Update of College Athletics Spending

I started the college football year with a look at the revenue from D1 schools.

The latest data is out on spending for the 2009-2010 school year.

No surprises at the top in spending:
1. Ohio State (only because their is nothing else to spend money on in Ohio because everyone has left Ohio and moved to the south)
2. Alabama (Bear Bryant told them it was expensive to win(because he told/taught everybody in Alabama everything) and they finally realized he was right...they tried the cheap route and it didn't work, finally paid the $$$ and Saban has produced...there is a lesson to be learned here for all colleges)
3. Notre Dame (Hopefully, they will keep spending and keep losing but my research shows it will eventually pay off...just don't bounce a check)
4. Auburn (add spending on Cam Newton and other players and they are number 1 and formally make college football - a pay for play sport)
5. Texas (everything is bigger and costs more in Texas)
6. Florida (No taxes in Florida...more money to donate, more money to spend and pilfering it from little old ladies helps)
7. South Carolina (13 last year - exception to the spend to win rule and just trying to keep up with the Jones' - it's a joke Carolina fans - actually finally seeing results that spending = winning)
8. LSU (proves that money can trump coaching (in Les Miles case) and can buy you anything you want regardless)
9. Iowa (it's the midwest, those farmers have to give/donate money somewhere so they can talk about how bad it is farming)
10. Arkansas (spending is not helping here, exception to the spend to win rule, because well, it is Arkansas - is there anyone still living there)

34. Clemson (19 last year - 5th in spending by ACC schools behind BC, Miami, UVA, and FSU - you know what I am thinking - BC and UVA in the top part of the conference for spending...interesting)

Correlation on spending to winning championships - 2000 - 2009 (A coincidence, I don't think so)

7* NCAA football championships to Top 10 spenders
LSU - 2 (*split 2003 with USC (AP winner))
Ohio State - 1
Texas - 1
Florida - 2
Alabama - 1

USC (Expense Ranking 11) - 2* (*split 2003 with LSU (BCS winner))
Oklahoma (Expense Ranking 13) - 1
Miami(Expense Ranking 26 (were 11th in 2008-09) - 1

I realize that I have not compared the expenses to the year they won their national championship but I am going to go out on a limb and hypothesize that they were ranked pretty close the same within a few places with the exception of Arkansas and SC who have been helped greatly in the available money to spend by the SEC football contract (and guess what I have a full time job, wife, and two kids and don't get paid to write on this blog and I don't think I have heard of anything just randomly dropping an extra 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 50 million on athletics...and since it is my blog, I can make statements that you might or might not agree). If you want to do the comparison and send it to me, I will post it. BUT, I think it is safe to say spending is directly related to winning national championships.

Anybody know how to forward this to James Barker (Clemson's President) who's 10 year goal for the athletic department for the university (when he started in 2000) was:
1. Win another National Championship in football
2. Two (2) Final 4 appearances in basketball (ok, so he was hyped up about getting the job...this was very unrealistic and showed he had never followed Clemson basketball...I would have been happy with a goal of an NCAA appearance and first round win and a stretch goal of a Round of 16/8)
3. Win two championships in an Olympic sport (honorable, but since golf isn't an Olympic sport probably not going to happen but it showed he appeared to care about all of the athletic programs at Clemson).
So far and we have accomplished none of his athletic goals and actually regressed in most sports and remain just average.

However, while under Barker's leadership, Clemson has excelled in academics - improving from 38 (2001) to 23 (2011) on the US News and World Report annual ranking. His 10 year goal was to be a top 20 institution. Clemson almost achieved his goal. However, the emphasis on the US News and World Report ranking has caused some to question the strategies that have been used to climb up the rankings.

Only three (3) institutions are in the top 10 in athletic spending (2011) and top 20 academically (US News and World Report Ranking 2011) that won a national championship in football since 1990 (University/US News Ranking) :

Texas (13)
Florida x 3 (17)
Ohio State (18)

Since 1978 only the following schools who won a National Championship have not won another National Championship (32 years - 10 Teams - 1 Championship):

Georgia 80
Clemson 81
BYU 84
Colorado 90 (*split with Georgia Tech)
Georgia Tech 90
Washington 91 (*split with Miami)
Michigan 97
Tennessee 98
Ohio State 2002
Texas 2005

So being a top academic school in the country and excelling in athletics (football) can be achieved but there is a cost. Presidents and Boards of Trustees have to decide what is important verse the funding available and unless the cup runneth over with funding (cough, cough, SEC schools, cough, cough) then it is my opinion that one area is going to suffer - academics or athletics. In Clemson's case it appears that academics is winning the battle for funding (which don't get me wrong, I appreciate the need for a quality education). However, the administration can not preach excelling in athletics without providing the funding to excel - it is expensive to win (look at numbers). All I ask is that you be honest with the fans and admit that you don't have the funding to excel in any sport and that your goals were unrealistic based on the funding available and that as the leaders of the university you are going to be satisfied being a middle of the pack team that occasionally competes for a division/conference title so that Clemson can excel academically. Need more proof:

The following are the only BCS schools to not have accomplished at least one of the following since 1992 (in football).

1) 10 Win Season
2) Win A Conference Championship
3) Play in a BCS Bowl Game

Baylor
Clemson
Connecticut
Duke
Kentucky
Indiana
Iowa State
Oklahoma State
South Carolina (could be their year to remove themselves from the list)
USF
Vanderbuilt
(source...clemsondesrvesbetter.com)

Those are some fine schools to be associated with and at least Kentucky and Duke have basketball season to look forward to each year (and Indiana has basketball because even in down time - basketball and the Indy 500 are king in that state).

A group of people are circling the wagons and starting a campaign (including billboards) to get rid of Barker and TDP (athletic director)...believing that Clemson athletics will not improve until changes at the top are made...maybe they are right...maybe not...not sure that's the best way to get your point across...just like I don't believe street preachers probably are the best way to get someone to believe in Jesus and probably does more harm that good.

Do with it what you want...form your own opinions but the bottom line as with everything in life their is a cost and the real bottom line is that it's just college athletics (a recreation for us "fans") and at the end of the day there are a lot more important things in life to worry about...I need to go change a diaper, feed Wyatt and read a book to Aubrey.