****The Official NEW new new conference realignment & shit talk thread****

[Saul Good]

Let's do it.

[greatgooglymoogly]

Originally Posted by RustShack

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.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by greatgooglymoogly

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.

[greatgooglymoogly]

Originally Posted by Bambi

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.

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

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.

Pretty much exactly what I wrote.

[blake5676]

Originally Posted by Bambi

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.

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.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by blake5676

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

[greatgooglymoogly]

Originally Posted by blake5676

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.

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.

[blake5676]

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?

[blake5676]

Originally Posted by greatgooglymoogly

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.

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.

[greatgooglymoogly]

Originally Posted by blake5676

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.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by blake5676

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.

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?

[Discuss Thrower]

Originally Posted by greatgooglymoogly

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.

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.

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

Kansas v North Carolina 2nd round outdrew the Orange Bowl and Sugar Bowl. That's pathetic.

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

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

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?

Kansas has a more popular football program?

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by Bambi

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?