Revenue for all 118 FBS Schools

[Daaah]

Perfect answer. That's all we need, more drunks. Personally I don't want any fan who would rather get trashed than actually watch the game and support the team. Nothing against drinking, I just do mine at the bar or at home. I saw what it was like back when we did sell it in the stadium, I wouldn't want that again.

It wasn't that long ago that beer was sold in the coors event center. I was a student. When did they stop? About 2000?

And you are a complete ****tard if you think people aren't drinking at games. First, people are bringing flasks in, and second, have you been to the tailgating areas at 1/2 time (and the third quarter)?

 

[buffwings]

as someone who lived in the dorms, I can tell you I only got promoted on the team ONCE my entire frosh year. Posters in the hallways, student only pregame activities, etc, NOTHING. Any of those small things would help. CU Football: A tradition only if you find out about on your own :sad1:

He's right there. I started my sophomore so I didnt live in the dorms in Boulder, and the only reason I found out about the traditions is because of my roommates who knew a little more than me, but there wasnt much of promotion by the school itself.

 

[sackman]

With regards to Princeton and their seemingly poor attendance (their stadium size is actually around 27k, not 40k), I have a couple of thoughts -

1. Geography - Princeton is located about halfway between New York City and Philadelphia - two cities that offer tons of entertainment options on weekends (including each city having an Ivy League school and football program of its own) - I would say that given all the opportunities those cities offer, Princeton football would not be amongst the first things that come to mind...

2. Level of competition - I-AA Ivy League - 'nuff said (especially since the Ivy League opts out of the I-AA Football Championship)

3. Small school and scattered alumni base - Princeton has about 5000 undergrads and as a private school, their alumni base is pretty well scattered around the country and even the world...

The stadium feels a lot bigger than 27K, but you're right. I looked it up. There's two levels on that stadium.
For the most part, I won't argue any of your points here. My initial comment was more along the lines of pointing out that low ticket prices do not equate to better ticket sales. If Princeton wanted to increase attendance, it could do so. It wouldn't take much, but they don't need to sell tickets to pay the bills, so why bother?

 

[BuffAlum2007]

Fair enough...I really just wanted to test out the quote in your sig and see what wrath might be brought on me...must say I'm a bit let down by the results :lol:

The stadium feels a lot bigger than 27K, but you're right. I looked it up. There's two levels on that stadium.
For the most part, I won't argue any of your points here. My initial comment was more along the lines of pointing out that low ticket prices do not equate to better ticket sales. If Princeton wanted to increase attendance, it could do so. It wouldn't take much, but they don't need to sell tickets to pay the bills, so why bother?

 

[Deleted member 807]

Texas is in a league of it's own. The drop off between #6 and #7 in the B12 is huge. Colorado is $22M away from climbing 1 spot. That's basically like acquiring CSU!
Colorado is only $14M above last place in the conference.

It's amazing Okie Lite is ahead of OU, considering the relative difference in success. I don't get that one. It's also interesting to see TTU, who brought in Bobbie Knight to energize the BB program and who has had a relatively hot hand in FB under Leach show up so far down on the list.

If the B12 were ever to re-organize, a strong case could be made for TCU and BYU. The addition of BCS conference revenue to those numbers would bring them on par with the bottom half of the B12. From a revenue standpoint, seeing SMU ahead of Utah and Boise is also telling.

CSU is a basket case. Looking at the numbers, maybe the front range is oversaturated. Seeing that the Denver market can no longer support two newspapers, maybe a case could be made that it can't support two D1 caliber programs either. If CSU were to fold under CU, that might concentrate enough interest and revenue to rival Numbraska. Just food for thought.

I'm throwing in the school's endowment numbers from wiki for further comparison.

B12 break down by Athletic Revenue/Endowment from Wiki

Texas $120M / $2.836B
Okie Lite $88M / $0.617B
Kansas $86M / $1.220B
OU $77M / $1.150B
Numbraska $75M / $1.150B
ATM $75M / $6.700B
CU $53M / $0.870B
MIZZOU $49 /$1.000B
Kjuco $48 /$0.346B
BAYLOR $44 /$1.000B
TTech $43 /$0.763B
ISU $39 / $0.569B

----
Other Regional
TCU $43M /$1.126B
BYU $37M / na
SMU $33M /$1.367B
AFA $31M / na
New Mexico $29M /$0.386B
Utah $27M /$0.595B
Wyo $23M /$0.259B
CSU $22M /$0.193B
Boise $22M /$0.065B

 

[aik]

Unless the Pickens Plan's anticipated success has an athletic payoff in fine print and the Pokes turn one of their above average seasons into a BCS one, I don't see T-Bone keeping OSU above the flagship U in dollar terms a decade from now. He's already slipping on the national wealth list I believe.

Tech's numbers really shock me, as they have amazing, updated facilities for all of their programs. But also only one 12 passenger van making the cross-campus trek from the media parking lot to the stadium. Terry Bowden's lady friend had to practically sit in my lap (not that I was complaining). Ah, what were we talking about? Right, athletic $. In terms of national program prominence, though, Tech always struck me as accepting of "it is what it is," as opposed to A&M's maroon-tinted delusions and sense of entitlement.

 

[dply]

CSU is a basket case. Looking at the numbers, maybe the front range is oversaturated. Seeing that the Denver market can no longer support two newspapers, maybe a case could be made that it can't support two D1 caliber programs either. If CSU were to fold under CU, that might concentrate enough interest and revenue to rival Numbraska. Just food for thought.

Don't forget about Air Force. 3 D1 schools within a 2 hour drive.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Don't forget about Air Force. 3 D1 schools within a 2 hour drive.

The big difference, of course, is that a service academy plays by a different set of rules when it comes to funding. The State of Colorado and it's voters don't hold the same sway over how the AFA AD runs his shop. You don't see the governor forcing the RMS upon the zoomies.

The next time CSU comes pissing and moaning about money, my position will be "join the borg". Without consolidation, CSU has about as much of a chance to rival CU as CU has to rival UT. CSU generates revenue equal to 42% of CU's take. CU earns 44% of what UT brings in. CU+CSU approximately equal Numbraska.

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

Don't forget about Air Force. 3 D1 schools within a 2 hour drive.

That isn't that unique.

Oklahoma, Tulsa and OSU are all within a 2 hour drive.

 

[sackman]

The next time CSU comes pissing and moaning about money, my position will be "join the borg". Without consolidation, CSU has about as much of a chance to rival CU as CU has to rival UT. CSU generates revenue equal to 42% of CU's take. CU earns 44% of what UT brings in. CU+CSU approximately equal Numbraska.

Keep in mind that both UT and NU (and everybody else in the Big 12, for that matter) has a baseball program. The numbers listed are gross revenues. For a D-1 school that has the minimum number of sports in order to remain a D-1 program, CU does remarkably well, IMO. Would a baseball program at CU make up that difference? probably not, but both UT and NU have good baseball programs that actually generate revenue. They have basketball programs that generate revenue, and football stadiums that are larger and always sold out.
To be honest, I'm kind of surprised CU is as high on that list as it is, given the overall lack of revenue sources.

 

[BlackNGold]

Out ticket prices are crazy underpriced for both football and basketball. Even with the low prices we will sellout 2 games if we are lucky at Folsom Field this year (CSU and Nebraska). We won't sellout even 1 basketball game. We need fans in the seats to boost our numbers. Put down the beer and get to the game!

Your premise is flawed. On what basis are CU football tickets "underpriced". Compared to what? CU's season tickets this year were $348 a seat for 6 games or $58. We only have one top 25 team from last year coming in (Missouri) and they lost most of their talent. CU is $58 per game, Nebraska season Tickets are $378 for 8 games - this is a team with 297 sell outs so they have some perceived value and their tickets are less than $50 per game for season tickets. Michigan charges $50 per game, Texas season tickets are $375 for 6 games so they average about $5 per game ticket more. I certainly don't see where CU tickets are silly cheap as you are trying to say.

Add the donation and tickets are over $100 a game if I just paid the minimum donation. Not cheap in my book.

