September 1, 201412 yr Hasn't gone up that much, according to this article. That means Stoops is doing a better job of using the resources available to him than Joker did. UK Football recruiting budget According to this piece, the budget for Midnight Madness is "just north of" $400K. KSR article So, I'll cop to being incorrect on the comparison, but not by much. Regardless, to spend this much on a preseason practice in comparison to the entire FB recruiting budget is a perfect example of what I've been talking about in this thread w/re to priority. This piece doesn't give a final tally on the budget, but at a minimum, it seems UK spends double on Midnight Madness and just Cal's flight costs than the FB recruiting budget. FB has no Midnight Madness-type event that would cause its budget to skyrocket that much. Conservative guess is UK spends 2 1/2 times as much on hoops recruiting than football (can't find an actual hard figure). And that's to fill out a roster of 15 as opposed to 85 for football. By comparison, Alabama spent just shy of $1 million on FB recruiting and UT just shy of $1.5 million. Priorities So I suppose Stoops is more competant than Joker was, since he is recruiting better than anyone.ever has in modern history, without much more money to work with. On the other hand is a large chunk of money is being spent on a stadium renovation and practice facility. Maybe Stoops was offered some of that money for recruiting and turned it down for better facilities, which in turn help you in the long run with recruiting. I don't know whether he was or not, do you? Also Alabama is the UK basketball, in football, when it comes to recruiting. So if they bring in the #1 recruiting class pretty much every year when there are traditionally good teams that still can't catch them, while spending more money on recruiting than they do, what makes you think UK can?
September 1, 201412 yr Ok.. Here's some facts. There's no direct correlation. Also, UK is one of only about 20 universities that are self sufficient and don't have to get $ from the schools general fund... Recruiting |
September 1, 201412 yr So I suppose Stoops is more competant than Joker was, since he is recruiting better than anyone.ever has in modern history, without much more money to work with. On the other hand is a large chunk of money is being spent on a stadium renovation and practice facility. Maybe Stoops was offered some of that money for recruiting and turned it down for better facilities, which in turn help you in the long run with recruiting. I don't know whether he was or not, do you? Also Alabama is the UK basketball, in football, when it comes to recruiting. So if they bring in the #1 recruiting class pretty much every year when there are traditionally good teams that still can't catch them, while spending more money on recruiting than they do, what makes you think UK can? I would presume that a lot of Alabama being able to get by for 2/3 the cost of UT has as much to do with the program prestige doing a lot of the recruiting for them. That said, UK could still get the guys they do at a discount in hoops given its program's prestige, and allocate more money toward being relevant in football instead of being a "basketball-only" school. W/re to the Commonwealth Stadium upgrades, most of that money comes from private donations and is not considered part of the recruiting budget. If it was, Oregon football would be the biggest spender of all given Phil Knight's donations.
September 1, 201412 yr This article shows that UL borrows $ from their schools general funds just for athletics. UK doesn't have to do that. As a matter of fact, they donated $3 million in academic scholarships. College sports come at a cost to Kentucky taxpayers | State | Kentucky.com
September 1, 201412 yr School Recruiting Class Rank Tennessee $1,135,211 13 Alabama-Tuscaloosa $980,882 1 Auburn $950,378 7 Georgia Tech $883,430 41 Arkansas $666,419 24 Georgia $623,224 5 Texas Tech. $611,910. 20 Florida $602,929 12 Oregon $590,683 9 Boise State $589,773 53 UNC $580,200 16 Texas $577,976 3 Michigan $577,663 21 New Mexico $545,867 81 Illinois $545,363 42 Army $511,840 118 Mississippi $495,233 19 Memphis $493,204 65 Clemson $490,305 8 Nebraska $478,554 15 Colorado $470,355 74 Iowa State $448,777 51 Kansas $442,911 34 Washington $440,931 23 Florida State $433,236 2 This second chart shows the top 25 class ranks, with their respective recruiting expenses.
