MU Athletic Department expenses...~ $22 million

[ChicosBailBonds]

Since it came up on another thread.

MU's expenses are about $22 million ($21.8 million) for all of athletics.  This covers scholarships, coaching salaries, administrative, recruiting, scheduling, uniforms, etc, etc.  MU's expenses are 91st highest in the country out of 339 schools.  Almost all of the schools ahead of MU have football that obviously raise those expenses, but also bring in revenues as well.  Remember that not every school requires reimbursement for scholarships either...at least that's how it used to be.  MU's athletic department must pay the university for all those student athletes that receive a "free ride".  Ain't nothing free about it.

MU Men's hoops spends just a shade under $8 million and have revenues about $21 million.

MU's men's hoops expenditure is VERY HIGH...top 5 in the nation last I checked.  MU is the ONLY school in the top 30 highest expenditures that have basketball only. 

[IrwinFletcher]

Just out of curiosity, what accounts for the $8M in expenses.  TC is one of the top earners for coaches so that is around 1.5M or so.

The team takes charter flights to their 9-10 road games, but don't incur hotel and other travel expenses.  We do not play alot of road games but do pay to bring in 4-7 teams for buy games.

Just curious as to where the the $8M comes from

[The Lens]

What's a home game worth?  $100,000?  Are we making a big deal about less than half a percent of our revenues?  You're saying we can't work around that?  We've found a way to pay top dollar for a high end recruiting system, pay top dollar for very well compensated assistants, pay top dollar for start of the art facilities, pay top dollar for a head coach, pay top dollar for travel but the one thing we can’t figure out is how to pay top dollar for competition?

We play who we play b/c that’s how our current staff wants it.  Money is not the issue.

[🏀]

Just out of curiosity, what accounts for the $8M in expenses.  TC is one of the top earners for coaches so that is around 1.5M or so.

The team takes charter flights to their 9-10 road games, but don't incur hotel and other travel expenses.  We do not play alot of road games but do pay to bring in 4-7 teams for buy games.

Just curious as to where the the $8M comes from

I'm sure the Bradley Center use is in there. Al maintence fees. Uniforms. Gatorade. Tutors. Players weekly allowance. Assistance coaches. Cell phones. Meals.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Just out of curiosity, what accounts for the $8M in expenses.  TC is one of the top earners for coaches so that is around 1.5M or so.

The team takes charter flights to their 9-10 road games, but don't incur hotel and other travel expenses.  We do not play alot of road games but do pay to bring in 4-7 teams for buy games.

Just curious as to where the the $8M comes from

I'm sure the Bradley Center use is in there. Al maintence fees. Uniforms. Gatorade. Tutors. Players weekly allowance. Assistance coaches. Cell phones. Meals.

I assume Gatorade and Converse give their products to MU to use as part of a sponsorship deal (although I don't know all of the details).


Chico's brings up some good evidence and points. MU has always done the schedule this way because it allows them to make the most money. That's factual.

MU has never been in the situation that they are in now (top conference, high attendance), so maybe they could revisit their scheduling policies and change them.

BUT, let's all be really honest admit that it's not as simple as some people like to make it out to be. Obviously, it's easy to sit at a keyboard and say "we should play....". It's a lot harder to actually get games on the schedule. I'm not saying its not possible... I'm just saying it's certainly not as easy as just typing it out.

I'd like to see MU get another good game at home, but I do understand why there hasn't been. My best recourse would be to cancel my tickets if I'm so unhappy.

ALSO: I'm afraid that no matter what the schedule is, people will b*tch. If MU gets 1 or 2 more great home games, people will still complain. If MU gets 8 really tough home games, but then don't win, people will complain.

I'm afraid MU is in a damned if they do, damned if they don't situation.

