you sure read a lot into a short data-based article.Your point being? I read the articles and to me their primary purpose is to bring about envy on the part of those schools whose sports programs aren't as successful as those at UA.. That envy brings about a strong dislike (or should I say "hatred"?) for UA simply because our sports programs are successful. Mostly, I think, it's pointed at our football program and the success we've enjoyed since CNS arrived. Yes, our football program is very successful. It's so successful, in fact, that it pays the bills for other sports as well. But then I have to ask "So what?".
If that's not the point, then I missed the point entirely.
But again, so what? Isn't the point of every college sports program to be self-sufficient?; to be able to provide for the other programs at the school as well as their own? Even in the realm of college sports, doesn't "charity" begin at home?
I think his summary is longer than the article.you sure read a lot into a short data-based article.
I think so, brother. It's just a pie chart.Your point being? I read the articles and to me their primary purpose is to bring about envy on the part of those schools whose sports programs aren't as successful as those at UA.. That envy brings about a strong dislike (or should I say "hatred"?) for UA simply because our sports programs are successful. Mostly, I think, it's pointed at our football program and the success we've enjoyed since CNS arrived. Yes, our football program is very successful. It's so successful, in fact, that it pays the bills for other sports as well. But then I have to ask "So what?".
If that's not the point, then I missed the point entirely.
But again, so what? Isn't the point of every college sports program to be self-sufficient?; to be able to provide for the other programs at the school as well as their own? Even in the realm of college sports, doesn't "charity" begin at home?
If you take the time to read the comments below, Reb hit the nail on the head.you sure read a lot into a short data-based article.
8 comments on a yahoo article do not make much of a nailIf you take the time to read the comments below, Reb hit the nail on the head.
No. If that was true then 80% (something like that, not sure) of university athletic departments would be failing and should be closed. College athletics is about name brand recognition. In fact, that's why a certain college president named Denny decided to emphasis football at Alabama. Sports are like company advertising departments. They don't usually produce anything that makes money, but they bring attention to your company in hopes of increasing sales....But again, so what? Isn't the point of every college sports program to be self-sufficient?;...
The point is simple and to the point. We make money and most lose money. I also found it interesting where the revenue came from and where it was spent. I'm still trying to figure out what your point was.Your point being? I read the articles and to me their primary purpose is to bring about envy on the part of those schools whose sports programs aren't as successful as those at UA.. That envy brings about a strong dislike (or should I say "hatred"?) for UA simply because our sports programs are successful. Mostly, I think, it's pointed at our football program and the success we've enjoyed since CNS arrived. Yes, our football program is very successful. It's so successful, in fact, that it pays the bills for other sports as well. But then I have to ask "So what?".
If that's not the point, then I missed the point entirely.
But again, so what? Isn't the point of every college sports program to be self-sufficient?; to be able to provide for the other programs at the school as well as their own? Even in the realm of college sports, doesn't "charity" begin at home?
Football is the bulk, probably almost the entirety, of the University's sports branding, and requires no subsidy. If it were a for-profit business, (and I'll assume for the sake of expediency that contributions are really tax-deductible ticket purchases) football would seem to have a 53% pre-tax margin ($47.1 million divided by $88.7 million). That's a nicely profitable business, and demonstrates the power of a great product and loyal customers....College athletics is about name brand recognition...Sports are like company advertising departments. They don't usually produce anything that makes money, but they bring attention to your company in hopes of increasing sales.
Football and basketball are usually the money makers true. How the funds are really spent from those 2 programs is mystery to me, too. No, I do not how the University measures returns. That would assume that they perceive it as advertising. Most universities do not. However, Denny's goal for football back in the hey day was to get the name of University of Alabama name recognition on a national level. In that regards, he succeeded. One other side benefit to athletics is the bonding of the alumni to the university. Don't have any answers for you though. Just those observations.Football is the bulk, probably almost the entirety, of the University's sports branding, and requires no subsidy. If it were a for-profit business, (and I'll assume for the sake of expediency that contributions are really tax-deductible ticket purchases) football would seem to have a 53% pre-tax margin ($47.1 million divided by $88.7 million). That's a nicely profitable business, and demonstrates the power of a great product and loyal customers.
What interests me is that 87% ($41.2 million) of that profit goes to "other areas of the athletic department" versus just 13% ($5.9 million) going to "non-athletic initiatives." It's not unreasonable to assume that a large chunk of such "other areas" is made up of subsidies of non-revenue sports. If so, that's a hefty price to pay for branding outside football - and I'm a branding consultant, so I ought to love that kind of spend! I wonder how the University measures its return on this versus whatever the alternate opportunity might be?
Note - This is not a criticism; just intellectual (so far as I'm capable) curiosity; and yes, I know, Title IX etc. etc.
Some may come from sale of Alabama clothing that is not specific to any one sport.$143.8 million in revenue, $88.7 million comes from the football program according to data obtained by BusinessOfCollegeSports.com.
Basketball nets about 6 million. Where does the other 50 million come from?
Just read that and I wonder the same!How did Wisconsin jump over us? What seismic event occurred for them to make such a large jump?