 |
|
How does WBB lose $4.5 million?
Posted on: January 17, 2025 at 07:27:22 CT
slamduncan KC
Posts:
22989
Member For:
24.16 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
Travel and opening the Arena for a game, with few fans, must be bad. Frankly, if you don’t have a competent program, it’s a literal waste of money. And since Mizzou can’t drop WBB and be in just about any league, they better try to get a competent program. Probably will still lose money but at least not as much?
From Missourian
“The MU women’s basketball program, which didn’t perform much better than the men’s team, didn’t financially benefit from a wave of national interest in women’s college hoops and saw its ticket sales drop by about 9%. Donor contributions did rise, though the program lost nearly $4.5 million.”
Wished they showed all the programs revenues vs costs. Frankly, I feel the leagues would all benefit from sending most programs to the club level and forgetting about “athletic programs”. Based on my reading of actual tv ratings and attendance figures that surely impact at some level what a network/streaming service will pay for it pretty much ends with football, MBB, WBB, baseball, softball, volleyball and, surprising to me, gymnastics. These sports also flow with the school year, providing said content throughout the year other than July and August.
In the NIL era, seems to me that both TV and fan interest should be what drives what a league and schools are selling. And it would not shock me if a handful of club sport championship events would command some interest in a content starved world. But that should just be financed by interested donors and sponsors and the university should largely stay out of it. I just can’t get behind participatory sports vs sports with TV value in this day and age. Seems antiquated and a waste of resources and undue demand on donors who give to football/MBB with some of that money going to stuff they don’t care about like scholarship funds and travel for a cross country runner, as an example. In the end, streamline college ADs, at this level, to what TV truly wants.
From Missourian
“The MU women’s basketball program, which didn’t perform much better than the men’s team, didn’t financially benefit from a wave of national interest in women’s college hoops and saw its ticket sales drop by about 9%. Donor contributions did rise, though the program lost nearly $4.5 million.”
Wished they showed all the programs revenues vs costs. Frankly, I feel the leagues would all benefit from sending most programs to the club level and forgetting about “athletic programs”. Based on my reading of actual tv ratings and attendance figures that surely impact at some level what a network/streaming service will pay for it pretty much ends with football, MBB, WBB, baseball, softball, volleyball and, surprising to me, gymnastics. These sports also flow with the school year, providing said content throughout the year other than July and August.
In the NIL era, seems to me that both TV and fan interest should be what drives what a league and schools are selling. And it would not shock me if a handful of club sport championship events would command some interest in a content starved world. But that should just be financed by interested donors and sponsors and the university should largely stay out of it. I just can’t get behind participatory sports vs sports with TV value in this day and age. Seems antiquated and a waste of resources and undue demand on donors who give to football/MBB with some of that money going to stuff they don’t care about like scholarship funds and travel for a cross country runner, as an example. In the end, streamline college ADs, at this level, to what TV truly wants.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
How does WBB lose $4.5 million? - slamduncan KC - 1/17 07:27:22
-