That graphic goes to show that but for supportng the UH FB program and paying CDH and his staff higher salaries, UH wouldn’t have been rated so high and likely would have been passed over by the likes of Air Force or Memphis or maybe even SMU. Obviously at this point in time, UCF & Cincinnati are already above us.
Ya know.
It’s funny to me how I hear some people say that SMU and Tulane should be P5 candidates.
All one needs to do is to look at the chart above….and he’ll understand why they are NOT.
Same for Rice.
That chart won’t include any private school even if they spend that much- USA Today’s methodology omits private schools.
That chart needs a different font.
If that is true, then where do you imagine SMU, Tulane, and Rice would finish?
I’m guessing NOT in the Top Ten.
SMU might be in the top 10, though certainly not in the top 3 which supports your larger point. Tulane after last season might be top 15-20 but I would think just about every G5 school would be after the kind of season they had.
I ran the numbers for SMU, Tulane, UH, and UCF for the most recent year the EADA data which includes private schools but doesn’t break out donations, tickets, subsidy, etc which is why USA Today doesn’t use it.
SMU - 79M
Tulane- 34M
UCF- 83M
UH- 78.8M
Rice- 42M
SMU is definitely one of the biggest revenue spenders and if they aren’t top three they are top 5 at worst IMO.
Data from: Equity in Athletics
Do you know if they are counting the school’s contributions to
prop up athletics as revenue , or is this “true revenue” due to
ticket sales, merchandise, private donations, Tv and conference payouts ?
Where would BYU finish?
I assume #1 given that they get over 60K attendance per game.
Were they in the PAC, they’d be close to the top in football attendance.
As for SMU, that would shock me. Their tiny stadium is empty. VERY small fan base.
They must, as the last poster said, be relying on sugar daddies.
I can’t imagine they are bringing in top five revenues in ticket sales, TV, concessions, merchandising, bowl and playoff money, etc.
I’m pretty sure it includes all revenue sources contributed to operations, so that includes student fees, university allocations, etc.
UH has committed to spend at least that amount of money every year, regardless of where it comes from. Once the other revenue sources increase, the university contribution would theoretically decrease (yeah, right).
Ok.
That makes more sense.
NO WAY SMU’s product in the field is bringing in that kind of dough.
You are really grasping for straws with these graphics lately
How so?
They are for discussion.
EADA had BYU at 95M so #1.
EADA isn’t split out by subsidy or student fees, etc… no way to tell which is why USA Today looks at public financial statements which private schools don’t have to provide.
SMU likely has some huge subsidies and donations.
That’s what I figured.
So at the end of the day, the right four schools were chosen.