USA Today: Top revenue programs

#3
#3
I would rather be lower in cost and higher in profit. 97.6 m per year isnt bad compared to some of the others.Looks like we project to make about 7m this year. Also there's no way in Hell Penn State makes 116 m this year. It isn't gonna happen.
 
#5
#5
I would rather be lower in cost and higher in profit. 97.6 m per year isnt bad compared to some of the others.Looks like we project to make about 7m this year. Also there's no way in Hell Penn State makes 116 m this year. It isn't gonna happen.

O rly? You some kind of accounting genius or something?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#10
#10
Too be fair, one of Mike Hart's stated goals is to shrink the athletic department to make it more efficient and cost effective. Should help our numbers. He has already started this process by eliminating some unnecessary jobs.
 
#11
#11
Too be fair, one of Mike Hart's stated goals is to shrink the athletic department to make it more efficient and cost effective. Should help our numbers. He has already started this process by eliminating some unnecessary jobs.

Mike Hamilton + Dave Hart = Mike Hart. Weve created a super-athletic director.
 
#12
#12
Too be fair, one of Mike Hart's stated goals is to shrink the athletic department to make it more efficient and cost effective. Should help our numbers. He has already started this process by eliminating some unnecessary jobs.

*Dave Hamilton
 
#14
#14
Seeing stats like this prove two things to me:
1) We have the best fanbase in college sports and
2) We deserve a hell of a lot better than what our last few years have been for how damn loyal we are.

Go Vols!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#16
#16
Well we got ranked in something in 2012. It was not for goose eggs finally!!!!!!!!!:horse:
 
#25
#25
These numbers should be getting better.
With Summitt retiring, Pearl resigning/fired, and Fulmer no longer being paid to not coach.
I don't think Dooley or Martin make that much yet.
Then next year with a potential bowl game.
 
Advertisement



Back
Top