A river of money runs through it.

In one of our many discussions here on the subject of a post-amateurism college football world, someone took the position that the Kentuckys of that world would be constantly outbid by the Georgias for top-flight players.  (Nevermind that the difference between the two schools’ 2013 revenues was less than $4 million.)

This, though, can’t hurt things.

The point here is that I don’t think any of us has a real handle on how much money is flowing through college athletics departments these days.  Which is a good reason not to jump to apocalyptic conclusions.

About these ads

10 Comments

Filed under It's Just Bidness

10 responses to “A river of money runs through it.

  1. Deutschland Domiciliary Dog

    Yeah, KY puts all its spare cash into basketball, in which the Georgias “of that world would be constantly outbid by the” Kentuckys “for top-flight players.”

    Works both ways doesn’t it?

  2. Rp

    OK. I’ll jump back on this. The UK example is valid. We are on a football blog, so i take it we are discussing football revenue and expenditures.

    I know it’s all one athletic department, but most organizations are not in the business of continually subsidizing less profitable divisions with revenue earned by the more profitable ones. UK is no exception. Form a 2011 Forbes article: Alabama football revenue (2009): $71,884,525.00 vs. UK $31,890,572.00 and Alabama football expenditures: $31,118,134.00 vs UK $13,905,724.00. So UK is not using roundball revenue to subsidize their crappy football program.

    I believe the players have a strong case and probably should win this suit. I also believe a verdict in their favor has a high likelihood of damaging the game. It will not be apocalyptic, but it certainly will not improve the game from a fan’s perspective. From a completely self-interested perspective I would prefer the NCAA prevail, but that would not be fair to the players who are being screwed. I really wish the NCAA would wise up and settle this thing on some reasonable terms.

    • I know it’s all one athletic department, but most organizations are not in the business of continually subsidizing less profitable divisions with revenue earned by the more profitable ones.

      That’s not what the NCAA’s arguing.

      And who’s to say how UK’s athletic department operates post-O’Bannon?

  3. DawgPhan

    I really doubt that my experience and expectations w/r/t UGA will change regardless of the outcome of any of these cases.
    They are still going to play games, I am still going to attend/watch, cheer for the old red and black, and cuss those miserable savages in orange.

    I can’t see any reason why any of that would change if Keith Marshall can buy an extra tank of gas, or up-size his combo meal.

  4. Reipar

    So much is constantly changing that I agree we do not have a real handle for the money. However, I believe we have a real handle on what sports are most important to various schools. If you let the schools pay what they want then some will likely consolidate some of that money to try and buy more than their fair share of star players in that sport.

  5. Normaltown Mike

    That’s a lot of FedEx envelopes for Cat Nation.

  6. Parent

    UK is in the process of spending almost 200 million on stadium renovations and new football facilities, so they are not afraid to spend some revenue trying to get Stoops what he needs to try to keep up with the Sabans a bit.