[IlikecreansoIcantposthere]

What's a home game worth?  $100,000?  Are we making a big deal about less than half a percent of our revenues?  You're saying we can't work around that?  We've found a way to pay top dollar for a high end recruiting system, pay top dollar for very well compensated assistants, pay top dollar for start of the art facilities, pay top dollar for a head coach, pay top dollar for travel but the one thing we can’t figure out is how to pay top dollar for competition?

We play who we play b/c that’s how our current staff wants it.  Money is not the issue.

got to be waaaaaaaay more then $100K.  13k seats at, lets say an average of $20 per game is $260,000.  Then add the ads.  All the game sponsors I'm sure are paying either on a per game basis or a flat fee based on the number of games played.  Also the add space in the programs and alumni traffic on campus needs to be taken into account along with the merchandise deal we have in place with the BC.  I'm only guessing, but I'd say a home buy-game brings in close to $350k to $400k gross. 

[tower912]

How much does it cost to recruit serviceable big men?

[IlikecreansoIcantposthere]

How much does it cost to recruit serviceable big men?

Ask a booster at Ohio State...I'm sure they have an exact figure.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Just out of curiosity, what accounts for the $8M in expenses.  TC is one of the top earners for coaches so that is around 1.5M or so.

The team takes charter flights to their 9-10 road games, but don't incur hotel and other travel expenses.  We do not play alot of road games but do pay to bring in 4-7 teams for buy games.

Just curious as to where the the $8M comes from

Just a guess on the current setup

Scholarships + Room and Board
Salaries of coaches and administrators
Travel budget
Recruiting budget
Bradley Center rent
Marketing costs
etc

I'm not sure if the Al McGuire Center day to day costs hit that budget or if they are on another line item shared across other spots.

[ChicosBailBonds]

What's a home game worth?  $100,000?  Are we making a big deal about less than half a percent of our revenues?  You're saying we can't work around that?  We've found a way to pay top dollar for a high end recruiting system, pay top dollar for very well compensated assistants, pay top dollar for start of the art facilities, pay top dollar for a head coach, pay top dollar for travel but the one thing we can’t figure out is how to pay top dollar for competition?

We play who we play b/c that’s how our current staff wants it.  Money is not the issue.

I'll ask the question AGAIN.  If money was NOT THE ISSUE, then why have Al, Hank, Rick, Bob, Kevin, Mike and Tom all scheduled the same way?  Simple...because it was mandated by the budget provided by the university.  It very much is an issue, it's not the ONLY issue, but it is a very key issue.  And no, a home game is woth much more than that...plus you're also removing the costs of travel etc to go on the road. 

[HarveysWallbangers]

This is some interesting stuff. How can we say we can't afford home and homes when we clearly are spending more than almost any basketball-only school in the country?

[IlikecreansoIcantposthere]

This is some interesting stuff. How can we say we can't afford home and homes when we clearly are spending more than almost any basketball-only school in the country?

...because we clearly are spending more than almost any basketball-only school in the country.

If you want to spend it you need to make it

[The Lens]

What's a home game worth?  $100,000?  Are we making a big deal about less than half a percent of our revenues?  You're saying we can't work around that?  We've found a way to pay top dollar for a high end recruiting system, pay top dollar for very well compensated assistants, pay top dollar for start of the art facilities, pay top dollar for a head coach, pay top dollar for travel but the one thing we can’t figure out is how to pay top dollar for competition?

We play who we play b/c that’s how our current staff wants it.  Money is not the issue.

I'll ask the question AGAIN.  If money was NOT THE ISSUE, then why have Al, Hank, Rick, Bob, Kevin, Mike and Tom all scheduled the same way?  Simple...because it was mandated by the budget provided by the university.  It very much is an issue, it's not the ONLY issue, but it is a very key issue.  And no, a home game is woth much more than that...plus you're also removing the costs of travel etc to go on the road. 

So TC has been able to change everything about MU hoops except for that?  We have donors paying for everything from Quarter million dollar AC salaries to prvate jets for recruiting but we can't figure out how to play another home and home?  Get real, it's b/c TC wants easy wins in Nov & Dec. 

