Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 30
  1. #1

    Disagree with Coach Cutcliffe

    http://college-football.si.com/2013/.../?sct=cf_t2_a7

    Quote:
    "And nobody is really getting rich off of this;"


    Lets see
    What is Coach Cut's Salary? Coach K's? Mark Emmert's? Brent Musberger's? etc. etc. etc.

    There are a lot of people getting rich off of college sports.

    SoCal

  2. #2
    Dev11's Avatar
    Dev11 is offline Commissioner of Statistics, DBR Podcast
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Boston
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    http://college-football.si.com/2013/.../?sct=cf_t2_a7

    Quote:
    "And nobody is really getting rich off of this;"


    Lets see
    What is Coach Cut's Salary? Coach K's? Mark Emmert's? Brent Musberger's? etc. etc. etc.

    There are a lot of people getting rich off of college sports.

    SoCal
    Not that it helps a ton, but Cut clarified today on the David Glenn Show that he meant that schools aren't profiting, given the costs of running the programs. However, his undisclosed-but-widely-assumed 7 figure salary is flying in the face of that argument, too.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Dev11 View Post
    Not that it helps a ton, but Cut clarified today on the David Glenn Show that he meant that schools aren't profiting, given the costs of running the programs. However, his undisclosed-but-widely-assumed 7 figure salary is flying in the face of that argument, too.
    Median household (not individual, but household) income in NC is under $50k a year. I know people who make ten times that who swear they are "middle class". Coach Cut may not think he's rich.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by allenmurray View Post
    Median household (not individual, but household) income in NC is under $50k a year. I know people who make ten times that who swear they are "middle class". Coach Cut may not think he's rich.
    Here's one reference that says he's making $1.75 M per year. Wikipedia says $1.5. I think David would agree he is "rich," unless he has some hidden debts or losses in his past.

    sagegrouse

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Southern Pines, NC
    When it comes to coaches high salaries there is a market place that decides on what those salaries will be. If anyone thinks the salaries should be lower, in what range should they be? If a Division 1 school wants to save some money, I would accept an offer of $100,000 right now. It would sure be fun for me, but I don't think my team would win a single game.

    Beyond that, I am getting a bit annoyed by those who complain about the sports profits made by the colleges. They are what is known as non-profit. They follow a different set of accounting rules. They have no ownership to whom profits are distributed. All of the revenues earned or contributed go into funds for use in supporting the programs and research of the university or college. At any level, in order to get good people working for the university, good salaries and benefits must be provided for the entire body of employees, faculty and staff. Is that what folks are complaining about?

  6. #6

    You are missing the point

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhead View Post
    When it comes to coaches high salaries there is a market place that decides on what those salaries will be. If anyone thinks the salaries should be lower, in what range should they be? If a Division 1 school wants to save some money, I would accept an offer of $100,000 right now. It would sure be fun for me, but I don't think my team would win a single game.

    Beyond that, I am getting a bit annoyed by those who complain about the sports profits made by the colleges. They are what is known as non-profit. They follow a different set of accounting rules. They have no ownership to whom profits are distributed. All of the revenues earned or contributed go into funds for use in supporting the programs and research of the university or college. At any level, in order to get good people working for the university, good salaries and benefits must be provided for the entire body of employees, faculty and staff. Is that what folks are complaining about?
    Sure there is a marketplace and maybe Cut but certainly K could make as much or more in the pros. But college football and basketball are big business, some people are making a lot of money. Not the players.

    You like the marketplace so much, why not a marketplace for college age football players?

    Why should football and basketball players have to be part of non profits and see the profit from their labors distributed to other sports?

    SoCal

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhead View Post
    When it comes to coaches high salaries there is a market place that decides on what those salaries will be. If anyone thinks the salaries should be lower, in what range should they be? If a Division 1 school wants to save some money, I would accept an offer of $100,000 right now. It would sure be fun for me, but I don't think my team would win a single game.

    Beyond that, I am getting a bit annoyed by those who complain about the sports profits made by the colleges. ...
    Accounting is interesting. Cutcliffe has become a (more) wealthy man at Duke. K had obviously become a rich man as a Duke employee And they got their salaries because of the marketplace. If players can use the same marketplace to leverage their position and get payment for themselves, I don't begrudge them much. Does Duke get hurt? I'd guess that Duke has been as helped by college athletics as any college. We may be non-profit, but Duke has profited a lot by its athletes and coaches, who have--in turn--profited by being part of the broader Duke community...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    This raises a question.

    Is Duke FB actually making money?

