Bowl Game $ Question
- Thread starter TMA62
- Start date
Yeah. Each bowl school gets more to cover expenses.
I think actually going to a bowl is more expensive than the extra money the conference gives you, esp if you take the band. At least it was under Tiller
You are right. In the past for a couple of Bowl games Purdue attended, with all the extra people Purdue brought to the game, the school paid more than they received. Notre Dame used to say if the payout was not at least $x amount, they would not attend.
The way it used to be when I followed this closely when Purdue was a bowl participant, each bowl has a payout. The bigger the bowl, the more the payout. Rose->Citrus/Capital One/Buffalo Wild Wings->Outback-> etc. Some could be millions, some can be hundreds of thousands. The school gets that money to pay for team travel, player gifts, athletic department travel, then if there is funding, band/mascot/cheer/travel. Basically most bowls try to be a break even venture. Anything left goes into a pot and is split among the other schools. I think the idea is to spend reasonably- use it or lose it (or share it).
https://www.statisticbrain.com/college-bowl-game-payouts/
Which is why it is important to get at least one B1G school in to the CFP Playoff every single season. That is the biggest payout and getting a team to the NC game means more money for Purdue every single season to help invest back in to the football program and facilities. This is why I always root for B1G teams in bowl games....except for Indiana. I'll never root for them in anything other than their academics. I hope they get beat 100 - 0 in every single athletic contest they enter.
Thanks for all of the info. Reason of my post is that I think we still have another year or two of DH2's contract to payoff. If going to a bowl game would give us added money, that would really help in paying off DH2's remaining contract. The hiring Brohm and his unprecedented success in his first year reaped financial dividends that would make the AD's and President's office smile.
Our home attendance this year net 13,400 more people per game. Multiply that by 6 = 80,400. Lets say conservatively $20 a ticket = $1.6 million. Add in concessions, programs, souvenirs, beer, parking, for those 80,400 and we are doing OK.
They ran an article in the Milwaukee paper around 10 years ago about how the Badgers lost money on some of their Bowl game appearances because they paid for so many people to go. I think something like 900+ including coaching staff spouses and family members, office personnel, administration, and the band went to the game on Wisky's dime. I think they said Wisconsin was break even at best on their Rose Bowl appearances. Bowl payouts are not a money maker for the schools that go, but they are for the BIG schools that don't with the revenue sharing.
Do you have a source indicating B1G teams lose money by bowl participation? That certainly is not my understanding. Rather I was of the view that B1G bowl involvement yields quite substantial net sums which are divided amongst schools and the conference.
Each team gets an equal share, but the extra the bowl teams get to travel is less than the costs to take everyone
Yes, I was aware of that so I referred to "substantial net sums".
My point was that while uhcflynn said bowls were financial losers and the teams made their money from increased donations and licensed items sales, I believed to the contrary that after expenses were paid there was a lot of money to be split. So even if costs were more than the "alotted" sums there was still significant money made.
My point was that while uhcflynn said bowls were financial losers and the teams made their money from increased donations and licensed items sales, I believed to the contrary that after expenses were paid there was a lot of money to be split. So even if costs were more than the "alotted" sums there was still significant money made.
It appears that following the '14 -'15 bowls that the B1G reaped $505.9m in bowl money while the costs paid by the participating schools were $100.2m
Hardly a losing proposition.
http://btn.com/2015/04/14/college-football-bowl-game-payouts-surpass-500-million/
Let's say if Purdue went to the Holiday or Outback bowl, they would probably break even with some money going to the BIG 10 revenue sharing pool!
However, typically Purdue will add the band and the glee club and other non athletic organizations to represent Purdue and Purdue incurs those expenses! When Purdue went to the Rose Bowl, didn't the band participate in the parade? All of this adds up!
However being in the championship series is a tremendous payout! Purdue really needs UW in that series!
However, typically Purdue will add the band and the glee club and other non athletic organizations to represent Purdue and Purdue incurs those expenses! When Purdue went to the Rose Bowl, didn't the band participate in the parade? All of this adds up!