And I'll ask the question again, what's a home game worth?

[muPARTY]

I'll ask the question AGAIN.  If money was NOT THE ISSUE, then why have Al, Hank, Rick, Bob, Kevin, Mike and Tom all scheduled the same way?  Simple...because it was mandated by the budget provided by the university.  It very much is an issue, it's not the ONLY issue, but it is a very key issue.  And no, a home game is woth much more than that...plus you're also removing the costs of travel etc to go on the road. 

i'm just wondering what's the big difference than in '01,'02,'03,'04... when Marquette scheduled Wake Forrest, Dayton, Notre Dame, Nebraska, and Arizona?????

no one here has answered that.

has joining the Big East really but such a strain on the finances that getting one or 2 more quality games in a season can't happen?  (remember '02/'03 when it was @ND, @Dayton, vs.Wisc, and vs.Wake Forrest) i mean, that's the only difference i see now.

there's another thread where people have listed a bunch of teams that would be good, that aren't top 10 teams, but from good conferences that help prepare the team and get them ready (more than any Savannah State or Coppin St ever could).  and for costs, each school covers the others travel expenses (or some %) (set a value that's equal for both).

games against a Maryland or Texas Tech would bring in 17-18,000 to the BC rather than the 12-13,000 they get now for their Dec games.  plus that calibur of game would almost certainly be on ESPN, ESPN2, ABC?, CBS? bringing in more revenue than a Time Warner Sports covered game.

an overhaul of the schedule would be fiscally irresponsible, but not a 1 or 2 game change, they've had them in the past.

I think Crean got stupid (yes a cheap shot at him) and cocky, and said "i want the W rather than a game they could lose, but become better because!"

[Chili]

I'll ask the question AGAIN.  If money was NOT THE ISSUE, then why have Al, Hank, Rick, Bob, Kevin, Mike and Tom all scheduled the same way?  Simple...because it was mandated by the budget provided by the university.  It very much is an issue, it's not the ONLY issue, but it is a very key issue.  And no, a home game is woth much more than that...plus you're also removing the costs of travel etc to go on the road. 

i'm just wondering what's the big difference than in '01,'02,'03,'04... when Marquette scheduled Wake Forrest, Dayton, Notre Dame, Nebraska, and Arizona?????

no one here has answered that.

has joining the Big East really but such a strain on the finances that getting one or 2 more quality games in a season can't happen?  (remember '02/'03 when it was @ND, @Dayton, vs.Wisc, and vs.Wake Forrest) i mean, that's the only difference i see now.

there's another thread where people have listed a bunch of teams that would be good, that aren't top 10 teams, but from good conferences that help prepare the team and get them ready (more than any Savannah State or Coppin St ever could).  and for costs, each school covers the others travel expenses (or some %) (set a value that's equal for both).

games against a Maryland or Texas Tech would bring in 17-18,000 to the BC rather than the 12-13,000 they get now for their Dec games.  plus that calibur of game would almost certainly be on ESPN, ESPN2, ABC?, CBS? bringing in more revenue than a Time Warner Sports covered game.

an overhaul of the schedule would be fiscally irresponsible, but not a 1 or 2 game change, they've had them in the past.

I think Crean got stupid (yes a cheap shot at him) and cocky, and said "i want the W rather than a game they could lose, but become better because!"

One big change that has occurred since then is the BE expanding to 18 games. That takes away one away game that was typically scheduled as an OOC as well a home game.

Look to next year when MU is in a weaker tournament than Maui that has Dayton in it, Madison come to the BC and MU plays Tenn. I think this is what will be happening in the future. A tournament and then a game against Madison with another major game at home when MU plays Madison at the Kohl Hole and vice versa when Madison is at the BC.

[The Lens]

What's great is when the BE went to 18 games, the CW was, now we will lose a bad BUY game and replace it with a good BE game, instead we lose a good OOC game.  The BE expansion has been pretty much a wash - though it gives the pundits further reason to question our OOC sked.

