Michigan finished 2nd behind Texas in terms of football profits in 2011/2012.
Michigan finished 2nd behind Texas in terms of football profits in 2011/2012.
THIS IS WHY WE CAN HAVE NICE THINGS.
Going for #1 next year!
does PSD mean photoshop document?
I think its something similar to LSD...
Its all the WOW experiences!
Look at Alabama spending 36.9mil. Gotta spend money if you wanna be the best perhaps we need to up the spending.
Too late, someone already hired Kliff Kingsbury.
I find it amazing that a state like Alabama with all of its socio-economic problems. Has the two highest spenders in college football. Nobody spends more money than Alabama and Auburn and look what it has done for them. Auburn has taken a step back. But nothing is going to knock Alabama off its pedestal. Unless Saban leaves or some serious sanctions come down the pipe. They're on top for the foreseeable future. Michigan needs to start spending this money (in legal ways) to assure we are at the top.
To play devil's advocate, U of Alabama's football prominence has helped(the warm weather and girls don't hurt either) to propel the school academically, attracting a much better caliber of student than they likely would have had they continued to flounder. Also, while it may seem disagreeable, people in Alabama are football-obsessed, and the dominance of Alabama may add more value to their lives than shaving 12-15 million off of their football budget to be used for other things.
They also do not have major professional sports to siphon off their entertainment dollars.
I find it amazing that a state like Alabama with all of its socio-economic problems
Do they really have worse problems than Michigan? We were the only state in the country to lose population last decade, our unemployment rate is consistently higher than the national average, our economic growth has been flat for a decade and our state tax base is shrinking. If we can manage to finance two successful athletic departments (U-M and MSU), why wouldn't Alabama, which is economically and demographically healthier than our state?
are in Michigan, we are not Alabama
People in Alabama probably the say the same thing about Michigan.
I agree with everything you said, and enjoy civil discussion. I live in Illinois, which is easily one of the worst states in the union. We have the worst debt per capita. I know Michigan, isn't much better off, if at all. But Alabama is at the bottom of everything. Obesity, health, education, average income. I know spending money on football doesn't help any of those things but it certaintly paints a brighter picture.
Household income data can be misleading though. Southern states have lower average household incomes but also a significantly lower cost of living, so their money goes further. A person making $40K in Alabama may live more comfortably than a person making $45K in Michigan.
As for obesity, health and whatnot, I don't really see what that has to do with Alabama residents' ability to financially support their football programs. Based on what I observe at Michigan Stadium, it seems like a lot of our fans have pretty generously-sized waistlines as well. They seem able to afford tickets anyway.
high obesity (southern) produce the best DL. These schools (live in Atlanta) also dedicate much more $ and time to HS football to create talent gaps vs other regions like the Great Lakes.
Is the cost of living really lower in Alabama than Michigan? Michigan has dirt-cheap real estate, low income taxes, and most else is close to fixed nationwide. What is cheaper in Alabama?
Alabama has a population of 4.8 million, and their showcase program spends $36.9 million. That is slightly less than $8 a person. That works out to about the price of a double McRib combo with a side of lard for each resident.
It isn't driving anyone to the poorhouse.
A few years back Charles Barkley was considering running for Governor of Alabama. When a reporter asked about a possible run he said "why not, if it weren't for Mississippi and Arkansas, Alabama would be last in everything".
of socio-econmonic problems itself.
Don't forget, this is only judging the spending that is ON the books. Can Newton's alleged salary will not be counted.
This is pretty easy to figure out: football is important to the Alabama schools. Their donors and students want to win. Spending is the best way to keep winning.
You may wonder how they can afford it, but can't a state afford one or two things it really likes? $100 million between all football expenses in Alabama is a lot of money, but it's just peanuts compared to, say, the Detroit Tigers payroll or the cost of the new stadium Minnesota is going to build for the Vikings.
I can't believe no one has made a "Those who pay will be champions" joke yet.
You make great points, and bring up things I wasn't thinking aboout when I first posted. I just want to be good, I want to be champions!
As much as people around here complain about Brandon's concern about the "Michigan brand" and all his money making schemes (which is totally fair, to be clear), they have no idea the extent to which Texas will sell their logo, name, etc to each and every bidder. The UT brand is stamped on everything in and around Texas without the least bit of shame.
Make it rain!
2003 Maurice Clarett
we can haz greene now?
I thought Notre Dame would be higher than it is, and I definitely thought OSU would crack the top-10. Texas is no surprise, but Arkansas kind of is.
