I think by the time the decision was made, and why it was made, to pay more the pursuit for Belichick was on. I don't think paying someone else say 7.5 / year was an option. Maybe, if Belichick said no. Hopefully they'll continue with this mindset when it's time to bring in a new staff.
I just read a post by Greg on IC, stating that the budget for the next coach (prior to pursuing Belichick) was 5 million / year. I don't see how that was going to pull in Campbell or Summrall. After the decision to pursue Belichick they realized the money would have to change. Hopefully they'll...
Your first point is patently wrong.
Your second point is also wrong, Texas this past year is an counterexample. But, I do agree that most definitely operate at a negative.
A counter example to your first point, Texas has done just that this year.
My stance from the beginning is that high-performing football programs benefit the university as a whole. A position you seem to be in agreement of, so why the fuck are you arguing? At this point you are just arguing...
No, that is not what I'm arguing. Like I said, if you're going to argue at least do it in good faith. You can easily go read my posts, if you actually want to have a discussion.
Once again, are you saying that a high-performing football program doesn't bring benefits to their university?
Regarding schools putting excess revenue back into the university, Texas just did that after last year's season - 2.8 million.
No, you might want to go back and read the posts from before.
Also, are you seriously trying to argue that high-performing football teams don't bring in benefits to their university?
Don't think I ever said millions upon millions, and pretty sure I said excess funds. Also, pretty sure I didn't say a lot (it's around 1% believe). But, perhaps y'all know better than me. 🤷♀️
And to be clear, I'm only talking about the excess revenue, not the benefit from the rise in...