These numbers are released from the 23-24 season and this graphic has been floating around social media. We have increased our spending since, but just 2 years ago we were 36th in the nation in terms of expenses for WBB at a little over $5 million. UCONN, SC, LSU at $12 million. Texas, Iowa, and Duke around $10 million.
UConn earned the No. 1 overall seed in women's March Madness 2026, but its $11.86 million women's basketball budget was barely surpassed by LSU.
www.sportico.com
It is important to note that there is a huge correlation on the upper end of this graph between teams who spend the most and coaches who can demand the most.
Salaries with their probable earned incentives included (which would show in expenses)
Staley: over $4.6 Million last year
Auriemma: just under $4 Million
Mulkey: Just under $4 Million
Schaefer: $2.6 Million
Freese: $2 Million
By Comparison, Banghart earned between $500K and $600K last year. No, that is not because she is grossly underpaid. That roughly correlates to her market value. I bet she could leverage a couple $100K more with a competing offer, but she likely is not yet a Million Dollar Coach on the open market.
So having a top-tier established coach who already has titles under their belt adds about $1-3 Million to your budget. They are probably also able to demand more for their assistants, adding more to expenses. The UofSC coaching staff earns more than the entire UNC WBB budget.
Of course I am focusing on the correlation here, not implying causation. Because we know that schools like LSU, Texas and Kentucky went out and bought top coaches; they did not develop and retain them. So that is a function of having money and being willing to spend it.
There are some top spenders who do not fit this mold. UCLA's Cori Close earned around $1 Million. Jan Jensen, recently promoted from within at Iowa earns $1.2 Million/ I would argue she is actually overpaid, but Iowa spending in general is probably related to trying to ride the Caitlyn Clark wave still. Dook does not make coaches salaries public.
So what schools like dook, Iowa and UCLA spend on WBB probably marks the high end for teams without all-star coaches.
Also important, these expenses going forward do NOT include NIL deals, just revenue share. There was one fiscal year where NIL collectives came in house, but in the future they will, by their nature, be separate from athletic budget spending and largely dark money. This is where I actually hope we compete. If we could somehow match what teams like UCLA, USC, Oklahoma, TCU, etc... are clearly willing to spend on players right now, we would be in the national title conversation with or without a HOF coach.