[rocky_warrior]

MU Men's hoops spends just a shade under $8 million and have revenues about $21 million.

What's a home game worth? 

So...uh..given that we have 18 home games, I'd say they're probably worth about $1,000,000 each.

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

What's a home game worth?  $100,000?  Are we making a big deal about less than half a percent of our revenues?  You're saying we can't work around that?  We've found a way to pay top dollar for a high end recruiting system, pay top dollar for very well compensated assistants, pay top dollar for start of the art facilities, pay top dollar for a head coach, pay top dollar for travel but the one thing we can’t figure out is how to pay top dollar for competition?

We play who we play b/c that’s how our current staff wants it.  Money is not the issue.

I'll ask the question AGAIN.  If money was NOT THE ISSUE, then why have Al, Hank, Rick, Bob, Kevin, Mike and Tom all scheduled the same way?  Simple...because it was mandated by the budget provided by the university.  It very much is an issue, it's not the ONLY issue, but it is a very key issue.  And no, a home game is woth much more than that...plus you're also removing the costs of travel etc to go on the road. 

So TC has been able to change everything about MU hoops except for that?  We have donors paying for everything from Quarter million dollar AC salaries to prvate jets for recruiting but we can't figure out how to play another home and home?  Get real, it's b/c TC wants easy wins in Nov & Dec. 

And I'll ask the question again, what's a home game worth?

First off, thank you to Chicos for posting this.

Second, DamonKeysContactLens hits the nail on the head. The reason we haven't scheduled a decent home-and-home (but have scheduled home and homes with Oakland and Valpo) is because Crean wants to pad the schedule with wins.

For several years we've heard people claiming it's because of budgetary restrictions and I've been saying repeatedly that our quite public spending (and boasting about it!) makes that a ridiculous claim.

Thirdly, what we're forgetting is that a home-and-home with somebody like St. Louis or Butler or Southern Illinois or Xavier or Illinois or Gonzaga or Indiana would not mean an extra road game every year...only every OTHER year, presuming it's a true "home and home."

It's quite simple...we don't have a better schedule because MU has decided season ticket holders are basically suckers (myself included) and will buy tickets no matter what they bring into the Bradley Center. Unfortunately, there are posters are on here that will reply by saying, "Then don't buy tickets," which is just absurd. Blaming the season ticket holders for complaining about the schedule is akin to blaming a rape victim for dressing provocatively.

We need an athletic director and we need one badly.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

What's a home game worth?  $100,000?  Are we making a big deal about less than half a percent of our revenues?  You're saying we can't work around that?  We've found a way to pay top dollar for a high end recruiting system, pay top dollar for very well compensated assistants, pay top dollar for start of the art facilities, pay top dollar for a head coach, pay top dollar for travel but the one thing we can’t figure out is how to pay top dollar for competition?

We play who we play b/c that’s how our current staff wants it.  Money is not the issue.

I'll ask the question AGAIN.  If money was NOT THE ISSUE, then why have Al, Hank, Rick, Bob, Kevin, Mike and Tom all scheduled the same way?  Simple...because it was mandated by the budget provided by the university.  It very much is an issue, it's not the ONLY issue, but it is a very key issue.  And no, a home game is woth much more than that...plus you're also removing the costs of travel etc to go on the road. 

So TC has been able to change everything about MU hoops except for that?  We have donors paying for everything from Quarter million dollar AC salaries to prvate jets for recruiting but we can't figure out how to play another home and home?  Get real, it's b/c TC wants easy wins in Nov & Dec. 

And I'll ask the question again, what's a home game worth?

First off, thank you to Chicos for posting this.

Second, DamonKeysContactLens hits the nail on the head. The reason we haven't scheduled a decent home-and-home (but have scheduled home and homes with Oakland and Valpo) is because Crean wants to pad the schedule with wins.