 

[sackman]

Your premise is flawed. On what basis are CU football tickets "underpriced". Compared to what? CU's season tickets this year were $348 a seat for 6 games or $58. We only have one top 25 team from last year coming in (Missouri) and they lost most of their talent. CU is $58 per game, Nebraska season Tickets are $378 for 8 games - this is a team with 297 sell outs so they have some perceived value and their tickets are less than $50 per game for season tickets. Michigan charges $50 per game, Texas season tickets are $375 for 6 games so they average about $5 per game ticket more. I certainly don't see where CU tickets are silly cheap as you are trying to say.

Add the donation and tickets are over $100 a game if I just paid the minimum donation. Not cheap in my book.

You can get season tickets for $180. That's $30 per game. I suspect, although I can't be sure, that the comparisons to UT, NU, and Michigan don't take into consideration their minimum donation and/or are the lowest season tickets available. In either case, our tickes are still less expensive.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Keep in mind that both UT and NU (and everybody else in the Big 12, for that matter) has a baseball program. The numbers listed are gross revenues. For a D-1 school that has the minimum number of sports in order to remain a D-1 program, CU does remarkably well, IMO. Would a baseball program at CU make up that difference? probably not, but both UT and NU have good baseball programs that actually generate revenue. They have basketball programs that generate revenue, and football stadiums that are larger and always sold out.
To be honest, I'm kind of surprised CU is as high on that list as it is, given the overall lack of revenue sources.

I agree with that. The lack of baseball and other D1 sports (wrestling, swimming, gymnastics, hockey, ect) does take away opportunities to generate box office receipts and TV revenue.

I'm guessing the TV revenue plays a big part in being #7 instead of lower. The size of the Denver TV market and the OCC schedule contribute to that.

I'm still kicking around the consolidation theme. Baseball and hocky and swimming just might be enough of a carrot for me to actually consider a CU and CSU merger.

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

Baseball, hockey, softball, wrestling, swimming, gymnastics, etc. are all huge money losers.

I think if you looked at the various Big 12 teams that have all those sports, the number of teams which actually GENERATE revenue are incredibly limited.

 

[BlackNGold]

You can get season tickets for $180. That's $30 per game. I suspect, although I can't be sure, that the comparisons to UT, NU, and Michigan don't take into consideration their minimum donation and/or are the lowest season tickets available. In either case, our tickes are still less expensive.

The $180 tickets are discounted because they are in locations where most people do not want to sit. That is why they discount them. CU tickets did not include donations either. What does the average season ticket holder pay? The most popular seating areas for season Ticket holders are $348 for this year plus donation. As much as people bitch about their seats at Invesco, I doubt they want to sit in section 122 at Folsom. Just because some seats are discounted does not make CU tickets a bargain.

 

[BlackNGold]

I agree with that. The lack of baseball and other D1 sports (wrestling, swimming, gymnastics, hockey, ect) does take away opportunities to generate box office receipts and TV revenue.

I'm guessing the TV revenue plays a big part in being #7 instead of lower. The size of the Denver TV market and the OCC schedule contribute to that.

I'm still kicking around the consolidation theme. Baseball and hocky and swimming just might be enough of a carrot for me to actually consider a CU and CSU merger.

Merger for what purpose? Sports...isn't that like the tail wagging the dog. CU fans love to talk up the academics and then want to merge with a non-research University. You think you are going to get their Athletic $$$'s - CU merges with CSU ( A financial nightmare) and I assure you that donations from both schools will dry up.

 

[sackman]

The $180 tickets are discounted because they are in locations where most people do not want to sit. That is why they discount them. CU tickets did not include donations either. What does the average season ticket holder pay? The most popular seating areas for season Ticket holders are $348 for this year plus donation. As much as people bitch about their seats at Invesco, I doubt they want to sit in section 122 at Folsom. Just because some seats are discounted does not make CU tickets a bargain.

I just bought two season tickets in Sec 205 for $180/each. Sec 205 is a perfectly fine location. In reality, only two sections in Folsom are all that bad. 101 and 122. Other than those, every seat is a good one. I'm certain that UT, MU, and NU also have discounted tickets in undesirable locations. They don't charge the same amount for seats on the 50 yard line as they do for seats in the second deck in the end zone.

 

[BlackNGold]

I just bought two season tickets in Sec 205 for $180/each. Sec 205 is a perfectly fine location. In reality, only two sections in Folsom are all that bad. 101 and 122. Other than those, every seat is a good one. I'm certain that UT, MU, and NU also have discounted tickets in undesirable locations. They don't charge the same amount for seats on the 50 yard line as they do for seats in the second deck in the end zone.

If you want to compare apples to apples. The 50 yard line seat at Folsom costs $348, the 50 yard line seat at Nebraska costs $378 (for 2 more games) seems like NU is cheaper. CU's tickets are right in line with everyone elses. for the base ticket price.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Baseball, hockey, softball, wrestling, swimming, gymnastics, etc. are all huge money losers.

I think if you looked at the various Big 12 teams that have all those sports, the number of teams which actually GENERATE revenue are incredibly limited.

Merger for what purpose? Sports...isn't that like the tail wagging the dog. CU fans love to talk up the academics and then want to merge with a non-research University. You think you are going to get their Athletic $$$'s - CU merges with CSU ( A financial nightmare) and I assure you that donations from both schools will dry up.

My arguement is purely based on the ability to generate revenue based on the numbers provided. This tells me that the size of the Colorado D1 sports market is around $100M (CU+CSU+AFA). For a Colorado school to compete in the B12, consolidation is one option that is no less viable than hearing fans bitch about not selling out 100K seats for each game. By colapsing the number of D1 teams, it stands to reason that a consolidated entity could fill a bigger stadium. With the more FB revenue, then more non-rev sports could be funded, thereby getting closer to matching what is available among the top tier. Consolidation would eliminate inefficiencies associated with multiple AD's supporting multiple marketing and facilities.

The politics admittedly stink, and would cause all kinds of complaining. But having watched Denver's beer, telecom, cable, and airline industries go this route, it seems like college D1 wouldn't be immune from similar thinking.

 

[Duff Man]

Consolidation would be a disaster. Good thing there is no chance of it actually happening.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Consolidation would be a disaster. Good thing there is no chance of it actually happening.

And with that goes one aveneue in which CO might actually compete with the likes of UT, Ohio State and USC. Athletic mediocrity for all three of CO's D1 programs seems like the alternative.

 

[Duff Man]

Again, consolidation for the sole purpose of athletic success is a very bad idea. Not the least of which is the fact is the academic side of the equation.

 

[sackman]

If you want to compare apples to apples. The 50 yard line seat at Folsom costs $348, the 50 yard line seat at Nebraska costs $378 (for 2 more games) seems like NU is cheaper. CU's tickets are right in line with everyone elses. for the base ticket price.

What's the annual donation for a Nebraska ticket? I've heard (though I admit to not having the first idea) that it's somewhere to the tune of $1,000 per seat. I believe it's $400 a seat for the CU tickets. Right there is the difference.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Again, consolidation for the sole purpose of athletic success is a very bad idea. Not the least of which is the fact is the academic side of the equation.

That's why An Ohio State University and Numbraska gets a hard time.
But Stanford and UT are not suffering for academics. I'm sure there are good ways and bad ways to consolidate. Let Metro State and CSU merge their Psychology/Sociology and business schools. Only cherry pick the best of what CSU offers.

CSU is in a downward spiral. The more they lower their academic standards, the harder it is to build the endowment, the harder it is to recruit, and the harder it is to sustain a FB program anybody cares about in the volume necessary to compete.

Colorado has a very saturated college market place. It's unlikely a large percentage of students from Metro, DU, CSU, Colo College, Mines, UNC-Greeley, Regis, Western State, Ft Lewis or Mesa are going to become rabid CU fans who want to fill Folsom. With all these colleges in the area, CU can be somewhat choosy in what programs it teaches and in who they admit. This helps the academic side of the equation. But it doesn't bring best with it a situation where CU can be best in conference when it comes to money for athletics. The sad outcome is that all of those graduates from other Colo schools don't have quality NCAA football as part of their college experience, and can't be depended upon to support CU as fans. Whether it's due to some inferiority complex or lack of exposure, why wouldn't an alum from these schools cheer on some other NCAA school or the Broncos instead of CU?

