[Husker] Big 10 to increase number of league games.

Tue Feb 12 22:32:12 CST 2013

The Forbes article someone mentioned estimated that each home game brings in $8M to the city of Lincoln. 

Jon Johnston
Corn Nation 

On Feb 12, 2013, at 10:22 PM, Paul Dalen <quesohusker at gmail.com> wrote:

> Husker home games aren't just revenue generating for the university...they are a not insignificant part of the city's economic base. 
> 
> The city of Lincoln, surrounding communities, and even the State of Nebraska are stakeholders in this decision. 
> 
> Paul
> 
> On Feb 12, 2013, at 1:25 PM, Shawn Sherlock <shawnsherlock at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> 
>> I have not read through all of these to know if this has been mentioned and this 
>> does not take into account the economic impact for the Lincoln and Nebraska 
>> businesses that benefit from having the home games, but:
>> 
>> How much more would you as a ticket holder be willing to pay for higher quality 
>> level of apponants?
>> 
>> I recognize that ticket prices are higher these days (especially once you factor 
>> in the "donation" on season tickets), but would it be worth $10 more to see a 
>> mid-level team from a top conference rather than a Directional U that isnt even 
>> competetive in their own conference?
>> 
>> Making up this $5MM over a six home game sechedule works out to be approx $9.25 
>> extra per ticket/game (assuming 90K paying tickets per game).  Depending on how 
>> the athelitic department is allowed to cash flow on a year to year basis, by 
>> averaging out the increased revenue on an every-other year basis would reduce it 
>> to $5.
>> 
>> There are so many ways that this $5MM can be made up (with the majority of fans 
>> not even noticing it) that I doubt it would affect the actual budget.  But 
>> having only a six home game year with two or three of those being pay-for-play 
>> would hurt the revenue (IMO). 
>> 
>> That said, I depend on these pay-for-play games as my chance to get into the 
>> stadium as these tend to be the easiest and cheapest tickets to get for someone 
>> outside of Lincoln and just traveling in for the day.    
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> From: Mike Jaixen <mikejaixen at yahoo.com>
>> To: Dave Ratchford <ratchfromneb at gmail.com>; husker at tssi.com
>> Sent: Tue, February 12, 2013 12:38:20 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Husker] Big 10 to increase number of league games.
>> 
>> That's awfully generous for you to determine how the Nebraska athletic 
>> department should spend their money.  Nebraska football makes a lot of money, 
>> but the athletic department spends a lot of money to put all of those funds to 
>> use.  Cutting $5 million of revenue from the department will have an effect.  
>> Probably not to the football program, because you never want to cripple the cash 
>> cow of the department.
>> 
>> But that money is being used for something.  It's not going into some slushfund 
>> for Tom and Shawn to roll around in whenever they are feeling down in the 
>> dumps.  It's used for those many sports that don't make revenue, and those 
>> programs would be affected if you remove revenue from the department.
>> 
>> Mike Jaixen
>> http://huskermike.blogspot.com
>> http://www.cornnation.com
>> 
>> --- On Tue, 2/12/13, Dave Ratchford <ratchfromneb at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> From: Dave Ratchford <ratchfromneb at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Husker] Big 10 to increase number of league games.
>> To: "Gerald Jensen" <answerman1 at hotmail.com>
>> Cc: "Mike Jaixen" <mikejaixen at yahoo.com>, "Husker Discussion List" 
>> <husker at tssi.com>
>> Date: Tuesday, February 12, 2013, 11:51 AM
>> 
>> Check out the valuations of college football programs done by Forbes mag in Dec. 
>> 2012.  Google will take you to it.  As Paul Dalen can no doubt confirm, numbers 
>> can pretty much tell any story you want them to.  The Nebraska athletic 
>> department makes a lot of money.  More than just about all the other 126 (or 
>> so...not sure) FBS schools.  This idea that we have to pay all these teams to 
>> come play in Lincoln because we *need* the money so bad is wrong.  The idea that 
>> we must play 7 home games or we will be in a dire financial plight is wrong as 
>> well.  We *want* to play 7 home games of course, more home games for our fans.  
>> We *want* the money from the home games of course, put it to good use I am 
>> sure.  But the program being severely impacted if we play 6 games every few 
>> years?  Not so. At all.  Worth it to play less lame OOC games.  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Dave
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Gerald Jensen <answerman1 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> If it results in one less home game every few years, and programs like OSU and 
>> Michigan aren't afraid of it, then Nebraska shouldn't be as well.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> This is a very short-sighted statement. Nebraska is no where close to the 
>> financial league of O-State and Michigan. I am placing a chart in the body, of 
>> this message, if it does not pass the Mike's server let me know and I will 
>> attach it. Nebraska is much closer to the bottom of the BIG than the top. Notice 
>> O-State had a $10,000,000 profit Michigan had a $10,000,000 profit Penn State 
>> had a $15,000,000 profit Nebraska had a $1.5 million profit. We barely break 
>> even. Also note neither Penn State nor Ohio State receive any school subsidy and 
>> Michigan receives a pittance.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> School
>> 
>> 
>> Revenue
>> 
>> Expenses 
>> 
>> Subsidies
>> 
>> 
>> Ohio State 
>> 
>> $131,815,821 
>> 
>> $122,286,869
>> 
>> $0
>> 
>> 
>> Michigan
>> 
>> $122,739,052
>> 
>> $111,844,553 
>> 
>> $272,684
>> 
>> 
>> Penn State 
>> 
>> $116,118,025
>> 
>> $101,336,483
>> 
>> $0
>> 
>> 
>> Wisconsin
>> 
>> $96,288,191 
>> 
>> $95,623,345
>> 
>> $7,237,901 
>> 
>> 
>> Iowa
>> 
>> $93,353,56
>> 
>> $88,057,486
>> 
>> $564,680 
>> 
>> 
>> Mich State 
>> 
>> $84,510,199 
>> 
>> $84,004,229
>> 
>> $3,650,280
>> 
>> 
>> Nebraska 
>> 
>> $83,679,756 
>> 
>> $81,916,484
>> 
>> $0
>> 
>> 
>> Minnesota
>> 
>> $78,924,683
>> 
>> $78,924,683
>> 
>> $7,778,861
>> 
>> 
>> Illinois 
>> 
>> $77,863,883
>> 
>> $73,476,818
>> 
>> $3,983,640
>> 
>> 
>> Indiana
>> 
>> $71,017,355
>> 
>> $69,314,511
>> 
>> $2,686,769
>> 
>> 
>> Purdue 
>> 
>> $66,202,493
>> 
>> $59,429,383
>> 
>> $0 
>> 
>> 
>> Northwestern
>> 
>> N/A
>> 
>> N/A
>> 
>> N/A 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> husker site list
>> husker at tssi.com
>> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>> _______________________________________________
>> husker site list
>> husker at tssi.com
>> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
> 
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker