Other than football, how important are the other sports to you?

Uh..........yeh, that's why I was agreeing with you.

 

I know, I know! Just wanted to add some reality to the conversation with a real number...........had to look it up first as I don't walk around with that type of info in my head.

Yes, there's more than air up there underneath all that blonde. :grin: Anything else master?

 

Yes, the NCAA "count" doesn't include men's football. I can't help the rules. If your point is that (and doesn't surprise me on this board) that football is king and it should count more, I can't debate how you feel... I would have honestly traded LSU's 2003 NC for a basketball championship, but that just me.

Given the rules, I stand by my original statement. For whatever it's worth, the NC championship "race" is what it is. I can't help that USC doesn't field soccer--again, that seems to prove my point. USC chooses to spend its athletic dollars in other places than UCLA does. I mention golf and basketball, b/c you are primarily referring to men's sports, and that's what I was refering to. And, I'm not debating that Title IX didn't change college athletics, but your post sounded to me like 'SC was somehow affected in some great way--my only point is it affects every program.

I believe I did read your post and there was a cheap shot at Dorrell as an underachiever, so I corrected your statement about him being one of the "highest paid CA coaches". It's actually far from the truth, so thought it was worth correcting.

And, lastly, yes, I make a somewhat half-hearted jest of 13-9. Certainly USC has owned UCLA in the last seven or so years, but my point in my first post was simply that this wasn't the case 10 year ago--in those days UCLA regularly stomped 'SC and sometimes folks forget that. It wasn't until 'SC went out and got Pete Carroll did they matter again. Could and should UCLA want more football championshps? Sure.

But, I guess the point of the first post and your post was in essence---does 100 matter, if it doesn't include football? Maybe not to many on this thread, but then I'd say, just post up the football NC list, and not include any mention of any "college athletics" list or "NCAA championships" reference. Just call it a football metric.

 

BLASPHEMY!!!!!!!

I hereby sentence you to 120 "Hey Fightin' Tigers", and 4,156 Alma Maters.

 

Football is king in college athletics. It's the glamour sport that gets the ratings and brings in the most money to athletic departments. Bet I know what would happen if we polled AD's across the country and had em pick just one sport to keep. It's not Water Polo.

I never said USC was more affected than anyone else. I said changes in schollie limits and Title IX changed college athletics. It's true. Ask state schools like Cal State Fullerton, now a perennial baseball school, what happened to their football team or CSUN their basketball team.

Dorrell is a consumate underachiever. It's well known. He was on the verge of getting his walking papers before USC's underachievement on the field ensured him at least one more year on the payroll. He passed on former teammate and NFL great Ken Norton Jr as a coach on his staff. Guess where Coach Norton is now and guess who wishes he could change that? And I said that Dorrell along with former ucla coaches Toledo and Donahue have been at or near the top of the list for highest paid employees OF the state, not IN the state. In other words, Donahue made more money than the Governor.

I'm no bandwagon USC fan and I've said on here many times that 13-9 sucked. A loss to a cross-town rival is bad on all counts and particularly when it puts your team in the Rose Bowl instead of the NC game. ucla's near total domination of USC in the 90's was painful but I didn't jump ship and I'm not about to do it now. I love the fact that USC and LSU could be starting a long term rivalry and for me it will never be personal, just pure enjoyment of the game.
:geauxtige

 

Basketball brings in more money than football. Basketball last year brought in $159.2M during the season and $467.7M in the NCAA tourney for a total of $626.9M.

Football brought in $328.5M for the season and $146.8M in bowl games for a total of only $475.3M.

 

Imagine how much larger FB would be if there was a playoff system. :dis:

 

I can see that but look how many more games are played in a season during basketball as opposed to football. But, playoff could make a little more money.

 

That's a shocker for me, I'd have never guessed that.

 

Basketball:
Roughly 10,752 games in basketball's regular season (336 teams, around 32 games each). 64 game tournament
$14,806.55 per regular season game
Tourney does VERY WELL (over 7 mil per game)
$57,960.43 per game(reg plus tourney combined)

Football:
Roughly 1,428 games (119 teams, around 12 games each). 28 bowl games.
$230,042.02 per regular season game
Bowls do well too (over 5 mil per)
$326,442.31 per game (reg plus bowls combined)
In other words, football rakes in over 5-1/2 times as much per contest as basketball. Football=Cash Cow