I found this graph while searching for information on the Duke Athletic Director. This isn't a response to anyone, but I thought it was interesting and it illustrates how much football and basketball dominate athletic finances.
Attachment 13865
yes, as I've noted more than a few times, schools (and corporations for that matter) can and do allocate costs in a variety of ways, resulting in many different outcomes. If you want to allocate most costs to football, you can easily do that.
So it's difficult to compare programs within a school, and essentially impossible to compare programs between different schools. Tell me what outcome you prefer, and as a "cost engineer" (my actual title for two years) I can get you there.
I found this graph while searching for information on the Duke Athletic Director. This isn't a response to anyone, but I thought it was interesting and it illustrates how much football and basketball dominate athletic finances.
Attachment 13865
I was crossing fingers that this thread was headed towards the dustbin of page 50. Sigh.
Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."
We can be a successful P5 football team still not be at the level of Bama, GA, Ohio State. The impossibility of becoming Alabama shouldn't stop us from aiming to be Purdue or Northwestern or Wake.
We don't want to leave the ACC, and we don't want to get left behind if the ACC is somehow fractured during conference realignment or an evolution into some sort of super conference alignment. The perfectly attainable goal of being a football program that has a decent chance at 6 wins most years makes us pretty safe.