How do you define 40%? Maybe attendance for smaller schools like us but no way TV. Football drives the bus. Just because BB is 40% at Purdue doesn't mean it's anywhere close to that at a FB school.
Purdue Higher Ups: ECU is dropping $55 million on football upgrades too
- Thread starter RegionWarrior101
- Start date
40% of the total revenue for the conference as a whole....not just the singular schools.
I don't have data to support my claim but I think that number is way high. Just compare the FB vs BB television rights. Attendance revenue is less than 40% as well. More people attend FB games over the course of a season and pay on average much more per ticket. I could probably accept 30%.
He also just did the redo of Ackerman for $1. Pete Dye has been a gift to Purdue as his designs have allowed Purdue's golf courses to generate high amounts of revenue for Purdue. This new course opens a lot of potential for not only college tourneys but I wouldn't be surprised to see a Champion's Tour come to Purdue at some point.
What was completely asinine was the Ross-Ade renovation in general. The fact that the south end zone was not touched is beyond absurd. Meanwhile they were busy drawing up plans for an 80,000 seat stadium....great idea.
It was a different period of time 15 years ago. A 70M project was already pushing the limits.
There was virtually no time spent on the 80K stadium vision. That was always considered to be a long ways out ....if ever. Had season ticket sales continued to rise....phase 2 could've gotten done which would've removed bleachers and added added seats with better sight lines.
The program didn't sustain.....and numerous other factors changed. So the vision changed with...change in facts.
Region Warrior nailed this one spot on.
There are probably a couple of ways (and variations) for running an athletic department.
The first one is you take care of the money making sports then filter down what is left to the other sports. The TV money has changed this a bit but you still need to feed the geese that can help pay the bills which in Purdue's case is football and men's basketball.
The second way is you say you want to go for the Sear's Cup (or whatever it is called) and you spread the funding across all the sports. This is what I see MB did and in the process hurt the programs that he needed to keep funding.
When Tiller's assistant coaches started leaving I thought they were going on to bigger and better opportunities. I was wrong and it took Coach Painter threatening to leave before I finally figured out how the athletic department was being run.
I have always wondered how many would have stuck around if we had increased their pay?
Thank you BoilerBF for understanding the point I was making; and then doing a better job of explaining it and backing it with objective evidence. My point has never been about whether or not the AD spent enough on football, it has just been it is ignorant to assume by taking care of Olympic sports he has sacrificed football. For all we know the way things have gone is "Taking care of football first and then taking care of everything else". None of you know what the exact budget figures are. I was pointing out while Football was 10 years out of date; baseball and softball were 30 years out of date.
I agree with you BF that the golf course is an year round revenue. With how Football is currently playing, the golf courses might make more money than football.
I agree that we should be upset that Purdue sports in general seems to playing catch up instead of leading the trends and packs. Playing catch up on facilities, branding, and staying in touch with the high school athletes. However, if we are all honest with our selves it requires either a large bank account to lead the pack or to go into a high level of debt in hopes that the risk of doing something new pays off. I can see both sides of the argument. However, I will never poop on other Purdue athletes / students to prove my point.
I agree with you BF that the golf course is an year round revenue. With how Football is currently playing, the golf courses might make more money than football.
I agree that we should be upset that Purdue sports in general seems to playing catch up instead of leading the trends and packs. Playing catch up on facilities, branding, and staying in touch with the high school athletes. However, if we are all honest with our selves it requires either a large bank account to lead the pack or to go into a high level of debt in hopes that the risk of doing something new pays off. I can see both sides of the argument. However, I will never poop on other Purdue athletes / students to prove my point.
At PURDUE, I will never buy it's a "MONEY" issue! It's lack of vision and trying to sell that to the "BASE" ! We have millions of financially well to do alumni that would be happy to reach into their pockets and support something they can get behind! The AD DEPT as well as having a couple of lousy PRES have failed miserable at this task!
Try to focus on what's beyond the tip of your nose, 2009.
Firstly, no one begrudges the non-revenue sports the support they have received, except when it's come at the expense of what the revenue sports need to be competitive. In which case, both the revenue and the non-revenue sports suffer, soon enough, because the non-revenues benefit when Purdue makes more money on football.
Secondly ECU is the Ball State of North Carolina, and their conference is little more than the MAC. So saying they're tops in their conference is hardly relevant to the point, which is that ECU's leadership has been a whole lot smarter than Purdue's in terms of understanding the value of decent football. From the latter part of the Tiller era until recently, Purdue treated football as nothing more than a cost center, where expenses were to be minimized and revenues plundered, to subsidize everything from student leadership centers to women's softball stadiums, and everything in between that had nothing to do with football.
It was never realistic, period. Purdue had only for a FEW years in its history "needed" 67,000 seats - why would it need more? Purdue never sold out Ross-Ade for 7 games in a season under Tiller, and several of the sellouts were assisted by a large number of away fans.