    I ask because you routinely see articles that contend that only about half the I-A schools turn a profit on FB, due to the fact that FB takes so much human resources in scholarship terms. We can't fill the stadium. We basically can't win. (I mean, I like Cut, and I want him here, but we haven't even come close to, say, 9-3. I'm all for building a statue to him after the 6-7 season, given the circumstances, but we still ain't Texas).

    I thought I saw something during the Franks or Roof era that said we lost about half a million on FB, in a given year, and (this amazed me, given how successful WBB has been here) about 1M on WBB. It said we are a one-revenue-sport school. And what happens after Krzyzeswki retires and some replacement goes 15-15 one year? Yikes.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New York
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    This raises a question.

    Is Duke FB actually making money?

    I ask because you routinely see articles that contend that only about half the I-A schools turn a profit on FB, due to the fact that FB takes so much human resources in scholarship terms. We can't fill the stadium. We basically can't win. (I mean, I like Cut, and I want him here, but we haven't even come close to, say, 9-3. I'm all for building a statue to him after the 6-7 season, given the circumstances, but we still ain't Texas).

    I thought I saw something during the Franks or Roof era that said we lost about half a million on FB, in a given year, and (this amazed me, given how successful WBB has been here) about 1M on WBB. It said we are a one-revenue-sport school. And what happens after Krzyzeswki retires and some replacement goes 15-15 one year? Yikes.
    According to this guy, whose data comes from ESPN, Duke football is modestly profitable. Since Duke is private, the info is incomplete, but based on what we have Duke averaged $70,804,027 in revenue the past five years and $70,526,074 in expenses. So we made a little under $400k/year. *fires cannons* Tenth in the conference in profitability. FSU was #1 ACC, making almost $10M.

    This site has different numbers, with much lower revenues and expenses. It claims Duke football cleared about $1.5M in 2010. Also, says Duke basketball netted $14M that year.

    ETA: I checked the ESPN source info to which the first blog linked. One thing that jumped out to me was that Boston College, another private institution, listed identical amounts for both revenue and expenses. Pretty unlikely that they should balance so perfectly. That suggests that perhaps both Duke and BC are taking advantage of their private status to downplay the profitability of their programs. Or something? Someone with more experience could maybe cast some illumination?
    Last edited by Des Esseintes; 09-27-2013 at 01:46 AM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by Des Esseintes View Post
    One thing that jumped out to me was that Boston College, another private institution, listed identical amounts for both revenue and expenses. Pretty unlikely that they should balance so perfectly. That suggests that perhaps both Duke and BC are taking advantage of their private status to downplay the profitability of their programs. Or something? Someone with more experience could maybe cast some illumination?
    Curiouser and curiouser, said...Clarkston Hines.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Here's one reference that says he's making $1.75 M per year. Wikipedia says $1.5. I think David would agree he is "rich," unless he has some hidden debts or losses in his past.

    sagegrouse
    He may agree - he may not. that was my point. As people make more money they lose sight of just how far ahead they are of others. In this country a family with an income of $250,000 is in the top 3% of all income earners. I bet most of them don't think of themselves as "rich", though they are surely outliers.

  12. #12
    Some thoughts.

    1. Cut's comments were made during his Tuesday press conference. That is up for viewing at goduke.com. I recommend watching the whole thing.

    2. When Cut said nobody's getting rich, it immediately rang hollow -- at least on a superficial level -- as it was coming from a man making around $2m/year due to college athletics.

    3. I think the poster above who noted Cut was probably meaning the schools are not getting rich off of the athletes is correct and is what Cut was getting at. The revenue sports (FB, MBB) fund entire athletic departments.

    4. I think Cut doesn't like complainers, and doesn't like folks who focus on the negative. I think he believes that there is a lot *right* w/ revenue-producing college athletics:
    - they help fund, for example, 26 teams at Duke
    - they provide a rallying point for alums and fans and fun gatherings
    - they give educational opportunity to hundreds of students per year/per institution, for free higher education
    - the athletes have it good (training tables, trainers and medical staff, equipment and clothes, trips here and there, camaraderie ...)

    In other words, college athletes are getting a lot, for "free" (or, for their service; or, for playing games), so quit complaining. And a lot of other good is coming from college sports -- thousands of jobs at schools (coaches, trainers, support staff), scholarships for non-revenue sports, and TV gets to make money, and college sports are part of our shared cultural life, and fun.

    Yes, some folks are getting rich (Cut, K), but if you look at the thousands of colleges, those folks are probably the rare exception. And there's a lot of good that comes from college sports. So quit complaining. That's what I see Cut's comment meaning.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    This raises a question.

