Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="nzm136, post: 2486905, member: 2531"] 1. There isn't a finite pool of money that we can (or should) spend. It's all relative. We should spend to the point where the incremental cost of the investment equals the incremental return on that investment (highly subjective - how much is imporived student life worth?). 2. Although the exact amount is extremely hard to quantify, an understanding on a directional level isn't. For instance, northeastern schools should absolutely over-index in lacrosse, basketball, field hockey, rowing, and ice hockey, whereas southeastern schools should over-index in football, softball, and baseball. 3. SU's costs are inflated by tuition/scholarships, as are every other private school's. 4. There are Title IX implications. Pulling money out of one sport impacts other sports as well. 5. Being ranked #1 in XC isn't the same as being ranked #1 in football, and that fact is true from an effort required perspective and a cost perspective. 6. Basketball and football are what keeps the lights on, so IMHO, we should prioritize those sports first. I think that we do a good job keeping basketball well fed, but we've been behind the curve in football. 7. It's insane to blame Gross without knowing what his compensation looked like. If the guy was compensated on the overall competitiveness of the athletic department (i.e. Director's Cup standing), then he was just following orders, and he did a great job. If he was asked to win basketball games and football games, then he did a less great job. **For the record, I think that most schools under-pay football coaches. If hiring a guy like Saban is worth +5 wins a year, and if consistent 9-11 win seasons are worth +$30 MM in donations, merch sales, ticket sales, etc., then we'd be crazy to not spend an incremental $15 million on coaching salaries (+$15 MM mirrored in women's sports) if it meant getting a guy on Saban's level.** [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?