Gotta admit, that light show was incredible. I have never seen anything like it. Very cool.

However you want to look at it. UK football makes and keeps a LOT more money than basketball.

 

2009-10:

UK football - $31,890,572 revenue - $13,905,724 expenses - $17,984,848 profit

UK basketball - $16,781,239 revenue - $11,573,283 expenses - $5,207,956 profit

 

» Which Football and Basketball Programs Produce the Largest Profits?

 

 

 

I must admit that shocks me. Why is the revenue so much greater in football? Is it due to the rest of the SEC schools bringing in much more money via the bowl games?

I must admit that shocks me. Why is the revenue so much greater in football? Is it due to the rest of the SEC schools bringing in much more money via the bowl games?

 

And the SEC TV contract doesn't hurt.

 

Here's my take, it doesn't matter how much they spend on recruiting football players. Kentucky produces very few D1 football players and that puts UK at an incredible disadvantage in the SEC. Unless you are spending the additional money to buy house and cars then it's useless.

 

As far as Barnhart goes, it always humors me when I read or hear people say "get rid of Barnhart because he doesn't take football serious". Let's see UK has sucked at football for 80 years and somehow it's Barnhart's fault. I would argue that UK has enjoyed more football success with Barnhart as the AD than under any other AD in it's history.

 

Bottomline, UK cannot and will not compete on a consistent basis in football as long they are in the SEC. So just learn to deal with it. One thing is for sure, when you stop beating your head against the wall it stops hurting.

 

And the SEC TV contract doesn't hurt.

 

Here's my take, it doesn't matter how much they spend on recruiting football players. Kentucky produces very few D1 football players and that puts UK at an incredible disadvantage in the SEC. Unless you are spending the additional money to buy house and cars then it's useless.

 

As far as Barnhart goes, it always humors me when I read or hear people say "get rid of Barnhart because he doesn't take football serious". Let's see UK has sucked at football for 80 years and somehow it's Barnhart's fault. I would argue that UK has enjoyed more football success with Barnhart as the AD than under any other AD in it's history.

 

Bottomline, UK cannot and will not compete on a consistent basis in football as long they are in the SEC. So just learn to deal with it. One thing is for sure, when you stop beating your head against the wall it stops hurting.

 

UK HAS to spend more than the talent rich states simply because there isn't that level in KY. To land kids from those talent rich state you have to, you know, spend time and resources in those areas to make a dent and increase the level of player recruited to UK. LSU could spend $500 on recruiting and still be a power because they don't have to leave the front door to get local studs. If they don't want to up the ante on fb recruiting they can expect to suck for the next 80 years...

As someone mentioned, I wonder how much of Big Blue Madness is underwritten by sponsors? The "True" cost to the Athletic Department may not be near to total cost.

Bottomline, UK cannot and will not compete on a consistent basis in football as long they are in the SEC. So just learn to deal with it. One thing is for sure, when you stop beating your head against the wall it stops hurting.

 

I don't accept that. They may never be an Alabama level program, but that doesn't mean they have to be at the bottom every year either.

That's what they budget for it. Yankees budget money for baseball players.

That's what they budget for it.

 

Just the way it is.