And quite frankly, it's not like Purdue football plummeted after 2001. Purdue's highest ranking came with Kyle Orton in 2004 and ticket demand was very strong. There was no plan to do jack with the south end zone. Even just demolishing the south end zone, creating a small section of stands and having capacity be 60,000 would have been a better idea than leaving it as is (and quite frankly - more profitable because ticket demand would have been a real thing).
Purdue's overall vision for Ross-Ade has been a disaster. And you can say that about the 80k - well why on earth would you present that publicly? You don't present pipe dreams. It was laughable at the time and it's laughable now.
You've obviously never been to Ross Ade. If you had, and also been to ANY other B1G stadium, you would know that Morgue didn't "take care of football first", or second for that matter.
Ecu?
Now we are competing with Texas high schools
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/05/10/texas-town-oks-63m-for-high-school-football-stadium.html
Now we are competing with Texas high schools
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/05/10/texas-town-oks-63m-for-high-school-football-stadium.html
Umm... they are spending 55 mil on a stadium expansion and club levels and basically a whole new stadium. We're spending 69 mil, JUST on a sports performance facility. That price tag doesn't include the stadium renovations to come. I don't see what the problem is here. It's not apple to apples.
There is no worse advertising than a college which cannot put together proper sports facilities. Purdue football stadium needs a class A upgrade top to bottom. If you can't win anything at least look good trying. Be attractive on TV. ECU knows. We looked PUTRID on TV this year. It was absolutely dismal. There has got to be more of a facility investment to get that stadium packed on Saturdays. It is a simple equation. Put money into the business to grow the business, and make the product attractive to the consumers. Lighten restrictions on tailgates. Free up the fun. Legalize fun at Purdue football games. The rest will take care of itself. Legalize fun.
The problem with the other sports is they don't win nothing. Nobody wants mediocrity. Football is the sugar daddy. The other programs don't bring in the cizash. Purdue was hot under Tiller. We went to a Rose Bowl. Purdue was like 10 bowls in a row. And the Athletic Director took a gigantic fire hose and hosed down the sugar daddy and now there ain't no sugar to go round. Instead Alumni and students alike get to enjoy looking like a bunch of morons each Saturday with an empty old stadium filled with a horribly bad looking seat arrangement. Lets face it, it is time to roll the dice. It is time to put some money on the table. Thank god our AD is retiring. It is time to get down to business with the AD. Winner and a chicken dinner. No more of this simpering to the track team or the softball team. If they win then we'll toss em some gravy but its sugar daddy time. Time for daddy to get some sugar. And daddy is the football team. The engine that pulls the rest of those programs. Time to give the engine some oil and the rest of these programs (basketball aside) can take a back seat.
Even if he is, it would still be warranted...as collectively they destroyed what barely remained of Purdue football...each alienated the fanbase...each essentially flat out stole money from the University without batting an eye...and collectively, they have made the job of whoever succeeds each of them far more difficult than it ever should have been to try to make up for their failures, never mind have some genuine positive impact and success of their own.
I'd love to have the opportunity to bitch about winning a national championship!
Would Pete be willing to redesign the football program?
Maybe Pete can design a par 3 inside Ross Ade. During timeouts, the 73 Purdue fans in attendance can come down and take turns at making a hole in one. The prize would be you get to leave.
I just heard that Amherst and Williams both want to get back into D-I football and are prepared to each spend $1 billion of their endowment funds (with their alumni, they can afford it) to do so. Should Purdue follow suit?
TIC, of course, but what ECU does should have no bearing on what Purdue does or doesn't do
TIC, of course, but what ECU does should have no bearing on what Purdue does or doesn't do
Actually, I think PU would be better off playing D3 football with Amherst and Williams, rather than continue to pursue the typical Purdue half-a$$ approach, which is purely reactive but still requires spending tens of millions, although long after everyone else in the conference, so the return is zilch!
He people clamoring that Purdue should drop to a lower division are the same people I assume show up to office parties and are the total party poopers. Have you seen the uproar that UAB had when they removed football? Can you imagine the absolute ****show it would be if Morgan Burke came out and said Purdue was dropping out of the B1G and dropping a division in football? Just stop with the woe is me posts about dropping divisions or changing conferences. As bad as Purdue football is right now and we should rightfully be upset about it, OSU had a spell where they were arguably bad. Same with Michigan and ND. Now, I understand it is easier to turn it around at those programs, but a turn around is capable and it is much easier in today's college football landscape than it was when it happened previously under other coaches at Purdue who found success...even Tiller in the 90's.
I'm not "clamoring" for Purdue to drop to a lower division, nor do I want them to. But I do want Purdue to get serious about being competitive in D1 football, which means we have to stop bringing up the rear of the conference in everything related to football! IU just announced another $50M improvement to Memorial for football related facilities. This is on top of the big investment they made several years back. Meanwhile, what has Morgan spent on Ross-Ade since the 2001 renovation? His excuse is he doesn't have the money, because football sucks, and football sucks, why? Because we can't recruit with the worst facilities in the B1G! We can't even beat IU out for kids now because even their football facilities are far better than ours!
But I bet we have the bleeping best women's softball stadium east of the Mississippi!
TGMF -- Thank God Morgan's (effectively been) Fired!!!