For several years we've heard people claiming it's because of budgetary restrictions and I've been saying repeatedly that our quite public spending (and boasting about it!) makes that a ridiculous claim.

Thirdly, what we're forgetting is that a home-and-home with somebody like St. Louis or Butler or Southern Illinois or Xavier or Illinois or Gonzaga or Indiana would not mean an extra road game every year...only every OTHER year, presuming it's a true "home and home."

It's quite simple...we don't have a better schedule because MU has decided season ticket holders are basically suckers (myself included) and will buy tickets no matter what they bring into the Bradley Center. Unfortunately, there are posters are on here that will reply by saying, "Then don't buy tickets," which is just absurd. Blaming the season ticket holders for complaining about the schedule is akin to blaming a rape victim for dressing provocatively.

We need an athletic director and we need one badly.

I actually agree with you up until you get to the rape victim stuff (yikes!).

MU is a private institution. This is a free market. MU can put anybody they want the schedule. You are welcome to purchase or not purchase tickets.

That's it.

I know we all have a lot of passion for MU, and that makes us all feel like we have "rights" as ticket holders... but realistically, it's just business.

ECON043

If you don't like the product, don't buy the tickets. When enough people quit buying and the demand goes down, MU will have to make some changes.

I'm afraid it's just that simple. 

[DegenerateDish]

Does MU do what a lot of pro/college teams do now, and place a premium on tickets for better games? As a consumer, I'm not a fan because I like paying the same amount to see Wisconsin as I would Florida Gulf Coast. As a business person though, the laws of supply/demand work out to where I wouldn't blame MU for putting an extra $5 a ticket for games vs Wisco/'Ville/ND/Pitt/G-Town/DePaul. Without adding the premium to student tickets, that's an extra $300,000 (approx) in revenue right there.

If MU's already doing this, then ignore my ignorance.

[ChicosBailBonds]

This is some interesting stuff. How can we say we can't afford home and homes when we clearly are spending more than almost any basketball-only school in the country?

Because you have 13 other sports to support.


$22 million in revenues
$22 million in expenses

Doesn't even cover the additional subsidy the university is providing.  The athletic department has a budget, basketball spends a lot but makes a lot but that goes to cover all 14 sports (13 of them that LOSE MONEY).

[ChicosBailBonds]

I answered your Wake Forest, Dayton question in another thread but I'll repeat myself.


Going back the last 15 years we've played 2 non conference road games 12 of those 15 years.  Two years we played 3 games.  One year we played one.   If I went back further, it would be much of the same....it' budgetary.  PRN, I know you like to get your digs in, but this goes way way way back further then TC.  It's budgetary.

Now, to your point PRN, absolutely TC or any sound coach is going to pad some wins because we play in the #2 conference in the land which means a lot of losses coming our way.  Only makes sense, also why nearly every school in a major conference does that.  Not all, but nearly all.

Finally, the school has tried to bring in Gonzaga, Illinois, Wake Forest, a Pac Ten school, etc in the last 5 years.  Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't.  You also realize that agreeing to play UWM now limits that year's option when we have to go on the road to play them...but hey, "its good for the state".   

It takes two to tango, the other school has to agree to it also.  Every other year we play at Wisconsin, that is set in stone.  That leaves ONE OPPONENT every other year to schedule.  Not as easy as you think.  I've seen these guys try to make schedules first hand and it's a NIGHTMARE as schools play off one another, getting better deals, backing out at the last minute, this and that.  You wouldn't believe the games that are played.

It's also why we don't play Dayton anymore.

Now, I've answered it....when is someone going to answer my question....why did Al, Rick, Hank, Mike, Kevin, Bob also schedule the same way?  That is....15 or 16 home games (in the old days with less games overall in the schedule) and 18 home games in more recent times?

Waiting..........



















Hint....it's economics based.   

