Here it is specifically.

I suppose I was wrong on one tiny detail. The NFL Championship games bring in slightly more per minute.

But as you can see the comparison with college football isn't close.

https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/51...0/829/ua1c.png

Well, the fact that you have such a boner for CBB certainly shows that the bolded is a questionable opinion.

I don't run a multi billion dollar corporation that is paying to advertise their product during the CBB Championship game.

But whatever you want to believe is cool with me, this is America.

I just pulled it up and it says the NFL had 46 of the top 50 rated events while college football and college basketball had only 1 each. If you're arguing the NFL is more popular than either, that's already been said 1,000 times.


When they stripped out the NFL the top-50 was 16 college football and 7 college basketball. Kansas v North Carolina 2nd round outdrew the Orange Bowl and Sugar Bowl. That's pathetic.

You're delusional if you don't think college basketball is a money maker. Who cares what makes more? Both make schools a large profit.

Our basketball teams are the only sports that turn a profit. Football makes up a large part of our deficit, and that's with 2 paid shellackings in '11 and '12. '15 should be even worse, with 3 trips to the Dakotas and a game in Youngstown, OH.

Very few college football programs make money for their institutions. In fact they lose quite a bit.

College Basketball makes money hand over fist. Well….if you're good that it.

The men's team often beats the football team in attendance - I can't remember the last time we had 11,000 butts in seats for a football game. It also helps to have a women's basketball program whose popularity is far above average. A minimum base of 2,000 season ticket holders for any women's sport is a definite luxury.

Pretty much exactly what I wrote.

Again, football generates WAY more revenue for schools in comparison to football. There isn't really any way you can argue that. I'm sure there are some basketball schools where this isn't the case. Obviously KU being one of them. But let's be honest....you guys have to put your football tickets on Groupon and give them away for $1 if you donate canned goods. Not really a product to buy so basketball being more profitable than football at KU shouldn't be a shocker.

But other big basketball schools, like Kentucky or Michigan State for example, are still getting smoked by their football teams.

You should research before you open your mouth. Only way to make money in CFB is to play in the BCS. The rest is eaten up by runaway spending.

Then again if you're a Missouri fan you wouldn't know anything about the BCS.

https://www.toledoblade.com/sports/2...situation.html

Wichita State dropped football in the 80's, and I would argue it was a fantastic decision. Since then, they've won the College World Series and appeared in the Final Four, not to mention the numerous conference championships they've won in those sports.

Not every university is fortunate enough to be in a major conference. For those of us on the outside, we have to make hard decisions sometimes. Football is a sunk marketing cost, and it isn't always justified.

You're wrong again. You just posted a link about how much $$ teams make by playing in a single bowl game. That is a very small slice of the pie when it comes to money made by a football program. Do you think that link then means that a school like TX or LSU or South Carolina or Nebraska or Florida or Georgia (none of which made a BCS game) had their football revenue in the red this year?

I agree with you completely. It's definitely not a level playing field and that was obviously a smart decision for the Shockers. I'm just trying to explain to Bambi that football is where the dollars are, even for some of the "blue blood" basketball schools like Kentucky, when looking at overall revenue generated. There are SOME exceptions, but it's not the norm for schools with both sports from AQ conferences.

I saw a post on a Missouri State forum that claimed our student ambassadors were instructed by the university president to tell potential students we were looking to move up in football. Now, this is a whopper if true, but I have no idea who would even take us. Football will still lose money, but the FBS status alone would be a major marketing tool.

Well lets consider your example here. How did KU generate $100M more than Mizzou the past 7 years? After all, football is way more lucrative and KU apparently gives away free tickets. Explain why Mizzou got dominated in revenue?

I don't care how much money they're putting into Plaster... That stadium isn't fit for any level of Division I BCS play.

I feel sorry for whomever told the ambassadors to feed that line of BS.

Somehow, though, that ku/nc tournament game couldn't beat out a Mizzou regular season football game.

Kansas has a more popular football program?

It must be something. My hunch is that Mizzou doesn't charge squat for prices, that's my guess. Outside the top 15 or so football programs most don't charge all that much because they can't. Schools like Mizzou and Miss and NC State etc really can't justify Bama or OU ticket prices. That's why their revenue is so low by comparison.



But if KU gives away football tickets yet blows out Mizzou in reported revenue......what does that say?

Do you actually have some links and facts to back up the wonderful observation of yours...or is this more lying bullshit on your part?

