IU football makes double Purdue. Their B-Ball Quadrupled our revenues (FIRE BURKE)

[Foolmeoncefan]

I am sorry, but this needs it's own thread in itself. This simply needs seen by people where Purdue is right now in sports. How is Burke allowed to continue at Purdue after these results? He has treated the football team like someone treats a private in the army. How was this allowed to happen? Look at what he has done to our sports program. At this point I think we fire the AD or force his retirement this year. That has to happen before we fire Hazell. And a very careful AD replacement needs to be made and we should take someone from a very successful college sports program with a football bent, someone who was a football coach and won. Someone who has great leadership ability and who can negotiate and work with whoever the new football coach is, a hire made by the new AD.

IU has made far more money in football and basketball and trounced Purdue in just about every sports money category you can think of except Hazell. Even more of a reason to fire Burke. Indiana makes more in basketball ticket sales than Purdue does in football ticket sales. That is really telling considering our football stadium size is around 70,000. How is that for telling? IU makes three times our basketball ticket sales.


Football team profit (revenue minus expenses):
10. Indiana - $8,667,357
13. Purdue - $4,456,955

Men's basketball profit (revenue minus expenses):
3. Indiana - $11,275,513
11. Purdue - $3,106,981

NCAA/conference distributions (bowl, tournament, conference TV, etc.)
2. Indiana - $30,073,247
7. Purdue - $28,928,744

Athletic department profit (revenue minus expenses):
In the 2011-12 data, USA Today Sports reported that just 23 of 228 athletics departments at NCAA Division I public schools were able to cover their own expenses and turn an overall profit. Last year, in the Big Ten alone, eight of the 11 schools that responded were able to cover their own expenses and the top six turned a profit.

4. Indiana - $4,282,047 (positive)
14. Purdue - (-)$4,949,278 (DEAD LAST NEGATIVE)

Athletic department total operating revenue (keep in mind Purdue is much worse off than these numbers today from 3 years ago.)
1. Michigan - $157,899,820
2. Ohio State - $145,232,681
3. Wisconsin - $127,910,918
4. Penn State - $117,590,993
5. Minnesota - $106,176,156
9. Indiana - $84,668,779
13. Purdue - $71,372,206

This is the most telling statistic of all. It is almost embarrassing.
Football ticket sales
1. Ohio State - $47,091,663
2. Michigan - $46,108,503
3. Nebraska - $34,121,726
4. Iowa - $21,042,903
8. Purdue - $9,628,594 (Football Ticket Sales)
11. Indiana - $6,585,484 (Football Ticket Sales)
Men's basketball ticket sales
1. Indiana - $9,765,047
9. Purdue - $3,964,735

 

[BoilerBulldog]

I am sorry, but this needs it's own thread in itself. This simply needs seen by people where Purdue is right now in sports. How is Burke allowed to continue at Purdue after these results? He has treated the football team like someone treats a private in the army. How was this allowed to happen? Look at what he has done to our sports program. At this point I think we fire the AD or force his retirement this year. That has to happen before we fire Hazell. And a very careful AD replacement needs to be made and we should take someone from a very successful college sports program with a football bent, someone who was a football coach and won. Someone who has great leadership ability and who can negotiate and work with whoever the new football coach is, a hire made by the new AD.

IU has made far more money in football and basketball and trounced Purdue in just about every sports money category you can think of except Hazell. Even more of a reason to fire Burke. Indiana makes more in basketball ticket sales than Purdue does in football ticket sales. That is really telling considering our football stadium size is around 70,000. How is that for telling? IU makes three times our basketball ticket sales.


Football team profit (revenue minus expenses):
10. Indiana - $8,667,357
13. Purdue - $4,456,955

Men's basketball profit (revenue minus expenses):
3. Indiana - $11,275,513
11. Purdue - $3,106,981

NCAA/conference distributions (bowl, tournament, conference TV, etc.)
2. Indiana - $30,073,247
7. Purdue - $28,928,744

Athletic department profit (revenue minus expenses):
In the 2011-12 data, USA Today Sports reported that just 23 of 228 athletics departments at NCAA Division I public schools were able to cover their own expenses and turn an overall profit. Last year, in the Big Ten alone, eight of the 11 schools that responded were able to cover their own expenses and the top six turned a profit.

4. Indiana - $4,282,047 (positive)
14. Purdue - (-)$4,949,278 (DEAD LAST NEGATIVE)

Athletic department total operating revenue (keep in mind Purdue is much worse off than these numbers today from 3 years ago.)
1. Michigan - $157,899,820
2. Ohio State - $145,232,681
3. Wisconsin - $127,910,918
4. Penn State - $117,590,993
5. Minnesota - $106,176,156
9. Indiana - $84,668,779
13. Purdue - $71,372,206

This is the most telling statistic of all. It is almost embarrassing.
Football ticket sales
1. Ohio State - $47,091,663
2. Michigan - $46,108,503
3. Nebraska - $34,121,726
4. Iowa - $21,042,903
8. Purdue - $9,628,594 (Football Ticket Sales)
11. Indiana - $6,585,484 (Football Ticket Sales)
Men's basketball ticket sales
1. Indiana - $9,765,047
9. Purdue - $3,964,735

First of all, the numbers you quote from USA Today are incorrect. Re-read the article.

Secondly, you need to better understand the difference between revenue and profit. We should NEVER hope for our AD to turn a huge profit. We want all revenue reinvested into the department. Our goal should be to make $1 a year.