[🏀]

Finally, the school has tried to bring in Gonzaga, Illinois, Wake Forest, a Pac Ten school, etc in the last 5 years.  Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't.   

Include Alabama and Texas into that list.

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

Now, I've answered it....when is someone going to answer my question....why did Al, Rick, Hank, Mike, Kevin, Bob also schedule the same way?  That is....15 or 16 home games (in the old days with less games overall in the schedule) and 18 home games in more recent times?

Waiting..........

Hint....it's economics based.   

Holy cow --
Are you suggesting those guys had near the resources, budgets (or revenue streams) that we currently have? 

I will repeat, we're spending too much money to keep claiming we can't afford an extra road game every other year. It just doesn't add up. I don't recall Mike Deane or Kevin O'Neill having two coaches/dir of ops making well over six figures apiece. Heck, there was a story recently that Crean tossed out a set of brand new warm-ups that we wore vs. DePaul last year because we played poorly. Are you kidding me? We spend like sailors on shore leave and then claim we can't afford to play a decent road game every other year? It doesn't make sense. 

I did find your point about 3 off-campus games (in tournaments) for the cost of one interesting, though. That does make sense.

[The Lens]

In the end, all we're talking about is adding 1 maybe 2 road games and subtracting 1 maybe 2 home games.  EVERYTHING else with regards to the MU hoops budget model has changed, why can't this? 

[Chili]

Now, I've answered it....when is someone going to answer my question....why did Al, Rick, Hank, Mike, Kevin, Bob also schedule the same way?  That is....15 or 16 home games (in the old days with less games overall in the schedule) and 18 home games in more recent times?

Waiting..........

Hint....it's economics based.   

Holy cow --
Are you suggesting those guys had near the resources, budgets (or revenue streams) that we currently have? 

I will repeat, we're spending too much money to keep claiming we can't afford an extra road game every other year. It just doesn't add up. I don't recall Mike Deane or Kevin O'Neill having two coaches/dir of ops making well over six figures apiece. Heck, there was a story recently that Crean tossed out a set of brand new warm-ups that we wore vs. DePaul last year because we played poorly. Are you kidding me? We spend like sailors on shore leave and then claim we can't afford to play a decent road game every other year? It doesn't make sense. 

I did find your point about 3 off-campus games (in tournaments) for the cost of one interesting, though. That does make sense.

So you know the dir. of bball ops salaries? Interesting.

Also, you think MU pays for warmups? No you don't. You know there are these silly little things called shoe contracts that provides the men's team with all of their clothing. You know that is also why team wears a lot of athletic apparel around campus - because the players get it for free! From the shoe company.

Stop being so ignorant. I bet if Crean or the University said the Earth was round and revolved around the Sun you would be screaming that the Earth was flat and that the Earth was the center of Solar System.

[ChicosBailBonds]

So TC has been able to change everything about MU hoops except for that?  We have donors paying for everything from Quarter million dollar AC salaries to prvate jets for recruiting but we can't figure out how to play another home and home?  Get real, it's b/c TC wants easy wins in Nov & Dec. 

And I'll ask the question again, what's a home game worth?

I think he has changed that...he most certainly has increased the budget for his team but he can't take away the fact his team supports 13 other teams...he can't change that at all.

Does he also want easier wins in November and December....yup...just like Al McGuire did, Rick Majerus, Mike Deane, Jim Boeheim, Ben Howland, etc.

If we played in a weaker conference, then my guess is you would see slightly better home games (still buy games, but slightly better).

When you know your conference is going to give you at LEAST 6 losses if not 8, then you don't want to tack on more than 1 or 2 in non-conference or you have no shot at the NCAAs.  That's smart scheduling, it's why almost every coach in America does it.  Some have more flexibility because their conference isn't as tough.

I've got a little bet for you and PRN....when Crean leaves do you honestly think the next MU coach will be playing less than 18 home games?  Do you honestly believe our non-conference home schedule will improve when the past 30 years have shown it won't?  Answer honestly.   