I have plenty of links I'd love to provide to show the basketball queens what the actual numbers are but for whatever reason I've never been given the ability to post links on CP. Anytime I try it says I have to be approved and given permission first. Quite annoying actually.

Already been posted. This is all public information which you can easily find. Every ath program files these financial reports with the Department of Education.



Since I know you struggle with facts, this 2012 is an example to help get you started:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colle...ools/finances/

PB and Bambi now share the biggest dumb****s mantle with knowmo banned...Congrats!!

B ball is a secondary sport. This is America and we are a football country. To argue otherwise is dumb as all hell. Nobody gives a shit about hoops except for their damn brackets. That is why they get ad money.

Like I said...I can't post links for some stupid reason (even have to take the link out of your post to quote for response).

But, using your USA Today link, tell me how many of the top 20 schools on that list are basketball schools. Maybe 2 out of 20?? And I already told you that Michigan St and Kentucky both have football programs that bring in more revenue than their basketball. Louisville is an exception to the rule.

Your link does nothing but discredit the point you are trying to make. What is wrong with your brain??

Love watching PB and Bambi get MU fans all stirred...

Always good for a laugh. Thanks guys.

You have to reach a certain post count to post links (to keep spammers at bay). You're probably almost there, but I don't know what the threshold is.

Great, PGM the yip-dog is back barking again. Nobody ever said football wasn't the most popular sport, we simply said it's PRO football that's most popular. College football really isn't. If you're not smart enough to separate the two (and by all accounts, you aren't), then you'll never get what is being said.

Brackets dummy. The sport itself is pure garbage and worse this year. Horrible product.

Huh? I already said that at the top football programs yes, football generates the most money. In what way did my link dispute that? Everybody knows Texas & Alabama & LSU and etc etc make their dough on football. Never been disputed one single time. But there's a serious dispute about whether football makes all that much money for the other 110 D1 programs (or as Googly points out, the other 200 sub-tier programs). Most studies say it doesn't.


I'd also point out the revenue numbers are not relevant to popularity since they're driven by structure. Football keeps their money, basketball divides it. The NCAA tourney funds 99% of the NCAA's budget. Football contributes bumpkis. That's why the data is so skewed.

Why are you now talking about the NFL? At absolutely NO point in this discussion has anyone made the claim that college football is more popular than the NFL. You're changing the subject and deflecting because you're losing an argument, per usual.

People like brackets and work pools. They are great....the spirt isn't near the quality of CFB.

Wrong. Mizzou fans try to lump college football in with the NFL in depicting the generic "football" as more popular. And Bambi & I have separated the two. DId you not just read PGM's post above? He clearly believes college football is vastly more popular despite the data proving otherwise. Because it's "football", ya know?


College football isn't much more popular at all than college basketball, and outside of the South it is less popular in the other 3 quadrants of the country.

It is, but will never expect a cartoon clown bird fan to acknowledge it. Keep up the bullshit "data" though.

You can lump them together or separate them. Either way, football is more popular than basketball.

For christ's sake dude, you posted a link showing it to be true and even WROTE it yourself when you said taking the NFL out of the top 50, there were 16 CFB games to 7 CBB games top rated. What am I missing???

When a 2nd round tourney game on Sunday afternoon outdraws the Sugar & Orange Bowl (and nearly ties the Cotton with Texas A&M and OU), all in primetime, college football ain't nearly as popular as you think.

Of course football "brings in" more money initially. No one is arguing this. But a football program costs schools so much more to operate. There are literally hundreds if not thousands of people involved to put on a football game (players, coaches, support staff, technical people, ushers, etc..). Not to mention how much it costs to travel all of those people for away games.

Now while bball has all of these people there aren't as many of them due to the nature of the game. Thus you can put on your production for far less of a cost while maintaining an extremely high dollar value for advertising, ticket sales, TV deals, etc (at least for the big time schools.)

This is ECON 101...

Whenever I'm feeling down, I search out those two jenkem huffers in this thread to feel better about things in general.

They serve a valuable service here, no doubt.

The funny things is...once the college playoff gets up and running, the ratings will skyrocket for football. CBB most popular days are behind it, given how the product on the court continues to decline, and the way the fouls are being called now day...the only time people are going to care is March...and even then, it is more of an excuse to throw a party or take a whole day off and hit the sports bar.

Once again, a regular season Mizzou football game was watched by more people than the tournament game you are referencing.

I don't blame college football for copying March Madness, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery after all. It will of course encourage folks to make brackets and have an excuse to throw a party and to hit some sports bars.

