#69

[Nacho]

According to a post on the Baylor site a report in the Orlando Sentinel newspaper shows that SMU finished the year with a net income of 255,002 from football and 357,019 from AD & inc. Very surprising. TCU came in ranked #98. Maybe we aren't doing so bad after all. I wish I knew how to do a link on this site.

[Nacho]

TCU lost almost $5 million in football last year. WOW! NTSU made 0.

[Dement-ed]

The little froggies went to a bowl and lost $5 million? How? What are they spending their revenue on?

[Dooby]

<A HREF="http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/college/orl-sptbudget09020903feb09,0,6497387.story?coll=tf%2Dmain%2Dsports" TARGET=_blank>Orlando Sentinal</A>

I think this is what you are referring to. The numbers are found in the link titled "Playing for Dollars" under "related Stories".

It says TCU lost $1,348,517 in the 2001-2002 school year on football. I assume that means the 2001 football season. They lost over $4.9M on their athletic program as a whole.

In contrast, SMU made $295,002 in football over the same time period. SMU made $360K off athletics as a whole.

This is based on reports filed with the Dept. of Education.

[Nacho]

Thanks for the link. Very sobering for a lot of schools. College athletics is totally out of control. Baylor lost 2.5 million in the Big 12 and we made money in the WAC. How is that possible? For most colleges this can't go on forever. Some schools are losing serious money. Houston lost about 4 million. C-USA simply is not working. The WAC for a lot of schools isn't working. Got to go regional and cut expenses.

[Dooby]

I just don't see how you can read that into those numbers.

First of all, I am just flabbergasted if those numbers show the whole picture. I suppose it is possible that SMU made money off football in 2001 (Cavan's last year), but I doubt it. It will be interesting to see what the next report shows.

Second, I don't see our expenses being cut that much. In this day and age, you simply are going to have to travel, in conference or out. The best argument for a regional conference is to increase revenue through attendance. The problem is that with the schools suggested, it would be a terrible conference for TV and would be lucky to get a TV deal at all.

The best thing about the article is that it is ammo to use against the Pye-leftovers who want to eliminate football from SMU alltogether.

[EastStang]

With our attendance, how did our football team get to be the highest grossing football team in the WAC at $5.6 Million? Where did all that money come from? Is it the revenue from the boxes at Ford? Baylor grossed only slightly more than $6 Million and they're in the Big XII. On the Frog site, they are saying that these figures are untrue, yet those are the figures submitted by the school to the U.S. Government.

[Nacho]

Look at the WAC and C-USA. They cover practically the whole US. Way too unwieldy. By cut expenses, I mean go regional and not go all over the country to play someone that no one cares about. A western C-USA/easter WAC conference seems ideal to me in light of these numbers.

[boulevard bum]

I believe we can contribute those numbers to the unwavering alumni support. The SMU alums just care more about their school than the other wac alums do as well as the TCU alums. Look at all the buildings at TCU..when is the last time someone gave millions to get a new one built there. The club level at Ford was always sold out. I was up there a lot last year. That helps. Those are the high priced tickets.
I also think many people buy tickets and don't attend the game just to inflate the attendance as well as the profits. This is just my hot sports theory. None of it is necessarily fact.

[Dooby]

Do you really want to encourage froggie-land to come on here and explain the buildings they have built in the last 5 years and the ones they plan to build? Please, for the love of God, don't.

Like I said, I think those numbers are skewed. But how and why, I don't know. I just can't believe SMU made money off football in 2001.

I do think TCU lost some money on football; maybe through guaranteed ticket sales at their bowl game, maintenance costs or something. But how much, I don't know.

[DallasFrog]

Save the alumni "we care more" bullsh*t.
Two new buildings have been built on campus over the past year, at a cost of $25 million, both alumni donations. New jumbotron, baseball stadium, soccer stadium, track complex, and football practice facilites have all been added due in large part to alumni donations. Spare us that crap.

[Nacho]

Hey DallasFrog, how in the world did TCU lose 5 million? A million here, a million there, pretty soon you're talking serious money.

[Dooby]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by DallasFrog:
<B>Save the alumni "we care more" bullsh*t.
Two new buildings have been built on campus over the past year, at a cost of $25 million, both alumni donations. New jumbotron, baseball stadium, soccer stadium, track complex, and football practice facilites have all been added due in large part to alumni donations. Spare us that crap.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What did I tell you. To assume that SMU is the only school putting up new buildings is just moronic. I drove by their baseball stadium last weekend; it is gorgeous.

Still, how and why did they lose money?

[GrapevineMustang]

I'm sorry if some of our Fort Worth friends don't like to read about how much we care about our school. There's a simple solution: don't read it.

If you don't like the flavor of Howard Stern's radio show, you don't have to listen.
If you don't like the rambling buffoonery of Rush Limbaugh, change the station.
If you don't like to read about SMU and the pride we have in our university, visit other websites.

This is by no means an attempt to suggest you're not welcome here. But consider what this website is — run by SMU fans, for SMU fans. If you'd like to start cyber-wars or bash SMU, there are other sites out there for that. Thanks for your understanding.

[PX]

The revenue numbers reported there include the money the univerity puts in to cover the athletic departments deficit. If it were just the money that the athletic department actually generated through ticket sales and donations, our deficit would look about the same as TCU's.

A lot of people dont realize that sometimes going to the smaller bowls is a money loser. Teams spend more on travel expenses and guaranteed ticket sales, than they recoup from the bowl payoff.