[NavinRJohnson]

In the end, all we're talking about is adding 1 maybe 2 road games and subtracting 1 maybe 2 home games.  EVERYTHING else with regards to the MU hoops budget model has changed, why can't this? 

Not sure why everyone has to over complicate this...Why should it change? Because a few people want it to? Being in the BE, we don't need that game for RPI purposes or anything else. Playing in Maui, @UW, etc., TC obviously doesn't feel it is necessary, we have a brutal road schedule in conference, so why would Mu give up the significant money they make on the extra home game to play a game they don't consider necessary?

What exactly is the argument anyway...that if we went and played a game at Cheighton, or Illinois we'd suddenly win all of our conference road games? Please! If we can schedule a made for TV game against a UNC, UCLA, Indiana, etc. I assure you we would do it. Short of that, there is no reason to forgo the ticket revenue of another home game.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Now, I've answered it....when is someone going to answer my question....why did Al, Rick, Hank, Mike, Kevin, Bob also schedule the same way?  That is....15 or 16 home games (in the old days with less games overall in the schedule) and 18 home games in more recent times?

Waiting..........

Hint....it's economics based.   

Holy cow --
Are you suggesting those guys had near the resources, budgets (or revenue streams) that we currently have? 

I will repeat, we're spending too much money to keep claiming we can't afford an extra road game every other year. It just doesn't add up. I don't recall Mike Deane or Kevin O'Neill having two coaches/dir of ops making well over six figures apiece. Heck, there was a story recently that Crean tossed out a set of brand new warm-ups that we wore vs. DePaul last year because we played poorly. Are you kidding me? We spend like sailors on shore leave and then claim we can't afford to play a decent road game every other year? It doesn't make sense. 

I did find your point about 3 off-campus games (in tournaments) for the cost of one interesting, though. That does make sense.

Actually, under Deane we were top 15 in the nation in budget....so yes, we've had resources for awhile.  Not as much as now, then again prior coaches didn't play in the Big East and all the expenses that entails either.  Expenses are much greater today then they were under Al, Rick, Kevin, Mike, etc...thus more resources.

Works both ways.

[Marquette84]

has joining the Big East really but such a strain on the finances that getting one or 2 more quality games in a season can't happen?  (remember '02/'03 when it was @ND, @Dayton, vs.Wisc, and vs.Wake Forrest) i mean, that's the only difference i see now.

there's another thread where people have listed a bunch of teams that would be good, that aren't top 10 teams, but from good conferences that help prepare the team and get them ready (more than any Savannah State or Coppin St ever could).  and for costs, each school covers the others travel expenses (or some %) (set a value that's equal for both).

games against a Maryland or Texas Tech would bring in 17-18,000 to the BC rather than the 12-13,000 they get now for their Dec games.  plus that calibur of game would almost certainly be on ESPN, ESPN2, ABC?, CBS? bringing in more revenue than a Time Warner Sports covered game.

Two problems with your post:

1.  There is no correlation between non-conference schedule and later success.  NC A&T played the #1 most difficult non-conference schedule in college basketball this year--they are currently 3-2 in the MEAC with losses to Morgan State and Norfolk State.  If the logic that playing tougher teams helps you beet lesser conference foes had any merit, then NCA&T's schedule (which including Missouri, DePaul, Pittsburgh, Washington State, Miami, Tennessee, and St. Louis) would have made them strong favorites over Norfolk State, who had a non-conference SOS of 338 of 341 teams. 

And lest you think this is an unfair comparision since the MEAC isn't a power conference, Arizona played the #2 toughest Non-Conference SOS.  They are sitting 2-3 in the Pac 10.  PLaying at Memphis and Kansas simply hasn't helped them get wins over Oregon, Arizona State, or Stanford.

