B1G Revenue vs. Football Sucess
Interesting take on the increases in revenue in the B1G vs on-field success in football.
- The ADs in the B1G to include Smith and Brandon also are pointing towards recruiting geography, focus and schemes as a key difference.
- Size of staffs (Alabama significantly higher in non-coaching positions)
- SEC is 4th in funding behind B1G #1, PAC12, ACC
- Focus on funding non-revenue sports - B1G funds on average 4 more non-revenue sports than SEC and 6 more than Big12.
October 5th, 2013 at 8:59 AM ^
"There's a definite correlation between resources and the likelihood of success," Northwestern athletic director Jim Phillips said. "It certainly doesn't guarantee success, but if you under-resource it, you're setting yourself up to not meet or exceed the goals that you have."
This sort of struck me, because it seems to me that the Big Ten schools do set departmental goals and utilize the revenue to achieve them across all sponsored sports inasmuch as they can. As the article points out, it isn't exactly how you would operate a corporation (the SEC seems to actually have a decidedly corporate outlook, at least in my opinion), but the schools do this essentially because they can (and it provides opportunities for students that don't exist elsewhere - it's a selling point) and they can do it without creating problems for revenue sports.