How much money is UMD going to get from the B1G conference?

[Anonymous]

In answer to the original question … in the 100 million neighborhood.

The only schools that add more money per school are ND, one of the Bay Area schools, Texas and Florida. I think Texas is secretly talking to the Big.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMD has 1.5 national championships in football since 1950 the modern age of football. When Michigan closes the gap with .5 more championships I’ll sit up and notice. Cramming in with 100000 people and spending massive resources for a non championship program of more than 70 years seems good for people with nothing better to do.

Foolish comment.

You’re right . Michigan’s 1 national championship in 70 + years is awesome !!
.5 more and you catch mighty UMD and that’s a tough task.

So you've randomly decided that 1950 constitutes the "modern age of football" in order to say UMD has won more championships? That's funny. But why start there?

Michigan has had 9 national championships. In two of them, a future U.S. president played for the Wolverines. (Gerald Ford, 1932 and 1933)

GO BLUE!

Yes. Thank you.

Michigan is also the winningest program in college football. And the players actually do have to take classes and do well. They have one of the highest GPAs of any college football program.

Michigan is not Alabama. Recruits turn down Michigan every year because they don’t think they can handle the academics.

Uh huh.

1 championship since the 1940s

UMD has 1.5

100000 seat stadium seems a bit much. Get a smithsonian or Kennedy center .. jeez.

How can it be too much when, until the pandemic, every Michigan game since 1975 had 100,000 people in attendance?

GO BLUE!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMD has 1.5 national championships in football since 1950 the modern age of football. When Michigan closes the gap with .5 more championships I’ll sit up and notice. Cramming in with 100000 people and spending massive resources for a non championship program of more than 70 years seems good for people with nothing better to do.

Foolish comment.

You’re right . Michigan’s 1 national championship in 70 + years is awesome !!
.5 more and you catch mighty UMD and that’s a tough task.

So you've randomly decided that 1950 constitutes the "modern age of football" in order to say UMD has won more championships? That's funny. But why start there?

Michigan has had 9 national championships. In two of them, a future U.S. president played for the Wolverines. (Gerald Ford, 1932 and 1933)

GO BLUE!

Yes. Thank you.

Michigan is also the winningest program in college football. And the players actually do have to take classes and do well. They have one of the highest GPAs of any college football program.

Michigan is not Alabama. Recruits turn down Michigan every year because they don’t think they can handle the academics.

Uh huh.

1 championship since the 1940s

UMD has 1.5

100000 seat stadium seems a bit much. Get a smithsonian or Kennedy center .. jeez.

That’s not UMD, genius. That’s DC. UMD doesn’t get to claim everything in the DC area.

Ann Arbor is one of the few US stops for the Royal Shakespeare Company. You acting like it’s a crappy backwater just makes it clear how ignorant you are.

NP and don't care about UMD but lmaooooo at royal shakespeare company. It's like saying the stepson of a basketball player came into down 20 years ago and impregnated somebody. What a claim to fame

Ann Arbor doesn’t try to be famous.

I’m just responding to desperate UMD booster who is trying to claim all of DC for their school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMD has 1.5 national championships in football since 1950 the modern age of football. When Michigan closes the gap with .5 more championships I’ll sit up and notice. Cramming in with 100000 people and spending massive resources for a non championship program of more than 70 years seems good for people with nothing better to do.

Foolish comment.

You’re right . Michigan’s 1 national championship in 70 + years is awesome !!
.5 more and you catch mighty UMD and that’s a tough task.

So you've randomly decided that 1950 constitutes the "modern age of football" in order to say UMD has won more championships? That's funny. But why start there?

Michigan has had 9 national championships. In two of them, a future U.S. president played for the Wolverines. (Gerald Ford, 1932 and 1933)

GO BLUE!

Yes. Thank you.

Michigan is also the winningest program in college football. And the players actually do have to take classes and do well. They have one of the highest GPAs of any college football program.

Michigan is not Alabama. Recruits turn down Michigan every year because they don’t think they can handle the academics.

Uh huh.

1 championship since the 1940s

UMD has 1.5

100000 seat stadium seems a bit much. Get a smithsonian or Kennedy center .. jeez.

How can it be too much when, until the pandemic, every Michigan game since 1975 had 100,000 people in attendance?

GO BLUE!

