

Arizona: $22,608,493
Kansas: $19,732,079
Texas Tech: $16,600,424
Houston: $14,626,221
Cincinnati: $11,883,407
Kansas State: $11,464,762
Utah: $11,191,830
West Virginia: $10,766,985
Iowa State: $10,578,135
Arizona State: $10,185,948
Oklahoma State: $9,530,565
Colorado: $8,608,359

Excluded: BYU, Baylor, UCF and TCU

What Utah's Operating Budget for Men's Basketball Says About Big 12 Viability

With a few exceptions, there's a clear correlation between operating budget and on-the-court success in the Big 12. The top four teams in the league standings were the four programs with the biggest operating budgets in 2025 (at least, among the schools with such records made available). Conversely, the three Big 12 teams with the smallest operating budgets finished No. 12, No. 14 and No. 11, respectively, in the standings.

Now, record and operating budget didn't align for all Big 12 programs. Iowa State's operating budget was smaller than than both Utah and Kansas State's, yet the Cyclones are a No. 2 seed in the NCAA Tournament and the Utes and Wildcats are sitting at home after finishing in the bottom two of the standings.

Iowa State is quite the anomaly, actually. Based on Brown's findings, the Cyclones' 2025 budget was the smallest among power conference teams that earned an at-large bid into the NCAA Tournament. Going even further, the University of Memphis, which has a smaller enrollment than Iowa State and resides in a non-power conference, had a similar operating budget as the Cyclones' ($10,776,074).

The Tigers went 13-19 and tied for eighth place in the American Athletic Conference standings this past season.

If anything, the apparent discrepancy between Iowa State's operating budget and its hardwood success is a testament to the culture T.J. Otzelberger has curated over his five years in Ames. The Cyclones haven't missed the big dance since Otzelberger took over as head coach in 2021, despite winning two games the year prior to his arrival, and have won at least 25 games in each of the past three seasons. They recruit well, retain their key players and utilize the transfer portal when needed.

Iowa State also had recent success to lean on as well. Fred Hoiberg guided the program to four straight NCAA Tournament berths during his five years, and Steve Prohm had the Cyclones dancing three out of his six seasons as head coach before the baton got passed to Otzelberger.

Utah, on the other hand, is just forming an identity under Alex Jensen, who just wrapped up his first season as head coach, and doesn't have as much recent postseason success compared to the Cyclones. The Utes have won three NCAA Tournament games in the past 20 years and haven't gone dancing since Jakob Poeltl was in Utah threads (2016). Jumping around conferences probably hasn't helped, either.

Would a bigger budget change things? Probably. But until the vibe around the program changes, Jensen and company can't expect to have the same budget as an Arizona or a Kansas. Bringing a program that's been dormant for years back to relevancy requires starting from the ground up with solid recruiting and a tight-knit culture — not to mention, working with less.

That doesn't mean the Utes aren't deserving of a bigger budget, though. The Indiana football program is a prime example of how the proper funds can turn around a team's fortunes. And given the lack of recent success and brand value, the Utes probably have to overpay to beat out more-established programs for recruits and transfers.

So, the truth lies somewhere in the middle: more money typically leads to better results, but culture is an important building block to turning around a program. How Utah manages that balancing act in the coming years will go a long way in determining its on the court success.