However being in the championship series is a tremendous payout! Purdue really needs UW in that series!
That article is somewhat misleading! Yes the BIG 10 made a ton of money! But the vast majority of that was being part of the championship series and having a second team going to a major bowl game! A lot of the lower bowl games are basically break even! An article last week said if given a choice of lower bowl games, the Big 10 would send a team to the pin stripe and quick lanes bowl before they'd send a team to the bowl games in SF or Dallas primarily because of the payouts and marketing!
I remember a report that Purdue grossed $78K for the trip to the Rose Bowl. They had the entire university there and the Purdue payout was over $1.5M. The governor of Indiana and his three assistants were on my plane going out and coming back. I am sure they didn't pay for their tickets, travel and lodging.
Last edited:
Forbes lists the B1G proceeds from Football Playoffs at $132.5m for '16-'17
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristi...ll-playoff-payouts-by-conference-for-2016-17/
Yes the bowl money for the conference is substantial, but the big 10 gives you a share of that even if you do not go to a bowl game. The extra stipend you get for playing in a bowl is typically a little less then the extra costs incurrred, but as I said previously , donations and licensed apparel take significant jumps. Plus, you are getting extra practice time for your team and free exposure to recruits.
I understood what you were saying, I just haven't seen any information in recent years that suggests schools lose money going to a bowl.
I realize that you could wind up netting more when you don't play but I can't conceive of a loss by playing, less profit yes, but a loss no.
I think it's ultimately just semantics.
I realize that you could wind up netting more when you don't play but I can't conceive of a loss by playing, less profit yes, but a loss no.
I think it's ultimately just semantics.
I
I believe it all depends on the bowl game and the school involved! I remember when I was at Purdue we hadn't gone to a bowl game in so long, the University wanted to make it a big deal! So they sent a lot of people and paid for it out of university money verses what the bowl provided!
Something we forget to address. You can look it up as to how much a Bowl gives out as a payout! But not all of that payout goes to the BIG 10 team participating in the game. A portion of that payout will go into the BIG 10 revenue sharing plan. I believe that for the bowl games that the BIG 10 has tie in for, that the payout probably covers the costs of the team participating . However, I also believe some of the lesser bowls BIG 10 teams do not participate in probably would not and that's probably why we don't participate in them. I could see one of the lesser bowls saying we'll pay the expenses for your football team but not your band! And a smaller MAC school would say fine, but A BIG 10 team would say sorry, we need a bigger payout.
Notre Dame complained for years that it would only participate in bowls offering $x amount of money because of the costs involved!
A consideration not usually addressed is if Purdue participated in the Music City bowl, transportation would involve a lot of busses. However , if they went to the bowl game in SF, airfare would be involved and that's a huge difference in costs.
I believe it all depends on the bowl game and the school involved! I remember when I was at Purdue we hadn't gone to a bowl game in so long, the University wanted to make it a big deal! So they sent a lot of people and paid for it out of university money verses what the bowl provided!
Something we forget to address. You can look it up as to how much a Bowl gives out as a payout! But not all of that payout goes to the BIG 10 team participating in the game. A portion of that payout will go into the BIG 10 revenue sharing plan. I believe that for the bowl games that the BIG 10 has tie in for, that the payout probably covers the costs of the team participating . However, I also believe some of the lesser bowls BIG 10 teams do not participate in probably would not and that's probably why we don't participate in them. I could see one of the lesser bowls saying we'll pay the expenses for your football team but not your band! And a smaller MAC school would say fine, but A BIG 10 team would say sorry, we need a bigger payout.
Notre Dame complained for years that it would only participate in bowls offering $x amount of money because of the costs involved!
A consideration not usually addressed is if Purdue participated in the Music City bowl, transportation would involve a lot of busses. However , if they went to the bowl game in SF, airfare would be involved and that's a huge difference in costs.
Latest posts
-
-
Shocker - Braden Smith named Cousy Finalist- Latest: Purdue Grad in Texas
-
-
-