I agree. Just like Trump rally’s … people can’t believe they completely sell out but I say it’s great for people to be happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that UCLA and USC are partners it looks like it could be 100 million+ per year. Plus with UMD being the 8th highest public and 14th highest overall research budget nationally, it could increase those rankings as well.

I feel bad for Uva and UNC that could be stuck in the ACC with that horrible iron clad contract through 2036.

Aren't the sports programs a net negative for the university? I mean the stadiums alone cost more than this.

Not if you are in a conference with big TV rights. The BIG10 schools average something like $50m/year in sports revenue. Plus there is a recruiting benefit in the revenue sports which drives alumni donations, ticket sales, merchandise sales, etc.

The SEC distributed $55 million to each school last year. That will go up when Oklahoma and Texas join. That’s over and above the revenue they made themselves and alumni donations. Even during Covid, UT Austin generated $200 million in sports revenue for about $22 million in profit. In a normal year, it’s tens of millions more.

IME, the stadiums are paid for with alumni donations. My alma mater is expanding the football stadium, and it will be 100% funded by alumni.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMD has 1.5 national championships in football since 1950 the modern age of football. When Michigan closes the gap with .5 more championships I’ll sit up and notice. Cramming in with 100000 people and spending massive resources for a non championship program of more than 70 years seems good for people with nothing better to do.

Foolish comment.

You’re right . Michigan’s 1 national championship in 70 + years is awesome !!
.5 more and you catch mighty UMD and that’s a tough task.

So you've randomly decided that 1950 constitutes the "modern age of football" in order to say UMD has won more championships? That's funny. But why start there?

Michigan has had 9 national championships. In two of them, a future U.S. president played for the Wolverines. (Gerald Ford, 1932 and 1933)

GO BLUE!

Yes. Thank you.

Michigan is also the winningest program in college football. And the players actually do have to take classes and do well. They have one of the highest GPAs of any college football program.

Michigan is not Alabama. Recruits turn down Michigan every year because they don’t think they can handle the academics.

Uh huh.

1 championship since the 1940s

UMD has 1.5

100000 seat stadium seems a bit much. Get a smithsonian or Kennedy center .. jeez.

How can it be too much when, until the pandemic, every Michigan game since 1975 had 100,000 people in attendance?

GO BLUE!

I agree. Just like Trump rally’s … people can’t believe they completely sell out but I say it’s great for people to be happy.

When has Trump ever sold out a rally?? He both started and ended his presidency worried about (lack of) crowd size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that UCLA and USC are partners it looks like it could be 100 million+ per year. Plus with UMD being the 8th highest public and 14th highest overall research budget nationally, it could increase those rankings as well.

I feel bad for Uva and UNC that could be stuck in the ACC with that horrible iron clad contract through 2036.

Aren't the sports programs a net negative for the university? I mean the stadiums alone cost more than this.

Not if you are in a conference with big TV rights. The BIG10 schools average something like $50m/year in sports revenue. Plus there is a recruiting benefit in the revenue sports which drives alumni donations, ticket sales, merchandise sales, etc.

The SEC distributed $55 million to each school last year. That will go up when Oklahoma and Texas join. That’s over and above the revenue they made themselves and alumni donations. Even during Covid, UT Austin generated $200 million in sports revenue for about $22 million in profit. In a normal year, it’s tens of millions more.

IME, the stadiums are paid for with alumni donations. My alma mater is expanding the football stadium, and it will be 100% funded by alumni.

Over at Burnt Orange they are hedging toward flipping to the BiG for more money and academic prestige. Is the SEC forcing them to stay or is it easy to go where they want?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMD has 1.5 national championships in football since 1950 the modern age of football. When Michigan closes the gap with .5 more championships I’ll sit up and notice. Cramming in with 100000 people and spending massive resources for a non championship program of more than 70 years seems good for people with nothing better to do.

Foolish comment.

You’re right . Michigan’s 1 national championship in 70 + years is awesome !!
.5 more and you catch mighty UMD and that’s a tough task.

So you've randomly decided that 1950 constitutes the "modern age of football" in order to say UMD has won more championships? That's funny. But why start there?

Michigan has had 9 national championships. In two of them, a future U.S. president played for the Wolverines. (Gerald Ford, 1932 and 1933)

GO BLUE!

Yes. Thank you.

Michigan is also the winningest program in college football. And the players actually do have to take classes and do well. They have one of the highest GPAs of any college football program.

Michigan is not Alabama. Recruits turn down Michigan every year because they don’t think they can handle the academics.

Uh huh.

1 championship since the 1940s

UMD has 1.5

100000 seat stadium seems a bit much. Get a smithsonian or Kennedy center .. jeez.

How can it be too much when, until the pandemic, every Michigan game since 1975 had 100,000 people in attendance?

GO BLUE!

I agree. Just like Trump rally’s … people can’t believe they completely sell out but I say it’s great for people to be happy.

1. Trump rallies don’t sell out.

2. Most people who go to Michigan games didn’t vote for Trump. It’s Ann Arbor, not Tuscaloosa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMD has 1.5 national championships in football since 1950 the modern age of football. When Michigan closes the gap with .5 more championships I’ll sit up and notice. Cramming in with 100000 people and spending massive resources for a non championship program of more than 70 years seems good for people with nothing better to do.

Foolish comment.

You’re right . Michigan’s 1 national championship in 70 + years is awesome !!
.5 more and you catch mighty UMD and that’s a tough task.

So you've randomly decided that 1950 constitutes the "modern age of football" in order to say UMD has won more championships? That's funny. But why start there?

Michigan has had 9 national championships. In two of them, a future U.S. president played for the Wolverines. (Gerald Ford, 1932 and 1933)

GO BLUE!

Yes. Thank you.

Michigan is also the winningest program in college football. And the players actually do have to take classes and do well. They have one of the highest GPAs of any college football program.

Michigan is not Alabama. Recruits turn down Michigan every year because they don’t think they can handle the academics.

Uh huh.

1 championship since the 1940s

UMD has 1.5

100000 seat stadium seems a bit much. Get a smithsonian or Kennedy center .. jeez.

How can it be too much when, until the pandemic, every Michigan game since 1975 had 100,000 people in attendance?

GO BLUE!

I agree. Just like Trump rally’s … people can’t believe they completely sell out but I say it’s great for people to be happy.

1. Trump rallies don’t sell out.

2. Most people who go to Michigan games didn’t vote for Trump. It’s Ann Arbor, not Tuscaloosa.

Still I’m glad the 100000 a game football fans are happy despite having fewer national championships than Umd for the last 70+ years. It shows perseverance and doggedness. UMD alum say if at first you don’t succeed … try again … then quit .. no sense in being a damn fool about it. Both philosophies have their merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that UCLA and USC are partners it looks like it could be 100 million+ per year. Plus with UMD being the 8th highest public and 14th highest overall research budget nationally, it could increase those rankings as well.

I feel bad for Uva and UNC that could be stuck in the ACC with that horrible iron clad contract through 2036.

Aren't the sports programs a net negative for the university? I mean the stadiums alone cost more than this.

Not if you are in a conference with big TV rights. The BIG10 schools average something like $50m/year in sports revenue. Plus there is a recruiting benefit in the revenue sports which drives alumni donations, ticket sales, merchandise sales, etc.

The SEC distributed $55 million to each school last year. That will go up when Oklahoma and Texas join. That’s over and above the revenue they made themselves and alumni donations. Even during Covid, UT Austin generated $200 million in sports revenue for about $22 million in profit. In a normal year, it’s tens of millions more.

IME, the stadiums are paid for with alumni donations. My alma mater is expanding the football stadium, and it will be 100% funded by alumni.

Over at Burnt Orange they are hedging toward flipping to the BiG for more money and academic prestige. Is the SEC forcing them to stay or is it easy to go where they want?

I wouldn’t be surprised if Texas is talking, but one big attraction to the SEC deal is the incorporation of the Longhorn Network into the SEC Network. It was easy since they’re both ESPN & I presume would be harder with B1G & Fox. They already have an agreement to base the coverage of the SEC West out of Austin. The Longhorn Netwrok was the impetus to blow up the Southwest Conference, and is a huge consideration from a money standpoint for Texas.

[Anonymous]

UMD can claim they represent Prince George’s County. Not all of DC. Georgetown, GW, American, and Howard are all in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that UCLA and USC are partners it looks like it could be 100 million+ per year. Plus with UMD being the 8th highest public and 14th highest overall research budget nationally, it could increase those rankings as well.

I feel bad for Uva and UNC that could be stuck in the ACC with that horrible iron clad contract through 2036.

Aren't the sports programs a net negative for the university? I mean the stadiums alone cost more than this.

Not if you are in a conference with big TV rights. The BIG10 schools average something like $50m/year in sports revenue. Plus there is a recruiting benefit in the revenue sports which drives alumni donations, ticket sales, merchandise sales, etc.

The SEC distributed $55 million to each school last year. That will go up when Oklahoma and Texas join. That’s over and above the revenue they made themselves and alumni donations. Even during Covid, UT Austin generated $200 million in sports revenue for about $22 million in profit. In a normal year, it’s tens of millions more.

IME, the stadiums are paid for with alumni donations. My alma mater is expanding the football stadium, and it will be 100% funded by alumni.

Over at Burnt Orange they are hedging toward flipping to the BiG for more money and academic prestige. Is the SEC forcing them to stay or is it easy to go where they want?

I'm sure those are the people in charge. . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that UCLA and USC are partners it looks like it could be 100 million+ per year. Plus with UMD being the 8th highest public and 14th highest overall research budget nationally, it could increase those rankings as well.

I feel bad for Uva and UNC that could be stuck in the ACC with that horrible iron clad contract through 2036.

Aren't the sports programs a net negative for the university? I mean the stadiums alone cost more than this.

Not if you are in a conference with big TV rights. The BIG10 schools average something like $50m/year in sports revenue. Plus there is a recruiting benefit in the revenue sports which drives alumni donations, ticket sales, merchandise sales, etc.

The SEC distributed $55 million to each school last year. That will go up when Oklahoma and Texas join. That’s over and above the revenue they made themselves and alumni donations. Even during Covid, UT Austin generated $200 million in sports revenue for about $22 million in profit. In a normal year, it’s tens of millions more.

IME, the stadiums are paid for with alumni donations. My alma mater is expanding the football stadium, and it will be 100% funded by alumni.

Over at Burnt Orange they are hedging toward flipping to the BiG for more money and academic prestige. Is the SEC forcing them to stay or is it easy to go where they want?

I'm sure those are the people in charge. . .

I just think it’s interesting. Because it sounds like something Texas would do two years before actually being a member of the SEC and they would have to do it soon because the Big Ten is negotiating the media deal this year.

[Anonymous]

It doesn't matter whether Texas is in the B1G or SEC. The SEC can easily find other top tier programs to add if indeed Texas were to change its mind.

The future is set. B1G and SEC will break away from the NCAA and create a pre-NFL with paid student players. Billion dollar "college" stadiums are on the horizon, too.

And paying the student players will allow them to be exploited like never before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UMD has 1.5 national championships in football since 1950 the modern age of football. When Michigan closes the gap with .5 more championships I’ll sit up and notice. Cramming in with 100000 people and spending massive resources for a non championship program of more than 70 years seems good for people with nothing better to do.

Foolish comment.

You’re right . Michigan’s 1 national championship in 70 + years is awesome !!
.5 more and you catch mighty UMD and that’s a tough task.

So you've randomly decided that 1950 constitutes the "modern age of football" in order to say UMD has won more championships? That's funny. But why start there?

Michigan has had 9 national championships. In two of them, a future U.S. president played for the Wolverines. (Gerald Ford, 1932 and 1933)

GO BLUE!

Yes. Thank you.

Michigan is also the winningest program in college football. And the players actually do have to take classes and do well. They have one of the highest GPAs of any college football program.

Michigan is not Alabama. Recruits turn down Michigan every year because they don’t think they can handle the academics.

Uh huh.

1 championship since the 1940s

UMD has 1.5

100000 seat stadium seems a bit much. Get a smithsonian or Kennedy center .. jeez.

How can it be too much when, until the pandemic, every Michigan game since 1975 had 100,000 people in attendance?

GO BLUE!

I agree. Just like Trump rally’s … people can’t believe they completely sell out but I say it’s great for people to be happy.

1. Trump rallies don’t sell out.

2. Most people who go to Michigan games didn’t vote for Trump. It’s Ann Arbor, not Tuscaloosa.

Still I’m glad the 100000 a game football fans are happy despite having fewer national championships than Umd for the last 70+ years. It shows perseverance and doggedness. UMD alum say if at first you don’t succeed … try again … then quit .. no sense in being a damn fool about it. Both philosophies have their merit.

Keep telling yourself you have more national championships and that your program is therefore more successful. Maybe one day someone else will agree with you … but probably not because it’s nonsense.