Jaytrain5
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 12, 2006
- Messages
- 11,285
- Likes
- 491
If by cash cow you mean they sit on their losing asses and eat a bunch of the money K and the basketball program generate, you're right.Ever been to Wallace Wade on a crisp autumn afternoon?
Literally dozens of the most rabid, revenue-generating fans in all of college athletics. Duke Football = cash cow.
The only way football catches basketball at Kansas or Kentucky would be for them to have success at the level of Oklahoma or Ohio State. Kentucky's had their best run of the last half century in the last five years and people are still more concerned about where John Calipari buys his ties than the Kentucky-Louisville football game.i'm not sure one 12 win season in a sea of 4-6 win seasons is going to build much of a fanbase.
No what I am saying as regardless of how fans feel about it fb is kings everywhere. The Big 12 isn't being shakin up due to bb. It's fb. If not they would be waiting to see what Kansas does first. But they ain't. Fans of bb dynasty's are taking this extremely hard. BB does not generate as much $$ as fb at any school. So to reiterate my post yes Gill or whoever they get> Self or whoever they get. :dance2:
So you are telling me Duke football makes more money than basketball?
I would like to see proof.
The billion dollar TV contract for the 'AA Tournament says yes.
If you think football is more important than basketball at basketball schools like Kentucky, Kansas and Duke then you are sadly misinformed.
If you think football is the driver of cash flow at Duke, you're beyond help. Illinois is in the Big Ten and has a fan base about 100 times bigger than Duke football. They only got out of the red when the Big Ten football network money started rolling in. Bringing in $10 mil in revenue means nothing when it's costing you $10.5 mil to run your program.Not misinformed, just pointing out the economic realities. UK, poor as their fb program has been historically, still generates a lot of cash flow, with which to pay Calip, as well as pay for other sports. Same with the Dukies and others. BB might generate a slight profit for the bb schools, but fb is the cash king.
That's two different issues. The NCAA makes next to nothing off of football. The TV money from the tournament pays all the bills for them. Football money has far more to do with individual conference TV packages. Also, 'AA Tournament money gets divided up to a whole lot more teams.there is zero chance duke makes more from football than basketball.
i'd be willing to bet that the money generated per school in the bcs (tv and other revenue) is far higher for football than basketball. that isn't to say there aren't some very notable exceptions, but on average football is what drives donations and the atheltic department revenues.
Exactly. That's why I get a good laugh when the Football Is God crowd starts talking about the economics of college athletics. The majority of D-I loses money on their alleged money printing machine of a sport.yup. generally speaking a football program doesn't start pulling a profit until it hits around 40K in season ticket holders.