(12-22-2014 10:28 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  That link is nice and all, but they say programs like Washington and Arkansas are "more valuable" than FSU...

Having money and having a better football program are two VERY different things.


Miami has 5 national titles.....they don't have a pot to piss in.


Stanford has a $600 Million athletic endowment.....how many national titles in football do they have?


UNC has a $212 Million athletic endowment....how is their football program.




FSU is a monster of a football program........but is NOT a financial powerhouse. It doesn't have billionaires funding it, fully endowed scholarships, corporations building facilities. FSU doesn't have a 80 year old med school with thousand of DR. grads lined up to give the football team money, could go on and on and on.


I think you are confusing things here. This is a simple concept. FSU is NOT loaded like the elite financial programs....it doesn't have the money of a Texas, Michigan, Stanford, UNC, Duke, etc.

It doesn't have the financial resources like that.

There are a million metrics I could produce to further explain, but it seems like I have already shown a few that cover this.

Sigh.

How are either of those programs "more valuable" than FSU? I don't care about your "money" argument, whatever point you're trying to make. You're just talking in circles to yourself.

Those schools were listed as "more valuable" and you used that terminology yourself. How?

(12-21-2014 10:30 AM)nole Wrote:  

(12-21-2014 09:56 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Schools like Michigan or Florida won't be down long because they have the money, facilities, infrastructure to get back to the top rather quickly. Does Miami?

Not, but neither does FSU.

I'm still just amazed by this response.

(12-23-2014 12:56 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(12-21-2014 10:30 AM)nole Wrote:  

(12-21-2014 09:56 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Schools like Michigan or Florida won't be down long because they have the money, facilities, infrastructure to get back to the top rather quickly. Does Miami?

Not, but neither does FSU.

I'm still just amazed by this response.

This is shocking how you don't get it. FSU is not a rich school.



You seem to believe winning football games changes all the data that details this.


If you think FSU has the money of a Texas, Notre Dame, Stanford, Michigan......you just are not very versed in this subject. The highest level rich schools have $10 for every $1 FSU has and the tier beneath those have $2 for every $1 FSU has. I am not surprised you are shocked.....you lack knowledge here.

Where have I said FSU has Michigan/Texas/etc money? Please, show me. If you can show me where I'll admit I'm wrong and you are right.

And "Stanford money"? Jesus christ... Wealthy alums and quality top-tier football programs are not one-in-the-same. Stanford is NOT a program that can easily and quickly return to prominence after a period of mediocrity and never has been. FSU is. Hell, aside from what Harbaugh built there, Stanford has been nothing BUT mediocre for DECADES, and honestly they're already just about back to mediocrity. That FSU doesn't have a $150M athletic budget is inconsequential considering it still has a top 15 or 20 budget, has facilities on par with other major national programs, is in a great recruiting area and is committed to football and providing the things needed to support a top program. That's what matters, not this garbage you keep talking about and acting as if that's all that matters and that you're the authority on the issue.