collapse

Resources

2024-2025 SOTG Tally


2024-25 Season SoG Tally
Jones, K.10
Mitchell6
Joplin4
Ross2
Gold1

'23-24 '22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

Big East Standings

Recent Posts

Nash Walker commits to MU by Captain Quette
[Today at 02:40:11 PM]


Recruiting as of 7/15/25 by JakeBarnes
[Today at 02:34:51 PM]


Marquette freshmen at Goolsby's 7/12 by majorgoolsbys
[Today at 02:08:45 PM]


Congrats to Royce by tower912
[July 10, 2025, 09:00:17 PM]


Kam update by seakm4
[July 10, 2025, 07:40:03 PM]


More conference realignment talk by WhiteTrash
[July 10, 2025, 12:16:36 PM]


2025-26 Schedule by Shaka Shart
[July 10, 2025, 01:36:32 AM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address. We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or signup NOW!

Next up: A long offseason

Marquette
66
Marquette
Scrimmage
Date/Time: Oct 4, 2025
TV: NA
Schedule for 2024-25
New Mexico
75

cheebs09

UK's high number could be their increased "recruiting budget" with Calipari. The Anthony Davis recruitment shows that  $200,000 number is pretty much right on.

Dr. Blackheart

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on October 18, 2011, 09:05:56 PM


    My first thought was that in-state recruits lower tuition costs...assuming that the cost of the grant-in-aid is included.

    But seeing schools like Kansas are only marginally more expensive, my guess is that it is an apples to organges thing.  For instance, MU has to rent the Bradley Center for home games.  I4 has its own areana.  But that doesn't address UK.

    Hard to tell.
Yes that is confusing and I couldn't find any clarification on what is an "expense".  The game day expense column I took to be, in MU's case, the cost of the BC and other associated game costs like travel, promotions, etc. Still, others like Duke, Kentucky, MSU, Texas are much higher than MU and they own their arena.

Whatever the case, MU is elite on hoops spending...which has to be a great recruiting pitch...and a way to keep a coach. It also shows that the football schools use basketball as a cash cow to keep their status (either to cover football shortfalls or to support the extra women's sports needed for Title IX compliance).[/list]

muhs03

Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on October 18, 2011, 08:46:29 PM
Only UK ($198,147) and Texas ($148,783) spend more per player than Marquette ($143, 792). Now you could argue that MU should have more elite results, but 6 straight years of NCAA money with a 7th likely seems to show the ROI is worth it. More-so:


  • Dick Strong purportedly pays Buzz's salary and provides the use of chartered plane for recruiting

Isnt Dick Strong over 70 years old now? Yes, its great to have him so involved, but what happens when he's gone? Programs need more than just one wealthy guy... [/list]

PaintTouches

I made a little spreadsheet for our Paint Touches blog and think it applies well here. It turns out that Marquette is 4th in the country in "expenses per player" taking room and board, tuition, and books out of the equation. It totals out to $100,670.



http://painttouches.wordpress.com/

avid1010

    Quote from: muhs03 on October 18, 2011, 11:25:11 PM
    Isnt Dick Strong over 70 years old now? Yes, its great to have him so involved, but what happens when he's gone? Programs need more than just one wealthy guy... [/list]

    Yeah, MU will likely collapse upon his death. 

    muhs03

    Quote from: avid1010 on October 19, 2011, 06:33:13 AM

      Yeah, MU will likely collapse upon his death. 
    That's what you took away from my comment? Wow. [/list]

    hoyasincebirth

    From what I understand these numbers are not close to being accurate.
    The numbers reported by the Louisville Business Journal are those supplied by universities to the Department of Education under the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act. They are available here: http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/, and they are complete nonsense.

    It is quite clear from perusing different school's numbers that many are quite creative in their accounting. Expenditures equal revenues for most schools' teams, particularly in the non-revenue sports. (In other words, "revenue" is generally just the team's budget, with the funds being allocated to it by the university.) Some schools have large revenues in a catch-all "other" category.

    Sometimes you can figure out what's going on. For example, Notre Dame's basketball "revenue" is exactly the amount the school receives from the Big East, which of course excludes all ticket sales and other game-day revenue. So clearly in Notre Dame's bizarro world, because the university owns the Joyce Center, revenues from basketball games accrue to some line-item outside the athletic department.

    Nothing is arm's-length. The numbers obviously are thoroughly meaningless.

    Previous topic - Next topic