OT: Nick Saban correlated with $70 million increase in U of Alabama revenue
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/magic-nick-saban-everyone-wants-alabama-155022258.html
An interesting read about revenue changes at Alabama corrrelated with Nick Saban becoming the coach. Athletic department revenue went up by 11.7 million. Tuition revenue increased by 58 million (mostly from increases in tuition and enrollment from out of state students). Nick Saban only costs 5.3 million (in money). Selling your soul in the name of football can, in fact, pay well.
The Michigan-relevant takeaway would be that a successful athletic program generates a lot of income for the school. That conclusion is obvious, but seeing it in print is nice. It's also nice to have a retort for your friend who is convinced that schools waste money on football.
US News rankings for rough perspective: Michigan 29, Rutgers 68, Michigan State 72, Delaware 75, Alabama 77. The student in the article, who is from Long Island, cares more about Alabama and Delaware than Rutgers; read into that what you will.
tech or was that a joke?
/possible woops
>>Alabama gets out of state students?
my partner has two kids going there, from AZ. They threw full ride academic scholarships at them, plus their dad is a closet redneck.
They also pull a lot of kids out of state through merit scholarships and the like.
http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20130206/NEWS/130209858
and no one gave a damn about college football. It was all about the professional teams over in NYC.
It's only recently when they've started to play well have people started to care. It'll take some time but the Rutgers fan base is expanding.
To the "executive salary" post we had the other day. Saban, for all the money he's getting paid, looks kinda like a bargin, no?
Part of the reason it does make sense to pay a lot of coaches this much
Good for Alabama and Saban. Michigan is/was in a very differnt place in terms of its pool of students and academics. There is no shortage of OOS students looking for admission to Michigan, even with OOS tuition at about the highest level of any public U.
In terms of value of the program, Michigan is #2 per Forbes, second only to Texas.
http://www.forbes.com/pictures/emdm45lieh/2-michigan-wolverines/
Regardless, winning programs definitely help. I would bet that our Final Four appearance helps in significant ways to enahnce the brand as do 11-2/BCS football seasons.
If you use the data in the USA Today database, the jumps in revenue for Alabama's athletic department are rather substantial. Overall, from the final year of Shula and through the first five years of Saban, there was 45.6% increase, with two years of decreases but three years of 20%-plus growth in department revenue.
Interestingly, scholarship expenses are up 44.16% in that same period, and money spent on coaching staff is up 45.18% too. Profit from rights and licensing is up 53.97% since Saban as well.
is pretty near the top of its ceiling, whereas i suspect alabama has seen a rapid increase like they never have before and they will likely dropoff off slowly after saban's time.
Tuition revenue increased by 58 million (mostly from increases in tuition and enrollment from out of state students).
But the part in bold had nothing to do with Saban (I assume), so that's kind of misleading. Tuition revenue is up everywhere - every school keeps jacking it up.
Well, if you have more qualified students interested in your school than you can accept, raising tuition is quite doable. If you are currently accepting the maximum number of out of state students that are qualified, raising tuition will drive some of them away. I don't consider it 100% causality, but there's an effect there.
In other words, raising tuition tends to decrease enrollment in a vacuum; getting more students to pay more tuition is due to some outside factor (possibly named Nick Saban).
But there is no vacuum. Tuition is going up everywhere - and it seems like schools across the country are seeing record enrollment levels. The value of a college education in the job market is such that the demand curve is becoming pretty inelastic.
How much of that have they spent on the players' salaries during his tenure? Need a fair profitability measure for a true analysis.