About ten years ago I did a post comparing the USC and Clemson athletic budgets. At the time people were freaking out about the perception that USC was making more than $20 million more a year than us. Long story short - that number was greatly exaggerated. All the websites that quote total athletic or specific football or basketball budgets are pulling it from information that is reported to the government annually. It is extremely important to understand that this information is A) voluntary and B) non-standardized. There are lots of different ways to do accounting for a organization as large as a University athletic department. In the case of USC v Clemson, the most glaring difference is that the Gamecock Club and all it’s funds are run through the University. At Clemson, IPTAY funds are not run through the University so are not included in these budget numbers. But it isn’t as simple as adding the two because IPTAY does pay money directly to the University (i.e. scholarship funds) and these funds are reflected in the budget. Without actual line item budgets from any programs you want to compare and any affiliate fund raising organizations you aren’t making a legitimate comparison.
As for basketball, the question for me is whether Brownell has actually been denied the funds to hire an assistant he thought best for our program. If Brownell had a particular assistant who was willing to come to Clemson but was unable to hire them because of willful interference from the athletic director and/or board of trustees I believe that would be newsworthy. But outside of innuendo from a single poster I have never heard such a thing.