September 1, 201412 yr Ok.. Here's some facts. There's no direct correlation. Also, UK is one of only about 20 universities that are self sufficient and don't have to get $ from the schools general fund... Recruiting | Money is money, regardless of where it comes from, so whether it's university general fund money or from some entity such as the UKAA, what difference does it make. It still screams loudly what the school's priority is when it comes to hoops v. FB. On another note, it sure looks like FSU gets a lot of bang for its buck on the recruiting trail, even with the fact they don't have to go far from home.
September 1, 201412 yr This article shows that UL borrows $ from their schools general funds just for athletics. UK doesn't have to do that. As a matter of fact, they donated $3 million in academic scholarships. College sports come at a cost to Kentucky taxpayers | State | Kentucky.com You keep bringing UofL into this, when I'm not talking about them.
September 1, 201412 yr Money is money, regardless of where it comes from, so whether it's university general fund money or from some entity such as the UKAA, what difference does it make. It still screams loudly what the school's priority is when it comes to hoops v. FB. On another note, it sure looks like FSU gets a lot of bang for its buck on the recruiting trail, even with the fact they don't have to go far from home. There's no correlation. And yes it does matter where the money comes from. If the athletic department is self sufficient and actually gives back to academics, I'd say that's a far cry better than athletics taking from the general fund which funds academics. What's your priorities?
September 1, 201412 yr You keep bringing UofL into this, when I'm not talking about them. Yea but I am. You're a UL fan and apologist. If you live in a glass house don't throw stones. You keep bringing up UK, why can't I talk about UL? What's good for the goose is good for the gander :thumb:
September 1, 201412 yr On another note, it sure looks like FSU gets a lot of bang for its buck on the recruiting trail, even with the fact they don't have to go far from home. There's no correlation between $ spent and success. If there were New Mexico, Army, Memphis, Illinois, etc would be regular participants in the BCS
September 1, 201412 yr I would presume that a lot of Alabama being able to get by for 2/3 the cost of UT has as much to do with the program prestige doing a lot of the recruiting for them. That said, UK could still get the guys they do at a discount in hoops given its program's prestige, and allocate more money toward being relevant in football instead of being a "basketball-only" school. Just give Stoops some time and UK won't be a basketball only school.. People tend to forget that UK plays a top ten schedule every year in football, even they arent a "football" school. With a schedule like that and the talent available wins don't come easy against conference play. Stoops has brought in the best two recruiting classes UK has ever had, since rating services came around. Back to back mind you. If the man is given some time he will put them in a position to win games, and then, more money will come. For that matter they money is already coming in. They got the football stadium renovation and a new practice facility funded in the past two years. We have been hearing about Rupp arena renovations or a new on campus arena for around 10 years now. Which one was funded first? The argument that UK and their fans don't care about football is garbage. But I guess it makes for good bantre if your not a fan.
September 1, 201412 yr I enjoyed watching Patrick Towles play so well. He is a very hard nosed, throw back type of player.
September 1, 201412 yr This second chart shows the top 25 class ranks, with their respective recruiting expenses. School Class Rank* Recruiting Expense Alabama-Tuscaloosa 1 $980,882 Florida State 2 $433,236 Texas 3 $577,976 Georgia 5 $623,224 Louisiana State 6 $302,882 Auburn 7 $950,378 Clemson 8 $490,305 Oregon 9 $590,683 Ohio State 11 $320,938 Florida 12 $602,929 Tennessee 13 $1,135,211 Oklahoma 14 $356,414 Nebraska 15 $478,554 Berkeley 17 $394,298 South Carolina 18 $132,758 Mississippi 19 $495,233 Texas Tech 20 $611,910 Michigan 21 $577,663 Washington 23 $440,931 Arkansas 24 $666,419 Virginia 25 $276,806
September 1, 201412 yr Yea but I am. You're a UL fan and apologist. If you live in a glass house don't throw stones. You keep bringing up UK, why can't I talk about UL? What's good for the goose is good for the gander :thumb: I'm a fan, but to call me an apologist is reaching hard. I hate Rick Pitino more than most UK fans. Plus, this is a UK thread and I've avoided discussing them. All of my posts have been about UK, and about helping UK get better in football. You should get past who's posting and look at what I'm actually saying. To their credit, there have been a number of UK fans in this thread who have at least partially agreed with me. I'm not the cave troll you're dying to make me out to be.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.