Miami OH (#3 sos) is currently 1-3 in the MAC

Mississippi Valley State (#4) is currently 2-3 in the Southwest

Davidson #5 is 9-0 in conference

SIU #6 SOS is 4-3 in the MVC

Middle Tennessee is 3-4 in conference play.

#8 toldeo is 2-3 in conference play

#9 Chattenooga is 7-2 in conference play, which puts them behind Davidson in the Soutner.

#10 Temple is 2-1 in the A-10, tied with six other teams for 2nd place.

So there you have it--just three of 10 teams that could even reasonably be described as having the success that a tough schedule should facillitate.


As for the Big East, once again, schedule strength is at best a non-factor.
Syracuse (#11 SOS) played the toughest non-conference schedule in the Big East, and they are 3-4 in conference play.  Georgetwon, played one of the weaker schedules, and are still #1 in conference.


Same thing applies in other major conferences:  Arizona State played the #11th EASIEST schedule (or 330th most difficult), and they're 4-1, tied for first with Washington State (who played the #253rd' toughest schedule)



2.  Teams don't decide to play UNLESS the networks decide to cover it.  It's a naive notion that MU and Maryland would decide to play, and hope that ESPN or CBS gets involved. 

The only way that game is scheduled is if CBS or ESPN calls the two schools and suggests that they play a game to fill a hole in ESPN's or CBS's schedule. 

[mu_hilltopper]

One thing I still don't understand is .. hasn't the Department's economics improved drastically in the past 5 years?  

Ticket revenue has easily doubled, as season tickets have doubled in price, plus our attendance is up.  -- On top of that pile of cash, lays the ESPN/Big East contract, which was supposedly the biggest in the history of college basketball.  -- Then there's the NCAA tournament credits $$, which MUST be higher than what we got in our CUSA days.

So .. I realize "competing in the Big East" (in all sports) is more costly .. but has that cost outstripped the huge amount of new cash rolling in? -- That's a tough one to believe. -- It's not like we added a sport.  Mostly what's changed is the destinations our team travels to, which can't amount to huge spikes in budgets. -- Sure, we've upgraded our coaches here and there, and our equipment .. but if someone was running a company at $X revenue level, and in 3-5 years got $2X but managed to "still" be strapped .. doesn't make sense.

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

It's a naive notion that MU and Maryland would decide to play, and hope that ESPN or CBS gets involved. 
The only way that game is scheduled is if CBS or ESPN calls the two schools and suggests that they play a game to fill a hole in ESPN's or CBS's schedule. 

I don't think that muPartY suggested the networks would not be included in discussions upfront, but I'm curious why you choose to refer to such an idea as "naive?"

[The Man in Gold]

MU's expenses are about $22 million ($21.8 million) for all of athletics.  This covers scholarships, coaching salaries, administrative, recruiting, scheduling, uniforms, etc, etc. 

MU Men's hoops spends just a shade under $8 million and have revenues about $21 million.

Why is this so controversial.  It is pretty easy to see MU's athletic department basically breaks even when you account for the limited revenue brought in by other sports.  As was mentioned before, you could roughly say MU makes about $1,000,000 a game (even if the real number turned out to be only half that), the athletic department needs to offset the loss of revenue ($0.5MM-$1MM) with some other money making ventures.  If they raised ticket prices they might be able to offset that, if there was a consensus among all fans the new prices were worth it.

It's all about economics.  Based on the numbers, the clear priority is offsetting the costs of running a highly competitive program, not making profit.    So unless  all fans are willing to sacrifice on the commitment to the basketball team or another program, please let this topic go.  Everyone of us would love to see more marquee games in the BC, but that requires a trade-off.

[NavinRJohnson]

Dude, where's that burger from?

[Chili]

Dude, where's that burger from?

Sobelman's

[The Man in Gold]

<--The Sobelman...mmm  /drool

[ChicosBailBonds]

I take it then that you guys feel a new MU coach would still schedule 18 home games and plenty of bunnies...as many as today with a similar out of conference schedule?