 

[Foolmeoncefan]

First of all, the numbers you quote from USA Today are incorrect. Re-read the article.

Secondly, you need to better understand the difference between revenue and profit. We should NEVER hope for our AD to turn a huge profit. We want all revenue reinvested into the department. Our goal should be to make $1 a year.

I partly disagree with that. That is definitely not how Alabama is running their program and nor the others. Profit is key. The school has to be able to make money on these sports programs, number one to remain relevant, but also to remain competitive academically. Sports has done wonders for Alabama. In 2001 Alabama was barely ranked in the top 50 public schools at like 48th. In 2013 they are 31st and up from 34th the previous year. Much of that had to do with the student retention rate. Sports had a lot to do with that both in applications and retention. I guarantee you if Alabama saw the same kind of success as Purdue in that time they wouldn't be ranked as a top 50 school today and certainly not 31st. And while sports doesn't necessarily determine academic standing, having a good sports program can without a doubt improve the desirability of the college and retention rate. That in turns boosts the ranking from where it is at any moment in time as in the case of Alabama, a school certainly not known academically but steadily is approaching Purdue's ranking. Wonder how that happened.

OSU made 22 million in surplus. Michigan (with losing programs during the time) made 13M. PSU (after Sandusky and near that time) made 8M. Indiana around 5M. Purdue is operating at a 5M loss per year and last in the big ten. Michigan had the highest operating revenue at 160M. That is more than double what Purdue gets. The big four teams in the big ten ( 160M, 145M, 127M, 120M ) Mich, OSU, Wisc, PSU respectively. Probably not a coincidence they lead the conference in winning.

Alabama made over 138 million in surplus (profit) between 2004 and 2013. In 2004 their surplus was 5M. They went out and made a huge hire. In 2013 their surplus is over 33M. The football coach is a major hire. One that must be taken with the greatest care. And I refuse to hear that Burke put all that time in Hazell when he abruptly went from being rejected by one guy to making a quick and rash hire. A very very costly error that was for Purdue. Michigan just dropped 7 large on their coaching hire that you better believe they spent the time making intelligently and what will most probably see Michigan ending up with a similar surplus to Alabama 6 years from now.

 

[lbodel]

I partly disagree with that. That is definitely not how Alabama is running their program and nor the others. Profit is key. The school has to be able to make money on these sports programs, number one to remain relevant, but also to remain competitive academically. Sports has done wonders for Alabama. In 2001 Alabama was barely ranked in the top 50 public schools at like 48th. In 2013 they are 31st and up from 34th the previous year. Much of that had to do with the student retention rate. Sports had a lot to do with that both in applications and retention. I guarantee you if Alabama saw the same kind of success as Purdue in that time they wouldn't be ranked as a top 50 school today and certainly not 31st. And while sports doesn't necessarily determine academic standing, having a good sports program can without a doubt improve the desirability of the college and retention rate. That in turns boosts the ranking from where it is at any moment in time as in the case of Alabama, a school certainly not known academically but steadily is approaching Purdue's ranking. Wonder how that happened.

OSU made 22 million in surplus. Michigan (with losing programs during the time) made 13M. PSU (after Sandusky and near that time) made 8M. Indiana around 5M. Purdue is operating at a 5M loss per year and last in the big ten. Michigan had the highest operating revenue at 160M. That is more than double what Purdue gets. The big four teams in the big ten ( 160M, 145M, 127M, 120M ) Mich, OSU, Wisc, PSU respectively. Probably not a coincidence they lead the conference in winning.

Alabama made over 138 million in surplus (profit) between 2004 and 2013. In 2004 their surplus was 5M. They went out and made a huge hire. In 2013 their surplus is over 33M. The football coach is a major hire. One that must be taken with the greatest care. And I refuse to hear that Burke put all that time in Hazell when he abruptly went from being rejected by one guy to making a quick and rash hire. A very very costly error that was for Purdue. Michigan just dropped 7 large on their coaching hire that you better believe they spent the time making intelligently and what will most probably see Michigan ending up with a similar surplus to Alabama 6 years from now.

These numbers are not always black and white, and schools budget things differently.

That being said, most schools do not turn a profit on a regular basis. We aren't going to magically turn into a Michigan, that's just completely pointless to compare. However, can we turn into a Michigan State? Sure. We weren't much different than MSU 10 years ago. Now we are. What's changed? MSU's football program has gone from a 6-8 win program to a 9-11 win program.

So yes, football makes a big difference in your budget numbers - easily the biggest sport there is.

 

[Inspector100]

These numbers are not always black and white, and schools budget things differently.

That being said, most schools do not turn a profit on a regular basis. We aren't going to magically turn into a Michigan, that's just completely pointless to compare. However, can we turn into a Michigan State? Sure. We weren't much different than MSU 10 years ago. Now we are. What's changed? MSU's football program has gone from a 6-8 win program to a 9-11 win program.

So yes, football makes a big difference in your budget numbers - easily the biggest sport there is.

I think this discussion is getting bogged down in the minutia of it all. The OP has posted the same argument in 3 different threads and has been going non-stop since 9AM today. His passion is impressive and refreshing. I get his point and agree with the better part of it. It is truly sad for our once revered university and all the things that gain it attention, including football. Sad that we are so far behind a place like Penn State that has 100K each week to watch the remnants of one of the most appalling events in collegiate sports history. And they proudly claim it isn't so. At least we are more realistic.