Michigan not in top 10 spending on CFB

Submitted by Maize and Blue… on December 30th, 2010 at 5:27 PM

Alabama and OSU lead the way spending over 30 million each.  Six of the top 10 from SEC. TCU spends more than we do.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/bowls10/news/story?id=5970794

Update: We placed 5th in the Big 10 spending a little over 18 million. In other words, we spent 58% of what OSU spent. The other Big 10 schools who spent more were Iowa, Wisky, and PSU. http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/SelectDownloadOptions.aspx

Comments

CRex

December 30th, 2010 at 5:37 PM ^

With our miserly spending poor GERG is likely being forced to trade stuffed animals for tattoos.

"Hey will this beaver I rubbed all over Demens' face buy me a giant flaming skull tattooed on my back?"

Togaroga

December 30th, 2010 at 6:03 PM ^

...in the top 10 and three teams who we compete against and recruit against annually clearly outspend us.  Spending more money isn't necessarily the answer, but it is a sign that the school is committed to the program.  I would like to see us commit more money to the program.  We sell out every game, have the highest attendance, merchandise up the wazoo.  I'd think we make money hand-over-fist. 

Shouldn't we be higher on that list?  Shouldn't spending whatever it takes to be the best team in college football be a top priority?

CalGoBlue

December 30th, 2010 at 9:54 PM ^

I agree with Togaroga.  Do you have *reason* for "no" or is it obvious to someone like you who attended a beter university than me?  (I merely attended the University of Michigan.)

AMazinBlue

December 30th, 2010 at 6:17 PM ^

these programs.  The amazing thing is it DOESN't include the cash that some of the players get at certain schools.  The anonymous benefactor $$ would make a more interesting list.  Of course no players are getting paid, right.

Abe Froman

December 30th, 2010 at 6:48 PM ^

you dont spend as much when you dont have to finance a bowl trip at the end of every season.

 

the article mentions that these quotes are for periods ending in mid-2010.

 

sad but true.

Tater

December 30th, 2010 at 8:41 PM ^

Michigan is notoriously cheap for what they pay head coaches, too.  In football, they almost always promote assistants with no HC experience and pay them 60 percent of the going rate because "this IS Michigan."   Even Bo had to fly to College Station, TX to get a competitive salary at Michigan.  Johnny Orr and Bill Frieder left because other schools offered them great raises that they knew Michigan would never match. 

The HC of one of Michigan's club teams (I won't say which or who) has often opined that as long as Michigan fills the Big House for every home game, they have no reason to spend any more money.  Hopefully, the facilities upgrades and RR's competitive salary indicate that the days of Michigan settling for a team that has a reputation of being elite but only wins one NC in the last sixty years is over.   

HAIL-YEA

December 30th, 2010 at 10:04 PM ^

that the top spenders are without question the top programs over the past few years... I would be curious to see what that list looked like 10 years ago.  What is the percentage of those #s spent on recruitng? it would think it is a small percentage. I don't see an obvious correlation between spending and winning..I mean, it's not the pros.

ilbt's

December 31st, 2010 at 10:35 AM ^

As the numbers show, you spend you win. U of M needs to fiqure out if it wants to be a winner or one of the big boys when it comes to college football.  As we have seen the last three years this is not happening. Brandon better have a plan in place if this university wants to compete and be one of the Top Ten programs in the country. It has been far too long since this program has been what it should be.