I wish I had LSU Freek's abilities.
we could be #1!! Go Dave Go!!
We play at UConn.
It is actually the case that seven of the schools listed are also among the top ten in merchandise sales as well. Texas, Michigan, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, LSU and Notre Dame are all among the most profitable in this regard.
We might be #1 here eventually if Brandon continues to up the donation amout and mack brown continues to let texas fall into mediocrity.
"Time to ditch that boring old helmet boys! I bring you neon silver shimmering helmets with diamonds paid for by Domino's!" -DB
There seems to be a significant disparity between what Ohio and Michigan spends. Should Michigan be spending more?
Also, how does this study split out "expenses?" That is to say, are capital expenditures to expand plant infrastructure accounted for differently from say, Hoke's salary?
One of the problem with these studies is that capital expenditures (stadium improvements, scoreboards, practice facilities) get accounted for differently depending on the school.
It would be useful to see a breakdown of staff, facilities, travel, recruiting, food, etc.
Also... Michigan can afford a real OC.
God, yes, thank you! Data like this are never as clear and simple (or as comparable) as they might seem.
I don't endorse DB's sarcasm, because thats not a cool way to respond to constituents. But as someone who pokes around in higher Ed data for a living I can relate how exasperating it is when someone thinks a few articles or data tables tells them what they need to know to fully judge the organization's decision-making.
See Clarett, Maurice, et al.
given our struggles making money, it is probably time to raise ticket prices.
Maybe they're still paying the buyout clause on Maurice's contract
In a state that has felt the depression more than most...DB is all like:
My initial thoughts to this were I wonder how much more we would make if we were total sellouts in the big house and had ads and ran comemricals like nearly every other program does. I'm in no way in favor of this but am curious as to how much that would add to our profits.
Also, I have no clue what bama is spending 13million more dollars on. I assume part of that is coaching salaries but what would make up the rest. I feel like michigan program has everything it needs in terms of facilities, recruiting budget, etc. I just shocked that a program could be spending that much more than we are because I view us as a program that can, more or less, do what ever it wants.
By "right pricing" his "product" and ever more effective "branding", without concern for pitfalls down the road, DB has managed to turn a profit in just 1 year big enough to pay ARod's salary for 2, count 'em 1-2, years. I know I'll sleep better knowing our public, not-for-profit university is so effective at emptying our collective wallets. Looking forward purchasing another banner home schedule in 2014.
In the case of big-time athletics, it's go big or go home. That isn't going to change any time soon.
Do not email DB and reference this data when trying to "gently" explain to him that a third consecutive year of a significant ticket price hike seems unreasonable.
He will explain to you that you don't know more about department revenues and expenses than him just because you pulled some articles from the internet.
On a related note, DB can be one sarcastic SOB when he wants to be.
You should have tweeted him.
/boom hashtagged #
Man I can't wait until Weis and Willingham are off the payroll. ND will shoot up in no time.
I'll make sure to write that in the memo section of my check to the University for my increased PSD
Wolverine Network inevitable?
....is knowing the amount of varsity athletic programs it subsidizes. That way you can tell what you are spending and making on a per team basis. See below (best performers bolded):
Team: #of teams, Rev/team, Exp/team, Profit/team
Texas: 20 teams, $5.2M, $1.3M, $3.9M
Michigan: 27 teams, $3.2M, $0.9M, $2.3M
Georgia: 19 teams, $3.9M, $1.2M, $2.8M
Florida: 19 teams, $3.9M, $1.2M, $2.7M
Alabama: 21 teams, $3.9M, $1.8M, $2.1M
LSU: 14 teams, $4.9M, $1.7M, $3.2
Auburn: 19 teams, $4.1M, $1.8M, $2.3M
Notre Dame: 23 teams, $3.0M, $1.1M, $1.9M
Arkansas: 19 teams, $3.4M, $1.3M, $2.1M
Nebrasksa: 21 teams, $2.6M, $1.0M, $1.7M
For good measure, OSU: 39 teams! This actually explains a lot.
I'm sure OSU's profits were squeezed by the tremendous wads of ca$h they funneled to players, a la the Clarett thread.
These "profit" lists are useless because there's no standard across Universities on how they report athletic revenue.
For example, Ohio State doesn't report their apparel/merchandise revenue.
Other schools break up athletic revenue into specific sports, some lump all sports in together.
Some schools report conference sharing revenue, others do not.
Of course OhioSt doesn't report apparel/merch revenue. That is because its given to players so they can sell it themselves. Man I thought this was common knowledge.