Almost half of CU's alum come from out of state, and many CU graduates split after graduation. Based on all this, it's nice to get >45K in Boulder, but some fundimental changes are necessessary within Colorado's higher ed market place for CU to compete head to head with the big boys.

 

[sackman]

Almost half of CU's alum come from out of state, and many CU graduates split after graduation. Based on all this, it's nice to get >45K in Boulder, but some fundimental changes are necessessary within Colorado's higher ed market place for CU to compete head to head with the big boys.

Not really. CU is the third largest school in the big 12. There are something like 28,000 students at CU Boulder, maybe more. You don't need to appeal to the entire state. You only need to appeal to the people who have already chosen to go to school there in the first place. CU does a miserable job of marketing itself to it's own students.

Case in point: the Greek System. Here's a group of people who are, by nature, joiners. They want to be part of something that's bigger than themselves. They are the best alumni you could hope to have. So what does the University do to cultivate this demographic for future donations? It does it's level best to shut down the entire system. Brilliant I say, absolutely brilliant.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Not really. CU is the third largest school in the big 12. There are something like 28,000 students at CU Boulder, maybe more. You don't need to appeal to the entire state. You only need to appeal to the people who have already chosen to go to school there in the first place. CU does a miserable job of marketing itself to it's own students.

Case in point: the Greek System. Here's a group of people who are, by nature, joiners. They want to be part of something that's bigger than themselves. They are the best alumni you could hope to have. So what does the University do to cultivate this demographic for future donations? It does it's level best to shut down the entire system. Brilliant I say, absolutely brilliant.

That's definately an incremental step in the right direction.
Doing that probably won't bring 75K admission paying spectators to the spring game, though.

 

[sackman]

That's definately an incremental step in the right direction.
Doing that probably won't bring 75K admission paying spectators to the spring game, though.

Not in one year, no. But over time, yes. Figure every graduating class has something like 5,000 members. Get one in every 20 to buy season tickets, and in 6-7 years, the stadium is sold out for every game, regardless of opponent. The problem is they don't even try to get one in 5,000 to buy season tickets. They're more interested in cultivating the corporate sponsorships and selling the club level & box seats. Don't get me wrong, that's important too. But the heart and soul of any college football program is it's alumni. Alumni are nothing more than people who used to go to school there unless they make a connection to the program while they're in school.

 

[Buffnik]

I don't worry about the marketing side of CU athletics. If Hawkins (and Bzdelik to a lesser degree) start winning, Bohn will market the sh!t out of things. There's already a lot positive going on this front and the momentum's just going to build. I could easily see AD revenues increasing by $10 million or more within the next few years.

 

[Deleted member 807]

I don't worry about the marketing side of CU athletics. If Hawkins (and Bzdelik to a lesser degree) start winning, Bohn will market the sh!t out of things. There's already a lot positive going on this front and the momentum's just going to build. I could easily see AD revenues increasing by $10 million or more within the next few years.

Shhhhhhsh! Let's agree to this after we beat the snot out of our next opponent.

 

[sackman]

I don't worry about the marketing side of CU athletics. If Hawkins (and Bzdelik to a lesser degree) start winning, Bohn will market the sh!t out of things. There's already a lot positive going on this front and the momentum's just going to build. I could easily see AD revenues increasing by $10 million or more within the next few years.

But succumbs to the notion that only winning will produce attendance. While it's true that it will help, there's so much more that can be done without the need to win games.

I'll go to CU games regardless of whether they're 12-0 or 0-12. That's just me. I love the game. I love the crowd. I love the atmosphere. It's intoxicating (in more ways than one). Not to brag, but that's the kind of fan the AD needs to be going after. The kind of guy who will come regardless of on-field success. That's something we're not doing at all.