Revenue share: stop feeding the football furnace

[Wet_Blanket_Guy]

The athletic department spent $175 million last year. If every school sees the same p/l by sport as Texas outlined in the tweet above, it’s on football to make up that $100 million difference between total expenses and the media contract.

Not arguing football is the money maker. But if we shift some of those funds in the rec-share bucket away from football and towards basketball…we will probably have 2 more football losses (either way not the cfp). And we could generate significantly more basketball revenue.

 

[PMWinSTP]

Not arguing football is the money maker. But if we shift some of those funds in the rec-share bucket away from football and towards basketball…we will probably have 2 more football losses (either way not the cfp). And we could generate significantly more basketball revenue.

That math does not work.

 

[GopherGrit]

Not arguing football is the money maker. But if we shift some of those funds in the rec-share bucket away from football and towards basketball…we will probably have 2 more football losses (either way not the cfp). And we could generate significantly more basketball revenue.

Have you considered that the bulk of the money that pays for the revenue sharing is coming from additional TV revenue from the Big Ten conference, and the conference is simply not going to allow any of its schools to "tank" their football programs in the way you're suggesting?

For all we know, the generally accepted 70-75% for football, could well be a mandate from the Big Ten and its TV partners.

 

[STPGopher]

True, but they were dead and it was mostly nonsense to me as a lad.

Forget that. We want to see that pimped out rascal scooter!

 

[GreasyGopher]

Not arguing football is the money maker. But if we shift some of those funds in the rec-share bucket away from football and towards basketball…we will probably have 2 more football losses (either way not the cfp). And we could generate significantly more basketball revenue.

So, you want to chop the bread winner for the department off at the knees and hope the same amount of revenue keeps rolling in…

If you spend significantly less than the rest of the B1G you will not be competitive. This isn’t a spend x dollars less lose two more games. It’s spend x dollars less and plummet to the bottom of the league.

PJ is NOT staying at a school that isn’t even attempting to be good, fans will stop going to the games, sponsors will pull back. Now, your whole department suffers and you put your ability to spend to the revenue sharing limit in question.

Your whole premise operates under the assumption that if you change the amount spent on football, nothing will change other than the team having a couple more losses every year.

 

[mggoph]

So where are you getting your 75 million from?