Are we a catch? You bet
by edsp on Jun 20, 2010 2:16 PM CDT
Email
Print
I always knew we were a big fish in the world of football. I didn’t know we were THE big fish. I sure didn’t know how massive a big fish we are.
Article in the Houston Chronicle this morning (it’s written by William Pack of the San Antonio Express-News) reveals that UT football netted more bucks in 2008 than Baylor, Kansas State, Iowa State and Texas Tech – COMBINED. Story here and here (the Express-News charts are much easier to read). Numbers from the 2009 season are not available.
Second to Texas’ $88 million in the Big 12 was Nebraska ($55 million), followed by Oklahoma, Texas A&M and Colorado. Texas’ haul ALONE is greater than the Aggies’ and Sooners’ combined. Ranked 6 through 12 in the Big 12: Oklahoma State, Missouri, Texas Tech, Kansas State, Iowa State, Kansas, Baylor.
Second nationally was Ohio State, more than $20 million behind Texas. The Buckeyes, Florida, Penn State, Georgia, Alabama and LSU all totaled between $62 million and $69 million. (Notre Dame was 10th, Nebraska 11th).
Of note to those stumping for Houston's addition to the Big 12: UH's football income in '08 was the worst among Division I programs in Texas -- trailing even a downtrodden North Texas program by $400,000!
All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Yeah, and that's not even based on our National Championship run season
It’s based on the season where we played Ohio State in the Fiesta.
Figures for last year will probably even be more ridiculous.
Profits for the football program have more than quadrupled under Mack’s tenure. He earns that ridiculous salary and more. We should be grateful for every additional season we get out of Mack. I hope he coaches here for another 10 years.
Also, we will enter into new TV agreements and our new, more lopsided, revenue sharing agreement with the Big 12.
Longhorn Football is comparable ( in profitability ), with an NFL franchise and is the crown jewel of college football.
It’s also part of the reason I think our program is set up to be a 2000’s USC-style National Title contender for the next four years at least. It’s been getting warmed up, and now the program is piping hot, and spitting out wins.
I think there are holes in this year's team,
and probably the one in 2011, that will preclude a perfect season (might get lucky with a loss if enough others stumble). The 2008 and 2009 classes, while solid, have some holes that make a run this season or next a bit of a longshot. IMO.
I think Mack’s 2010 signings, and the projected 2011 class, provide much of the structure that can make a big-time run at the 2012-2014 MNCs. My only concern is that Coach Boom will see how long he’s gonna have to wait and take Georgia or Florida or Auburn when those jobs come open between now and then.
I think there's holes in a team every year
The question is, do other parts of the team excel or step up to fill or cover them.
I think Mack’s goal is to put the team in a position to win it all, every single year. I think we’re in that position this year.
We had holes last year as well, and it was a NC run. This year could be another, or it could be a 10-2 season or worse or somewhere in between.
But I think Mack has set it up, and it’s pretty much now up to the individuals on the team to step up and make it happen. That and we’ll probably need a little luck. :)
Oh, and you can’t beat the ref’s.
It's college ball
There are holes everywhere (see last year’s OL, running game, mike backer, etc). Talent-wise we rank right up there with anybody else, including Alabama, and the defense is loaded.
Luck plays a huge role most years when there isn’t a VY caliber player out there. This year we’ll find out how good GG really can be.
"You've got to think lucky. If you fall into a mudhole, check your back pocket - you might have caught a fish" -- Darrell Royal
by SpiritOfTheFedora on Jun 21, 2010 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Actually
I’m pretty sure those numbers don’t include the merchandise royalties.
Those are in a seperate catagory, since they can’t be attributed to any single “sport”, they’re just collected in a general fund.
It’s income from ticket/concession sales, donations, and TV appearances.
I stand corrected
Donations must be the biggest factor. I believe OU led the big 12 in TV revenue last year.
So our donations dwarf most everyone's total revenue?
Amazing, I haven’t seen the numbers but I’ll take your word for it. This is one of the arguments I’ve used when tv money comes up in discussions. I’m taking bets on how many years before revenues top $1B. At that point we just retire the logo and move the entire operation to some remote Pacific island, maybe Samoa. Or the Cayman Islands.
TCU and Rice are basically the equivalent of Kansas and Baylor in football revenue. Not suggesting anything, just saying. NUsucks revenues were surprising. Great post.
"You've got to think lucky. If you fall into a mudhole, check your back pocket - you might have caught a fish" -- Darrell Royal
by SpiritOfTheFedora on Jun 21, 2010 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions
I pulled that stat off the Longhorn foundation page:
Why does UT Athletics need a foundation? Don’t they get money from The University?
Actually, athletics is a self-supporting UT auxiliary and receives no state funds. Ticket sales, television revenue, and advertising income account for less than 50% of needed operating funds for UT Athletics. Private support is very important in order to sustain the future of the 20-sport men’s and women’s programs.
http://www.texassports.com/sports/lfoundation/spec-rel/faq.html
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