    Is Duke FB actually making money?

    I ask because you routinely see articles that contend that only about half the I-A schools turn a profit on FB, due to the fact that FB takes so much human resources in scholarship terms. We can't fill the stadium. We basically can't win. (I mean, I like Cut, and I want him here, but we haven't even come close to, say, 9-3. I'm all for building a statue to him after the 6-7 season, given the circumstances, but we still ain't Texas).

    I thought I saw something during the Franks or Roof era that said we lost about half a million on FB, in a given year, and (this amazed me, given how successful WBB has been here) about 1M on WBB. It said we are a one-revenue-sport school. And what happens after Krzyzeswki retires and some replacement goes 15-15 one year? Yikes.
    There was a recent article in the Triangle Business Journal which detailed the financial facts of the Triangle football programs. Sorry I can not provide the link but Duke football was profitable to the tune of 5 million dollars last year. Shocking, I know.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    Sure there is a marketplace and maybe Cut but certainly K could make as much or more in the pros. But college football and basketball are big business, some people are making a lot of money. Not the players.

    You like the marketplace so much, why not a marketplace for college age football players?

    Why should football and basketball players have to be part of non profits and see the profit from their labors distributed to other sports?

    SoCal
    As I have argued in other threads regarding this issue, they don't have to be part of non profits. They choose to.

    And further, I am still not convinced that there is a market for their labor without having the college name on their helmets/chest/jersey/etc.

    Do you pay to watch Clemson vs. Florida State if they are The Bashers vs. The Thrashers in the INHFL (Insert Name Here Football League)? Do you? I certainly don't - I substitute away to something else. Haven't we tried this with AFL and Canadian Football and even XFL? They may exist still in varying success ranges - but they are certainly no college football audience.

    My point is all this ballyhoo over players not getting compensated for playing in college presumes there is a market for their services outside of college that college is precluding them from profiting in. I say, fine, try it - let the players secede and form a non-college league where they get paid (will never happen, I know). But do people out there really think even 2% of these kids would get paid if they didn't play for a school? Convince me of this, and I will start to agree on paying student athletes a salary.

    - Chillin

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by doctorhook View Post
    There was a recent article in the Triangle Business Journal which detailed the financial facts of the Triangle football programs. Sorry I can not provide the link but Duke football was profitable to the tune of 5 million dollars last year. Shocking, I know.
    Hmmm... I posted an insightful and brilliant response to this post 20 minutes ago but it never appeared. Now I'll have to start over on something much more prosaic.

    Lessee... Football revenue consists of

    • Gate receipts and concessions
    • TV revenue
    • Bowl revenue
    • Donations (usually considered in most analyses I have seen)



    There are two problems in allocation of revenue: How do you divide the ESPN contract revenue, which was for football AND basketball, between the two sports? One could use the TV earnigns ofr each support I suppose, but it seems pretty arbitrary.

    How do you allocated donations to sports, when usually they are not specific to a sport?

    I would like to see a methodology described before I reached any conclusions.

    sagegrouse
    'My earlier post was much better'

  16. #16

    Why not

    Quote Originally Posted by ChillinDuke View Post
    As I have argued in other threads regarding this issue, they don't have to be part of non profits. They choose to.

    And further, I am still not convinced that there is a market for their labor without having the college name on their helmets/chest/jersey/etc.

    Do you pay to watch Clemson vs. Florida State if they are The Bashers vs. The Thrashers in the INHFL (Insert Name Here Football League)? Do you? I certainly don't - I substitute away to something else. Haven't we tried this with AFL and Canadian Football and even XFL? They may exist still in varying success ranges - but they are certainly no college football audience.

    My point is all this ballyhoo over players not getting compensated for playing in college presumes there is a market for their services outside of college that college is precluding them from profiting in. I say, fine, try it - let the players secede and form a non-college league where they get paid (will never happen, I know). But do people out there really think even 2% of these kids would get paid if they didn't play for a school? Convince me of this, and I will start to agree on paying student athletes a salary.

    - Chillin
    limit what college coaches get paid to what high school coaches get?

    Then you would have more money for the other programs, the coaches could either not coach or coach for less money, you would still have fine coaches just like you do at the high school level.

    The real problem is that college football and basketball are big business with big money being made by lots of people, but not by the stars that make the game. And Cut and the NCAA and others don't see that.

    SoCal

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    limit what college coaches get paid to what high school coaches get?

