Started By
Message
re: There's only 1 way to counter...
Posted on 1/18/25 at 3:29 pm to scottydoesntknow
Posted on 1/18/25 at 3:29 pm to scottydoesntknow
quote:
The dirty secret is that university big wigs have used their athletic departments to enrich themselves. As long as the $$ is coming in, they will sell out anything
There was info released not long ago that shows only a handful of athletic departments operate in the black with very few that give back to the academic side. Alabama is one of those few. The majority of programs hope to break even with many operating in the red and have to take money from the academic side.
0
Posted on 1/18/25 at 3:32 pm to PBD4BAMA
quote:
There's only 1 way to counter...
There is only 1 way to counter not enjoying something.... It's by committing suicide.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 3:35 pm to YStar
quote:
You sound like a liberal.
There needs to be controls in place
Those two statements contradict each other.
Usually it is the liberals that demand controls and oversight from the government.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 3:40 pm to Diego Ricardo
quote:
I think it is equality in scholarship offers which is why men’s baseball is stuck offering partials at many schools
Do not think that is correct as basketball is a headcount sport meaning unlike most non revenue sports that are equivalency scholarships. You are required to give full scholarships not partial in headcount sports
Posted on 1/18/25 at 3:42 pm to Night Vision
quote:
All we have to do is cancel the same number of male and female sports.
Based on number of total scholarships not number of sports. One of the reasons so many universities do not have the male equivalent of the female offered sport is because football offers so many.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 4:00 pm to TideWarrior
Cancel male and female track. Should be the same.
Cancel male and female swimming ...
Cancel male and female swimming ...
Posted on 1/18/25 at 5:32 pm to Night Vision
So we cancel everything except football what does that solve?
Posted on 1/18/25 at 6:24 pm to TideWarrior
Frees up money for football.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 6:37 pm to Crimson Wraith
quote:
Frees up money for football.
You really believe much money goes to those sports to make a dent in the financial needs of the current landscape of college football. If so you be a little naive.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 6:45 pm to TideWarrior
No teams, no coaches.
Less training staffs.
Lots of other areas where money would be saved.
Less training staffs.
Lots of other areas where money would be saved.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 6:55 pm to TideWarrior
quote:
You really believe much money goes to those sports to make a dent in the financial needs of the current landscape of college football. If so you be a little naive.
It's naive to think a lot of money isn't needed to finance these sports actually.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 7:05 pm to Crimson Wraith
quote:
No teams, no coaches.
Less training staffs.
Lots of other areas where money would be saved.
Lets look at the numbers that were just released
quote:
The total net loss came to $27,963,839. It’s the second straight year Alabama has shown a loss on athletics,
28 million dollar loss.
quote:Combine that with another 7.6 million in football support staff.
Alabama football reported $21.3 million in coach pay for FY 2023, a number which ballooned up to $47.4 million for FY 2024.
That is 55 million in coaching/staff expense alone for the football team.
quote:
Tide’s football recruiting spend also jumped, from $2.9 million for FY 2023, to $5.3 million.
Probably needed with the current landscape but now the football budget exceed an extra 32 million this year over the previous year while revenue continues to shrink due to tickets sales among the main reason.
Football and MBB were down 24 million from the year before in revenue being the main reason for the overall loss. The total of all other athletic programs on campus was 25 million.
Not sure eliminating the other programs will create the cash cow you are hoping for with.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 7:09 pm to YStar
quote:
It's naive to think a lot of money isn't needed to finance these sports actually.
It is called being realistic understanding that the majority of revenue and expenses go with football and that the other sports yes are not cash cows but do very little to affect the bottom line to help football in what it is currently dealing with.
Maybe look at the menu in the football dining facility.
quote:
meals (non-travel) saw a jump from $918,301 to $5.89 million.
Maybe they only eat at McDonalds when traveling for road games.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 7:25 pm to TideWarrior
There is a lot of spending in college athletics that hinged on the players not being paid or were envisioned to improve the player's quality of life in non-compensation ways.
Ultimately, I imagine that there is going to be some sort of shell game to separate the football teams from the learning institutions and some sort of carve out from the federal government to make it legally protected. This non-profit will hire the students of the school as employees to play football. There will be some sort of redirection of funding away from the learning institution and towards their tightly-coupled but legally separate non-profit. This will likely have to come with some sort of unionization of the student athletes and binding contracts with the non-profits to render service.
It is utterly absurd that the federal government - at least for right now - says that revenue sharing has to be equally shared amongst all athletes when we all know that about 100 of them (men's basketball and football) are the ones generating all the revenue. There is going to be a reckoning on this reality or you can bet on this sport dying from the compounding contradictions within the system causing it to collapse and be replaced by something other than collegiate athletics.
Ultimately, I imagine that there is going to be some sort of shell game to separate the football teams from the learning institutions and some sort of carve out from the federal government to make it legally protected. This non-profit will hire the students of the school as employees to play football. There will be some sort of redirection of funding away from the learning institution and towards their tightly-coupled but legally separate non-profit. This will likely have to come with some sort of unionization of the student athletes and binding contracts with the non-profits to render service.
It is utterly absurd that the federal government - at least for right now - says that revenue sharing has to be equally shared amongst all athletes when we all know that about 100 of them (men's basketball and football) are the ones generating all the revenue. There is going to be a reckoning on this reality or you can bet on this sport dying from the compounding contradictions within the system causing it to collapse and be replaced by something other than collegiate athletics.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 7:27 pm to TideWarrior
If the dining had a huge loss because of food prices that’s on the person buying the food. Buy it from another vendor, not named Sysco.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 7:34 pm to Syd
Yeah, UA probably needs to cross shop because Sysco does not have a reputation for good value.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 7:45 pm to Diego Ricardo
quote:
legally separate non-profit. This will likely have to come with some sort of unionization of the student athletes and binding contracts with the non-profits to render service.
It will not be under the guise of a nonprofit. The NLRB under the efforts of the left side of the aisle are pushing for student athletes to be identified as employees so they can unionize. This is so they can pay taxes mainly. But for they to retain certain amenities like campus housing or provided housing via the college, meal plans or money for meals, or medical benefits they will be limited due to the tie in on federal funding how the entity paying them is labeled.
I do agree we are heading towards athletes becoming contracted employees which the law will support, and those contracts will include the aforementioned incentives.
This post was edited on 1/18/25 at 7:50 pm
Posted on 1/18/25 at 7:49 pm to Diego Ricardo
quote:
It is utterly absurd that the federal government - at least for right now - says that revenue sharing has to be equally shared amongst all athletes
I am not sure that statement is accurate, but I do know employees of educational organizations that receive federal funding are bound by Title 9 rules. A lot of unique ways to make positions differentiate to get around it but may not be as easy to the same for athletes unless you only classify specific programs and their athletes as employees.
Posted on 1/18/25 at 7:50 pm to TideWarrior
If something doesn't start happening to bring rationality to the collegiate athletics system for revenue sports, it won't be long until one of these iterations of spring league football says "lets sign top HS and college talent instead of has-been or never-was veterans."
Posted on 1/18/25 at 8:08 pm to TideWarrior
If you think we spend $47.4 million in a year for coaches then naive is the least of what you are..
Also while you tell us about how much the football expenses are for Alabama also tell us how much damn revenue was generated.
While you're defending the inflated cost of these other sports also give us a breakdown of their expenses and how much revenue they generate.
Also while you tell us about how much the football expenses are for Alabama also tell us how much damn revenue was generated.
While you're defending the inflated cost of these other sports also give us a breakdown of their expenses and how much revenue they generate.
Page 2 of 3
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News