You saw a mizzou game. The rest of us watched an Auburn showcase.

Kansas on the other hand destroyed a blue blood in one of the best environments of all of 2013. En route to landing the #1 recruit in the nation.

Funny how things work out.

Starting with a "final four" full of political turmoil isn't exactly what I think everyone had in mind.

But that's what they're getting, lol.

It certainly undercuts their long-standing argument that the regular season matters in that sport. "Every week is a playoff!" they spouted for decades. Raising the white flag with the new playoff is an admission they were entirely wrong.

An Auburn showcase in which Missouri led half way through the 3rd quarter. Seems legit.

Such buffoons

MSU will never be in a BCS conference, so that's not an issue. It's not like the MAC and Sun Belt have Jerryworlds themselves.

Raise those banners for losing! Gotta love hoops.

Florida hates basketball.

Michigan students plan a "jort-out" for home game vs Nebraska.

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-bas...medium=twitter

Haha.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BfrjcJ0CcAA4fA2.jpg

Nebraska should plan a "juggalo-out" for their next home game vs. Michigan.

ROFL

OMG. :eek:

If losing is a cause for banners, Mizzou's rafters must be overflowing by now.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Ouch is right. RT <a href="https://twitter.com/Jake_Trotter">@Jake_Trotter</a>: SEC schools signed the No. 1 players from the Big 12 states of Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Iowa. Ouch.</p>&mdash; Jeremy Crabtree (@jeremycrabtree) <a href="https://twitter.com/jeremycrabtree/statuses/431122982183112704">February 5, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Have to do something when the Big 12 flagship makes the SEC flagship their bitch during bowl season.

like the cotton bowl

I noticed the tweet left off the state of Missouri.

It also left off Arkansas, Georgia and the rest of the SEC states.

I read a lot of your stuff on the DC board and we think somewhat similar. How are you such a colossal moron when it comes to your obsession with Mizzou?

Missouri is in the Big12?

I did check the Oklahoma rankings and it looks like OU signed the top player there. And 7 of the top-12 went to OU or Oklahoma State, while 2 went to the SEC:
http://rivals.yahoo.com/kansas/footb...ings/rank-3314


Although truthfully, thinking about college football recruiting is about the last thing I need to be doing today when I'm not getting my work done.

ESPN rankings are different. That's what Crabby would be referring to. He had Alabama-bound QB David Cornwell as the top player in Oklahoma.

Top player in Missouri (Ranking system): Destination

Brian Wallace (Rivals, 247): Arkansas
Andy Bauer (ESPN): Missouri
Rod Johnson (Scout): Florida State

So, the least reputable of the Big 3 thought Rod Johnson was the best guy in-state. All the others tab a guy who is going to the SEC.

Gee, I wonder why that is...dumbass

Basically two football Final Fours in the last several years. You Beaks would beat yo meats to that.

Taking their lunch money again...

Looks like the SEC had a really good NSD. Maybe they will be able to compete with the Big 12 and ACC this season.

You really can't be this stupid.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/5hfYJsQAhl0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Patterson not pushing for rivalry renewal
Posted on February 5, 2014 | By Mike Finger
PRINT

AUSTIN – Last week, new Texas defensive coordinator Vance Bedford posted multiple Twitter messages asking fans if they wanted UT and Texas A&M to play football again. Wednesday, Longhorns athletic director Steve Patterson said there are no plans to make that happen.

“The reason the game went away is that A&M moved to another conference,” Patterson said, referring to the Aggies’ switch from the Big 12 to the Southeastern Conference in 2012. “Does that change? It’s not at the top of my list.”

Categories: Aggies, Colleges, Football, Longhorns
http://blog.chron.com/sportsupdate/2...valry-renewal/

I have periods where I wish my school had a rival. Then I see how MU/KU or OU/Texas fans behave around each other and that changes my mind for a couple of months.

Shocker fans are... well they're there.

Bevo wants no part of A and M

Cowards just like another school in their conference

I follow basketball, but I'm a football fan first and foremost. The Valley is terrible in that respect - I don't care about a bunch of schools in Illinois and the Dakotas. I've never even been to those places. MSU is in the Ozarks, and is closer to DFW than Chicago. We need to be in a conference that reflects this.

Iowa State is in the SEC now?

We also got the #1 recruit from our state the year before too, after he decommited from Mizzou.

There aren't any B12 schools in Missouri.

Uhhhh

The SEC signed IOWAs #1 ranked recruit :shrug: