Ummm, PUF can only be used on construction.
Even more to my point
Regardless of PUF, UT made $72m in ticket sales alone. Zero dollars spent from student fees or tuition.
We had a grand total of just under $17m in ticket sales and donations while student fees and tuition paid out just under $26m.
We want state funds to help bolster our sports program while students contribute more than the fans that attend the games.
So for me that means, if we suddenly got $26m through PUF and better TV contracts, the budget should stay the same exact size.
Of course, PUF money was spent on both ut and a$mâs basketball arenas as they were deemed âSpecial Event CentersââŠyou know, where concerts and graduations are also held.
Just like will be at FCâŠwonder if UH will be using any state funds to offset cost of FC ??
2 Likes
Interesting. Did now know that.
I never said we are crushing our opponents now. Reread what I said.
Currently we have highs and lows but more highs and average. Every time we have a high we always either lose a coach or a quarterback or both.
If we had more revenue I feel we could retain a good coach, attract more high quality players, and THEN we would crush our opponents.
2 Likes
I never said you did. Iâm just wondering why you think we would crush our P5 opponents if we had their revenue if we arenât crushing our G5 opponents when we are near the top of the G5 revenue list. And, our G5 friends lose coaches too.
More money would certainly help but crushing opponents will never come easy as weâve seen in G5. Donât get me wrong, I think we would be very competitive and have success if we moved up.
I suspect after a few years of adjustment (like Utah) we would eventually be just as competitive in a P5 conference as we were in C-USA and are in the AAC. The additional TV revenue would be nice but seeing as we are running at over a $15m deficit yearly, would the additional tv revenue go for paying coaches or taking the burden off of the school and students? If ticket prices doubled for conference games (would still be lower than average P5 tickets) would we pack 40k for Utah, Washington, Arizona, etc if we are struggling? We often say as a fanbase that winning cures attendance woes but I feel like going 9-3, 7-5, 8-4 wonât count as winning to the general fan.
Interesting article about how P5, especially in the Pac12, doesnât mean everything is solved.
Only Cal had a bigger annual deficit in athletics than WSU over the past two years among 230 public schools in Division I â $21.7 million in 2016 and $16 million in 2017.
Both compete in the Pac-12 Conference, where members eagerly spent the increased revenue-sharing payouts they received from the league just five to seven years ago. But then that outlook dimmed.
The leagueâs television venture, the Pac-12 Networks, has fallen short of revenue expectations amid distribution challenges. In the next five years, the Pac-12 is even projected to rank last in the Power 5 in payouts per school â around $35 million, compared to more than $51 million in the Big Ten. These payouts provide about half of WSUâs total revenue.
Additional TV revenue would go to both reducing the deficit and investing into athletics, IMO. I donât think we will continue to run the same deficits forever.
A bit confused on that tweet since it says âincreases were.â Are those in addition to the previous year? If not, the scholarships were definitely not increased.
Yes, in addition to the previous year.
Does that chart tell us that our deficit is $17m? What does other mean? Is that the
presidential discretionary account?
We have beaten many P5 opponents convincingly. In fact we had quite a win streak against P5 opponents. We were also typically beating G5 opponents without problems until our coach started to interview elsewhere. So the potential of us doing very well at the G5 or P5 level I feel is both there. A common denominator that has been going on for the past decade has been our coaches leaving us or quarterback play. I think both would be alleviated if we can get revenue like P5 schools do.
You are still passing up the point he made earlier. Why does losing QBs and coaches affect us any more than other G5 schools? We arenât talking about the difference between us and P5 schools, we are saying, if we canât dominate G5 every year with the same problems other G5 schools deal with, you canât assume we dominate P5 with the same lack of problems P5 have.
2 Likes
Because we have literally lost our entire staff as well. Other schools werenât gutted like we were. In addition when we had turnover the same offensive and defensive mentality wasnât carried over but was close with Briles to Sumlin.
Briles to Sumlin different offense but was similar in ways so there wasnât a huge drop offf but there was when Case went down.
Sumlin left and took everyone and Levine never could continue what Sumlin did.
Herman came in with a different offense but I think the defense was the key to us winning. He left and took everyone.
Applewhite scrambled like Levine to get a good staff, didnât happen, and didnât have a good QB until late to bail out the offense like Ward did.
He saw the writing faster than Levine and now enters Briles who carries a scheme that is successful and we have a defense that is on the right path.
If things turn out this year like they should and we retain all our coaches we should do well this year, next year, and going forward until our coaches are ripped away.
We have lost more coaches than any other school in the nation. That is why others havenât had as hard of time as we have.
1 Like
It seems ridiculous to me to think that UH will âcrushâ our future FB opponents.
However, we may very well win some games by a comfortable or wide margin.
[NOTE: I guess one could claim that we crushed Tulsa back in 1968 or UT-Austin back in 1976.]
More $ will help retain coaches. Young coaches are looking to advance their careers, just like young folks in every profession. Very few will ever get the opportunity to be the hc at a truly elite program (ie playoff contender year in and year out), so salaries closer to those programs will probably at least keep them here longer. This will build better consistency, and that what is necessary to grow the program.