A strong local economy helps in many ways. It brings in better employees and better businesses, both of which the University has to rely upon for various things. It yields a better place to live while you're a student here for 4-5 years. It keeps businesses supporting the teams from an advertising and sponsorship perspective, as has been mentioned. It means that we can show the ability to EARN a regional, which helps with recruiting, as well, and helps the NEXT TIME we try to get a regional that we can put that many butts in the seats.

Here's an example for you...stud baseball player comes in for recruitment and there ISN'T an On the Border because the economy can't support it = we look more like a country town than we already do = no commitment from the stud baseball player.

We need anything and everything in B/CS that we can get because we have no desire to look any smaller than we are...there is plenty of negative recruiting regarding B/CS being "backwoods" or some sort of small-town hell.

Hey lay of Sam, they're turning their spring athletics around. Just finished a nice baseball and softball complex. No more trying to sell Holleman to recruits. I know you think its an inferior school, but if Rupp is half as good as advertised, those words may come back to bite you. Though for those of you that do want A&M to stay where it is, Huntsville is a very nice town for 2-3 days at a time, perfect for baseball.

Make no mistake...unless you earn a regional by winning your conference, the only way you'll get a regional is through the big $$$ you promise the NCAA. The economy will benefit by having a regional in town, but will not determine who gets it. The only thing that matters to the NCAA is butts in the seats.

Gig 'Em

According to this information, the baseball program did turn a profit in 03-04 academic year.

According to A&M's 03-04 school year numbers:

Sport........Revenues..........Expenses............Net
Football... $31,103,828 ... $10,252,266 ... $20,851,562
M Bsktball.. $3,362,369 .... $2,866,438 .... $495,931
Baseball.... $1,598,325 .... $1,355,153 .... $243,172

http://sports.tamu.edu/nonsports/FOOT/PDF/EADAForm0304.pdf See Tables 70 & 71, pgs 39-41

Thanks Buckhorn! I'm an engineer and even I got it!

Byron, please turn down the smart azz knob on your computer. It doesn't take a business major to figure out that baseball doesn't have to make money for A&M to make a big payout to get the coach we want. Probably 90% of the athletics programs are breakeven at best. Buckhorn got it right: the less we lose, the easier it is to pay the bills.

BB just gave Fran and Billy Clyde each a hefty bump of $300K each. I don't think he was too worried about having enough left over for baseball. Somehow, I think he can lift his mighty pen just one more time to sign a new baseball coach for us.

Thanks Stu! Even if the big three are the only earners in athletics, we're still going to support the other programs. It's just easier to do if we're winning.

Stu Piditti: We've been through this before, but I believe those EADA numbers include camp revenue in baseball revenue, and all of that money (save what A&M receives for use of facilities) gets paid to instructors.

In actuality, baseball loses about $400K per year.

Sporting News recently did an interesting article on college finances. This article was about BCS schools in general, but sounded similar to A&M's situation. It stated that huge price increases in football tickets were basically caused by football and egos. The 'arms race' to build bigger, better facilities and the skyrocketing costs of football coaches were leading culprits. The athletic directors had thrown non-revenue generating sports under the bus. They are easy target and Title IX is a whipping boy. Cost of non-revenue sports hadn't increased significantly, but football ticket prices had. Where did the extra money go? To the bigger facilities and coaches. Great article if you can find it.

That's a long way of saying... I don't think football ticket prices will be paying for new baseball coach. But I do anticipate price increases.

AMF, Im sorry but I was under the impression that CSAGfan didnt understand that variable revenue is greater than variable expenses when we have home games. However from the furthered discussion we have begun discussing the added fixed costs associated with hosting a regional.

No prob, Byron. My bad. I didn't realize this thread was about variable expenses versus fixed costs!

Birdman, I don't see where football makes ADs throw other programs under the bus, at least not at A&M. I think BB and the coaches are working hard to support each other. The front page of this site features more news about more sports than it used to. I agree that it used to be a problem here and that it is/has been a problem at other major programs. Unfortunately, the only other alternative to higher ticket prices is to start scrapping programs. Sadly, you're either getting bigger or going out of business.

this thread was debating whether or not hosting a regional made money so yes I think it was a case of variable expenses vs variable revenue and the effect fixed costs have on the equation.

I used a bad analogy. By 'thowing under the bus', I didn't mean scrapping the non-revenue programs. Although last I heard, archery got the axe.

I meant (and the article meant) that ADs were playing the blame game. They were blaming higher football and basketball ticket prices on volleyball, gymnastics, etc. But the real factor was out of control spending on football facilities and coach salaries.