If you were AD
- Thread starter dawgphd
- Start date
How much more were we spending and what was the bottom line when Vic was here?Vic showed we can field a consistent winner, but I don’t know what our bottom line revenue was back then. I’m assuming we were still losing money, but if the bottom line is -$4MM either way, I’d rather be a winning program.
I’d prefer to spend the absolute minimum to put a team on the floor. Allocate the $ to sports that matter.
WBB is the third most popular college sport. I assume you’d want to allocate that money to baseball, which 80% of the country doesn’t give a schitt about.
First of all I'd be scratching my head tryng to figure out how and why you even had to spend at least $4MM on women's basketball , much less lose $4MM on top of what you spent??
But that doesn't mean it's the 3rd popular sport in MSU's portfolio.
If I had to pick out what non-revenue sport would I rather be good at, it's baseball 100 times out of 100.
I doubt the whole Coaching Staff cost $1M… maybe we need a Department of MSU Efficiency
Out of sheer curiosity, I just looked at the lady gamecocks budget to see what a national championship caliber program was doing, and I was surprised to see that even they had a $5M+ deficit last year.
The claim is that while men’s tournament credits go straight to the men’s budget, women’s tournament money gets buried elsewhere. That said, even if you do the math and estimate tournament revenue for them based on the fact that their media rights deal is about half of the men’s deal, it still leaves these programs in the red.
Let’s face it. It’s a result of media deals growing exponentially for several decades and ADs having more money than they know how to spend, so salaries for even small sports have gone to the moon. It can’t continue, and tough decisions are gonna have to be made
Baseball makes money (not much, but does). WBB loses a ton of money.
I’d punch Mullen for not giving me a carry on the goal line vs LSU
Football, Men's Basketball, <the distance between Earth and Alpha Centauri> the other sports. Our spending should reflect this.
Depends. Are they currently winning and do you have tradition? If yea, maybe spend money there. If not, no.
In the case of MSU in 2025, no. We had our chance in 2018, didn’t win. Now invest elsewhere unless we get lucky on a coach.
In the case of MSU in 2025, no. We had our chance in 2018, didn’t win. Now invest elsewhere unless we get lucky on a coach.
Cut football to the bare minimum, it makes money for us because of the league we in, no one tunes in to see mstate.
Whatever we spend on football isn't coming back because we spent it on football, it's coming back because the rest of the league are drunken sailors.
Whatever we spend on football isn't coming back because we spent it on football, it's coming back because the rest of the league are drunken sailors.
I'm fine with what we are doing with Purcell. Keep the status quo. If he wants more $$$, let him walk.
Baseball means something to us. Still a huge gap between football and men’s basketball and baseball, but we get a return out of having a good product at dudy noble.
He said "sports that matter", not "what 80% of the country gives a **** about".....
Shut your ***** mouth.
So you would rather win nattys with women’s basketball vs bulldog baseball??
Well 80% of the country thinks college baseball doesn’t matter. Obviously it’s important to you, so it skews your thinking.
But why does that matter. I better 80% of the country doesn't care when our football team is on TV. I don't really care whether 80% of the country enjoys the things I do.
And we are only hurting ourselves by acting like it matters. A men’s final four or a football playoff appearance is worth more than 10 CWS appearances. Our fans don’t want to hear that, but it’s true. And we’ve snuck by while some of our conference mates have ignored baseball. That’s no longer the case. Makes spending smartly more important.
I would be just as confused about the trade that got me to Dallas as everyone else
More like 90%, but we're part of the 10-20%, so I'm not sure it's relevant what the Big 10 thinks.
If we could get a final 4 or college playoff spot by reducing spending in baseball, then that would matter. But the money we could carve out of baseball won’t really move the needle that much. We’re better off having a good baseball product so we have people coming to campus in the spring.
So why do over 300 NCAA schools play division 1 baseball. Did they all miss the memo that said 80 - 90% of the fan base couldn't care less. Maybe all 300 ADs are just stupid.
It's completely irrelevant what other schools think. The Athletic Director works for the fanbase. He may report to the President, but he works for the fanbase. If he doesn't deliver results that make the fanbase happy, he'll be looking for a job. Our fanbase absolutely has more of an appetite for successful baseball over successful women's basketball. Whether or not the fanbase at Ohio State, Michigan, etc cares about baseball is completely irrelevant.
Football and Men's basketball make the money. Beyond investing in those, you invest in your fanbase's desired priorities.
Look at Georgia. They have the worst men's and women's basketball programs in the SEC, and it doesn't seem to bother the fans.
Have you not looked at the standings? They could obviously change, but UGA isnt close to the worst in MBB right now.
I would absolutely take winning 3 WBB titles in 5 years over winning 3 Baseball titles in 5 years.
17 yes.
That will be chosen 10 times out of 10.
Universities participate in a ton of sports that most of their fanbase dont care about.
I would love to see a poll of SPS that captures an honest assessment of how many posters have gone to an MSU track and field meet in the last year. Or how many can name current(or former) Cross Country runners.
And thats just MSU, where barely any sports actually exist. God forbid we look at schools with a lot of Olympic sports.
College athletics shouldnt exist based only on whether or not fans care about the sport.
Whomp Whomp.
Chin up though, I saw you had a funny post at some point over the weekend.
That is just wild to me. That's almost as wild as somebody wanting a baseball championship over a football or men's basketball one. I know there's not much logic to being a fan, but still can't wrap my head around it.
Fair enough. I mean, we are basically debating which secondary sport is 'best' or 'most important'. In the end, its still a distant secondary sport to Football and Men's Basketball.
I just think 3 Women's Basketball titles in 5 years would have more of an impact engagement with the university from fans and media than 3 CWS titles in 5 years.
But this is really like debating who was better- Karl Malone or Hakeem Olajuwon.
Incredible players, legitimate solid debate that could be had based on metrics, but in the ends its a debate about which player was better even though both are not even close to being in a conversation for who is the best player of all time.
I hear the argument that WBB loses money and am not debating that fact. What I am curious about is how much we get from SEC network for WBB. In other words, how much (if any) less money would we get if WBB was cut? Is that Check considered in the “loses $4 million/year” arguement? Seems like it should be if we are reaping TV revenue from it.
Same question can be posed for the other sports. I really just don’t know how much the TV revenue breaks down for each sport.
Same question can be posed for the other sports. I really just don’t know how much the TV revenue breaks down for each sport.