Iowa #15 revenue-producing athletic department

by flagfootballallstar on Feb 18, 2010 11:23 AM CST

Given the fact that we have one revenue-producing sport (and basketball isn't even bottom line neutral - its a fiscal black hole considering the average attendance) and teams with good football and basketball programs are way down the list.

This means two things to me - we are just better than everyone else, and there really is nothing to do in this state

also, Staples decided to drop IOWA STATE out of the top 64 in favor of Mississippi State and TCU - awesome

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/02/16/conference-realignment/1.html

Unless otherwise expressly indicated by BHGP editors, this FanPost is strictly the viewpoint of the author and is not endorsed by BHGP in any way.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Post Script

And Texas made in excess of 138 million dollars from their athletic department?
My God – remember they are the biggest school in terms of enrollment in the United States as well as respected academically – WHAT A POWERHOUSE

"We'll take what the other team gives us. We'll scratch where it itches." - Hayden Fry

by flagfootballallstar on Feb 18, 2010 11:25 AM CST reply actions

That's a little misleading

Because Texas spent $112,935,132 on athletics during that span. Their athletic department made $25 million net last year, which is still a lot. But using pre-cost numbers will always make the larger schools look better even though they may not be as profitable.

by PurpleMonkeyDishwasher on Feb 18, 2010 3:24 PM CST up reply actions

As a comparison

Iowa’s athletic department spent $70 million last year and made $79 million with a net of $9 million. Texas made 22% on the dollar spent, while Iowa made 13%. Considering we have a partial share of 3 million people, that’s pretty impressive in my opinion.

I think it’s amazing that Iowa is able to be somewhat successful despite spending 60% of what bigger schools spend.

by PurpleMonkeyDishwasher on Feb 18, 2010 3:32 PM CST up reply actions

I'm didn't expect Wisconsin to be so high

But not a lot of surprises in the top of the list

It never gets to be easy

by chitownhawkeye on Feb 18, 2010 12:35 PM CST reply actions

That list

shows how difficult the whole “expansion” thing is.

Any new school will be on that list. Now eliminate half of them because they are Big 10, SEC or PAC 10. Now get rid of everybody below about $50 mil ( and that’s if we want another bottom feeder) more realistically about $65 mil.. Now get rid of those who just don’t cut it academically.
Goodbye to the ones who can’t be realistically expected to switch and whaddya got.

5, maybe 6 choices? Only 2 of whom are clear home runs? And people think they’ll be adding 3? Please.

In 100 years, we'll all be dead.

by Flakbait on Feb 18, 2010 12:50 PM CST up reply actions

Candidates

Available

1. Texas $138.5mm
12. Oklahoma $81.5mm
13. Notre Dame $81.1mm
18. Nebraska $74.9mm
20. Florida State $74.4mm
22. Texas A&M $72.9mm
24. Oklahoma State $71.8mm
25. Duke $71.1mm
26. Kansas $70.6mm
28. North Carolina $70.2mm
29. Virginia $67.1mm
31. Boston College $64.2mm
33. Miami $62.0mm
37. Clemson $60.2mm
38. Maryland $60.0mm
40. UConn $58.5mm
41. Louisville $58.0mm
42. Mizzou $57.8mm
43. West Virginia $55.7mm
45. Rutgers $54.3mm
47. Virginia Tech $52.8mm
48. Syracuse $52.1mm
51. Colorado $49.9mm
54. G-Tech $48.1mm
55. K-State $47.4mm
56. Texas Tech $46.6mm
57. NC State $46.5mm
58. TCU $46.5mm
59. Pittsburgh $45.8mm
60. Iowa State $45.8mm
62. Wake Forest $44.6mm

Meet cut off of $65mm:

Academic fit:

1. Texas $138.5mm
13. Notre Dame $81.1mm
18. Nebraska $74.9mm
22. Texas A&M $72.9mm
25. Duke $71.1mm
26. Kansas $70.6mm
28. North Carolina $70.2mm
29. Virginia $67.1mm

Realistic switch (only removes Duke and North Carolina):

1. Texas $138.5mm
13. Notre Dame $81.1mm
18. Nebraska $74.9mm
22. Texas A&M $72.9mm
26. Kansas $70.6mm
29. Virginia $67.1mm

It looks like Virginia is a better pick up than previously thought. They managed those revenue numbers under AL GROH, have the #23 ranking in US News & World Reports and have the 22nd highest endowment in the nation.

Two may be home runs, but four candidates are in the Big 12. This lends a bit of credibility to the 14 or 16 team scenarios some bloggers are spitting out.

by Gopher86 on Feb 18, 2010 4:49 PM CST up reply actions

Thank you

I was going to do that myself when I got home…..

I see Texas & A&M going to the PAC 10, but we’ll know when we know.

Virginia? Very interesting.

In 100 years, we'll all be dead.

by Flakbait on Feb 18, 2010 6:18 PM CST up reply actions

Another interesting thought

How hard would it be to poach Duke and North Carolina together? Granted the ACC isn’t considered a target, but would there be mutual interest? They’re both fine academic institutions (high rankings and endowments) and are basketball super powers.

I don’t think it’s a real possibility, but it’s interesting to think about.

by Gopher86 on Feb 18, 2010 6:55 PM CST up reply actions

A&M

is academically a better fit for the Pac 10, but the “culture” aspect of that school cannot be underestimated. Sure, they have excellent research and development, but they would be far more likely to come knocking on the SEC’s front door if the Big XII were to dissolve.

I also don’t see any original ACC members jumping ship. There is too much history and there is a serious commitment within that conference to not only basketball, but the very eastern sports of college lacrosse and soccer, which actually make money at many of those schools. And while the Big Ten may try to woo a a school like that with the academic angle, despite having some real slouches (FSU, NC St., Miami, Clemson), the ACC is also rife with academic powerhouses (UNC, GT, BC, WF, Duke). Although the ACC expansion appears to have been a bad move at this point, I still cannot see any member (other than Clemson to the SEC if the situation were right) defecting.

Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.

by Kyle McCann't on Feb 18, 2010 9:17 PM CST up reply actions

Why not?

They generate revenue in football, basketball AND hockey. Plus, they don’t have the drain of fielding a baseball team in the apathetic Big Ten.

Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.

by Kyle McCann't on Feb 18, 2010 9:10 PM CST up reply actions

Talk About

doing more with less. There are only 3 million people in the state, plus a bunch of alumni in the Chicago area.

See ISU, that’s what winning will get you. Cy? You there?

Oh come on, stop crying. Seriously. I’m sure the Big 12 will be fine.

In 100 years, we'll all be dead.

by Flakbait on Feb 18, 2010 12:37 PM CST reply actions

There are several schools on there that are probably losing money on basketball

I would imagine Penn State, Nebraska, and most of the SEC schools aren’t exactly raking it in there either. Just goes to show how ridiculously big football is in comparison to everything else, I guess.

by NorseHawk on Feb 18, 2010 2:18 PM CST reply actions