Great Article on Division 1A Revenue

[Stallion]

Considering how relatively small our crowds and how little we get from CUSA membership, I would love to get an idea of how SMU gets its revenue-I'm sure SMU has benefited substantially from new revenue created by Ford Stadium (suites, seat licenses etc)-seems like SMU probably generates substantial revenue from the Boulevard-anybody know the top sources in revenue and how its improved since Ford and the Boulevard have been added. What are possible sources of additional revenue-are the suites fully sold out and is there an opportunity to build more? We seem to outperform our non-BCS competition considering obvious deficiencies

http://www.mrsec.com/2012/12/big-bang-t ... es-part-1/

[Pony81]

Very interesting.
Glad to see our revenue is in the upper tier of the lower tier.

Our future is in a combined BE / ACC which fits us well. We compete with schools od similar academic stature in a part of the country that is a good cultural fit for SMU. Plus it gives us visibility ot a wider student population to improve our student body.

I'd rather be in this sort of league than in the BIG XII where you compete with full on football factories and really can't expand your brand .

[SoCal_Pony]

Great article and I agree that I would like to know how SMU generates its revenues.

Initial thoughts

Note that we are only slightly below Utah in revenues, and I assume, we would actually be greater if we had the PAC $ Utah does.

Further supports those who question the B10 additions of Rutgers and Maryland. On a revenue basis, they could have done much better.

Texas Tech is next to last in B12 revenues.

UNLV at $54M per year is impressive.

At $35M per year, Hawaii could have supported JJ better.

Everyone talks Boise Boise Boise, yet they are only slightly above much-maligned Tulane in revenues.

Surprised at how low Houston's revenues are.

[DanFreibergerForHeisman]

Fascinating article. Thanks for sharing. I can't wait to read the next one.

[covok48]

Thank you for providing this. This is a fantastic read.

A few things:

A) There is going to be another division split in the NCAA like I-A and I-AA in the 70's. The figures don't lie. The Sunbelt, MWC, CUSA will not make it. Half of The Big East won't either.

B) SMU is exactly at the borderline cutoff as far as revenue goes. If we have modest success in football/ basketball there is a chance we make it by the skin of our teeth.

C) The Big 12 had good reason to fight over revenue. The gap between the richest and poorest is staggering.

D) Eventually a conference (or conferences) are going to give in and give whatever BYU and ND want. Those are gold nuggets in the barren wasteland that is I-A independent.

E) SMU going independent is a horrible suggestion on this board. Stop bringing it up.

[SoCal_Pony]

Thank you for providing this. This is a fantastic read.

B) SMU is exactly at the borderline cutoff as far as revenue goes. If we have modest success in football/ basketball there is a chance we make it by the skin of our teeth.

That is the beauty of it IMO. Borderline cutoff as far as revenue goes, but in terms of location, nobody left is better.

What we need is real success in BB, like a Sweet 16 run. Unfortunately, we don't have the time.

[DanFreibergerForHeisman]

What we need is real success in BB, like a Sweet 16 run. Unfortunately, we don't have the time.

The bottom line is we absolutely have to make the most of our limited time in what remains of the real BIG EAST.

I think we will in basketball, but I'm not so sure in football - but I'm sure not giving up!

[SoCal_Pony]

If goal is PAC, then maybe the time frame is longer, but otherwise, you are saying SMU goes Sweet 16 dancing next season. That might be a reach....but I agree, I will be rooting for it

[Charleston Pony]

If goal is PAC, then maybe the time frame is longer, but otherwise, you are saying SMU goes Sweet 16 dancing next season. That might be a reach....but I agree, I will be rooting for it

I'd be pleased with making the Big Dance and at least winning a 1st round game next year. Beyond that is a miraculous rise. Hope it happens, but my only expectation is of making the Dance

[SoCal_Pony]

agreed CP, but we will have the best HC in the dance. That's gotta be worth at least 1 more win, doesn't it?

[Charleston Pony]

agreed CP, but we will have the best HC in the dance. That's gotta be worth at least 1 more win, doesn't it?

we can only hope...but it would help if this year's starters are coming off the bench next year

[CA Mustang]

Note that we are only slightly below Utah in revenues, and I assume, we would actually be greater if we had the PAC $ Utah does.

Utah is only getting a partial share of revenue from the Pac-12 its first couple of seasons. Once they become a full participant and the Pac-12 Network revenue blossoms, their figures should increase sharply.

[SoCal_Pony]

Note that we are only slightly below Utah in revenues, and I assume, we would actually be greater if we had the PAC $ Utah does.

Utah is only getting a partial share of revenue from the Pac-12 its first couple of seasons. Once they become a full participant and the Pac-12 Network revenue blossoms, their figures should increase sharply.

Same could be said for SMU if they joined the PAC.

[Rayburn]

Thank you for providing this. This is a fantastic read.

A few things:

A) There is going to be another division split in the NCAA like I-A and I-AA in the 70's. The figures don't lie. The Sunbelt, MWC, CUSA will not make it. Half of The Big East won't either.

B) SMU is exactly at the borderline cutoff as far as revenue goes. If we have modest success in football/ basketball there is a chance we make it by the skin of our teeth.

C) The Big 12 had good reason to fight over revenue. The gap between the richest and poorest is staggering.

D) Eventually a conference (or conferences) are going to give in and give whatever BYU and ND want. Those are gold nuggets in the barren wasteland that is I-A independent.

E) SMU going independent is a horrible suggestion on this board. Stop bringing it up.

You're absoloutely right on point A. As college football labors and lumbers toward an NFL-style playoff system, the lower, unwieldy schools and conferences will be shed to create a "super division."

Point E is also correct. Going independent would be death for SMU.

[JasonB]

What a great read.

Here is the deal. A lot of the SMU numbers were advertising dollars, sponsorship dollars, and boulevard dollars because of the home schedule this year. I would guess it will be around the same amount next season.

I think it also points out that even though that other article suggested Boise and Temple are ahead of us, there is just no way that is true.

SMU is at 42.6 playing in a weak conference with second tier regional recognition. It also has minimal income from TV. That is why we are attractive to other conferences - we are at 42 with the potential of TCU's 68.

We already have more revenue than Cincy, even though we have had less success as a program in both football and basketball, and are in a smaller conference.

If invited to a major conference, we would be on the same level as Memphis and UNLV of the schools on the outside looking in, with much more upside because of our TV market. We would be upgrades over USF, Cincy, Washington State, Utah, Wake, and Ole Miss at minimum, and potentially Miss St., Vandy, Rutgers, Pitt, Iowa St., Oregon State, and on par with a BYU.

These numbers are why SMU gets an invite somewhere if/when the ACC gets ripped apart.