    Then you would have more money for the other programs, the coaches could either not coach or coach for less money, you would still have fine coaches just like you do at the high school level.
    There is no chance that I'm on board that the quality of coaches would stay equivalent in this scenario. Just like anything - the best coaches will (to some degree - likely a large one) substitute away to a profession that will compensate them for their skill set.

    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    The real problem is that college football and basketball are big business with big money being made by lots of people, but not by the stars that make the game. And Cut and the NCAA and others don't see that.

    SoCal
    Do the stars make the game? Or do the school brands make them stars? And are we talking about "the stars" as about 1% of players?

    - Chillin

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by ChillinDuke View Post
    As I have argued in other threads regarding this issue, they don't have to be part of non profits. They choose to.

    And further, I am still not convinced that there is a market for their labor without having the college name on their helmets/chest/jersey/etc.

    Do you pay to watch Clemson vs. Florida State if they are The Bashers vs. The Thrashers in the INHFL (Insert Name Here Football League)? Do you? I certainly don't - I substitute away to something else. Haven't we tried this with AFL and Canadian Football and even XFL? They may exist still in varying success ranges - but they are certainly no college football audience.

    My point is all this ballyhoo over players not getting compensated for playing in college presumes there is a market for their services outside of college that college is precluding them from profiting in. I say, fine, try it - let the players secede and form a non-college league where they get paid (will never happen, I know). But do people out there really think even 2% of these kids would get paid if they didn't play for a school? Convince me of this, and I will start to agree on paying student athletes a salary.

    - Chillin
    There's a lot of things that I disagree with when it comes to Jim Delaney and the Big Ten; but in this instance I agree with him on this matter of should college players get paid. http://espn.go.com/college-sports/st...etball-changes

    I think colleges should look at ways to further enhance and increase the value of scholarships; but I'm not sold on the idea of college players getting paid to play. One generally goes to college to learn and prepare for a professional career,not to get paid there. College coaching on the otherhand is a profession and they deservedly should get paid based on the countless hours spent teaching, training and developing these kids for a professional career and beyond. If college players want to get paid, go pro; and I think they should have the ability to bypass college all together or allow agents to invest in them to train for a year or two until eligible for the draft if players want to get paid. As Delaney pointed out, there are clearly players taht don't want to go to college and shouldn't foreced to do so.

    People are making decent to good salaries as coaches and athletic administrators in this day and age compared to 50 years ago; and if anyone has a problem with that, imo you have to go deeper than college athletics and look at the whole industry of sports (and the premium that consumers are willing to pay for it) and ask yourself why people should get paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to millions to play kid's games compared to people imo who provide a greater service to this country (like teachers, etc), many of which are vastly underpaid.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Southern Pines, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    Sure there is a marketplace and maybe Cut but certainly K could make as much or more in the pros. But college football and basketball are big business, some people are making a lot of money. Not the players.

    You like the marketplace so much, why not a marketplace for college age football players?

    Why should football and basketball players have to be part of non profits and see the profit from their labors distributed to other sports?

    SoCal
    I didn't miss the point. You moved it. The market place that I was talking about covers only the staffing of college coaching ranks. As for the players, you seem to prefer a system in which football players are hired just like campus cops, kitchen help, et al. That would require a massive change in rules and the environment of college sports, or would end it.

    As for those making lots of money from college sports, they are outsiders that are beyond the control of the college system. They have to pay for access to the college system, and yeah, lots of money. That money makes its way to the colleges, and contributes to the total cost of running proper college institutions. Without it, then what?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    limit what college coaches get paid to what high school coaches get?

    Then you would have more money for the other programs, the coaches could either not coach or coach for less money, you would still have fine coaches just like you do at the high school level.

    The real problem is that college football and basketball are big business with big money being made by lots of people, but not by the stars that make the game. And Cut and the NCAA and others don't see that.

    SoCal
    Would you also limit the income of doctors at Duke Med? Their true earnings are hidden in for-profit entities, but the number of seven-figure incomes there is substantial.

    sagegrouse

Similar Threads

  1. Coach Cutcliffe on the road
    By devildeac in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-02-2008, 01:16 PM
  2. Doyel on Coach Cutcliffe
    By rockymtn devil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-24-2008, 09:25 AM
  3. Eli Manning - Coach Cutcliffe
    By mr. synellinden in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-30-2008, 01:14 PM
  4. A test for Coach Cutcliffe
    By Devil in the Blue Dress in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-29-2008, 09:30 AM
  5. New Football Coach...congratulations Coach Cutcliffe
    By Bluedawg in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-17-2007, 05:25 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •