Discussion in 'Around the League' started by gmoser1210, Sep 5, 2013.
I've seen this report in the past and I brings up a few observations/questions.
Butler spends like an A10/American conf team.
Should we be appalled that our budget is so low for a successful program?
Should we be proud of our continued relevance, despite being last in BE spend?
Obviously, $$ matters for the top programs, but there are a lot of crappy basketball programs that spend a lot of money. It's interesting that their return on investment (on the court) is not good.
How much does $$ matter? Is it more about the culture, coach than cash?
Look how much money IU rakes in from their mediocre program.
Just a reminder, again, that as of this report's year (2016), only two schools played full-time in facilities that they owned, and only one of those (Butler) doesn't have any debt they are paying off (I believe X is still paying for the Cintas Center). All the other schools in the Big East are paying to rent their off-campus venues, and that isn't going to be cheap especially where they are using an NBA/NHL facility in Philly, NYC, Jersey, DC, and Milwaukee. So, in terms of real spend on things to help move the program forward, we are probably much closer to the middle than this graphic would lead you to believe. If you look at Xavier's season ticket pricing structure, it appears that those seat premiums would be rolling into their revenues, where Butler's donations for Priority Points just go into the general athletics funding. For comparison, seats at Center Court in the lower third at X cost $2,650 each ($650 plus $2,000 seat premium), where seats in the lower half of the same section at Butler cost $875.
As for expenditures I'm excited that the bball program now has a dedicated strength and fitness coach. To me that is huge.
I know many on this board see a need for a practice facility. Maybe that is a big need. But I think there are advantages to always practicing on Hinkle's main stage.
Long term, it’s just about the only determinant of success. Teams that spend at the top of their league, as Butler did in the Horizon, win those leagues.
Don’t just note Butler, note the two or three lowest spenders in any league you’d like.
It’s mostly predetermination.
Let's not let facts get in the way of your doomsday narrative, shall we?
In the 2015-16 season, Butler was at the bottom of the BEast in spending...and finished 5th in the league. Here is how the league broke down:
Georgetown: 1st in spend, finished 8th
Marquette: 2nd in spend, finished 7th
Villanova: 3rd in spend, finished 1st
Providence: 4th in spend, finished 4th
St. John's: 5th in spend, finished 10th
Xavier: 6th in spend, finished 2nd
Creighton: 7th in spend, finished 6th
Seton Hall: 8th in spend, finished 3rd
DePaul: 9th in spend, finished 9th
Butler: 10th in spend, finished 5th
By your argument, Georgetown and Marquette should both be consistent Top 10-20 programs. They were 3rd and 8th in the NCAA that season in expenses, and we see how that worked out. TCU was at the top of the Big 12 in spend...and finished dead last in their league. Notre Dame was 13th in spend in the ACC spending a third of what Duke and Louisville did...and finished 6th. Iowa was 13th in spend in the B1G at a little over half of what IU spent, and finished 5th. Illinois spent $10 million and finished 3rd from the bottom of the league. St. Mary's spent less than half of what Gonzaga did (7th overall in the WCC), and won the league. Spend does not always equal success, and the reverse is true too. So just stop.
What exactly should Butler's basketball program spend money on ( other than a cool practice facility or coaches salaries) that would significantly boost the program to the level of Villanova?
Perhaps advanced metrics , if available for return on dollars spent, would reflect that Butler is highly efficient.
You can't take the standings from one year and draw definitive conclusions about what spending means in relation to program success.
I know nuance is hard. But here goes.
All of the following can be true: (A) in general, over the 351 D-1 programs, larger budgets mean more wins; (B) Butler would likely find more success moving forward if they had a larger budget than if they had a smaller budget; (C) programs spend/use money in different ways, and thus wins per dollar spent varies quite a bit from program to program; (D) Butler has been more efficient with its resources than its peer programs, and its wins per dollar spent has almost certainly, and for nearly two decades, vastly outperformed virtually every other significant D-1 program.
In other words, it is completely reasonable to think Butler would be better off with a larger budget moving forward. But it is simply illogical to conclude that that fact necessarily means that Butler will eventually and inevitably get worse if it does not suddenly and radically increase its spending such that it matches their peers' spending.
This is true, but you can look at those numbers and make some pretty educated inferences. Without doing a considerable amount of digging, wouldn't it be safe to say that most schools spend roughly the same year-over-year? For example, IU would typically be at or near the top of B1G expense and revenues. Same could be said for the teams in our league. The ones who spend will continue to spend, while those who don't, won't. There are a lot of schools who don't get a great ROI for their money, and there are some who do. Butler, fortunately, has been one that has consistently gotten a lot of on-court bang for their buck.
The seat premium (license) is a donation to the all for one fund- I don't believe that is reported as revenue as all for one fund supports all sports but I could be wrong.
I'm confused do you not have seat licenses down low? Do all seats just max out at $875? If so I'd imagine that is greatly undervaluing the product/experience (not sure all the perks but I imagine you have some sort of club lower bowl has access to?)
Cintas was paid off a few years ago (it actually only cost $40 million back in 2000) but they injected $25 mil into over the last 3 years so I'm sure that is being paid off now.
We do not have the same resources as other schools, so we do not necessarily have the money to spend as other places. Also, it's not like Danko and Collier are sitting on millions of dollars and not spending it. The entire campus has basically been rebuilt over the last 15 years with several projects currently in process. I'm sure they will get around to pouring several more millions into basketball facilities, once they are done building everything else. And it's not like we haven't poured $25M into Hinkle a few years ago.
No, we do not have seat licenses. Butler uses a priority points system, which is primarily based on donations to the athletic program and the university. One's ranking in that system, and consequently the order in which season ticket holders select their seats, is based on an average number of priority points per ticket desired. There are a very small number of courtside and middle section front row seats higher than that $875 number.
Plus, one thing that seems to be forgotten, the institution does not exist for basketball. Basketball exists for the institution.
For those interested, I posted my preseason rankings for the conference this morning.
Sent from my iPhone using Butler Hoops mobile app
I agree with everything you wrote except that "it's time to stop underestimating Butler" I would rather we didn't do that...
Lukas, nice preseason review. I like the Nova as one and shake the next six up and see who comes out as number 2. Pretty much the dog fight of equals that is the BE.
Think of how many Butler BE games were won or lost on one or two plays in 2018!!! It could be even tighter in 2019.
Thanks for the kind words! As I alluded to in my introduction, it might be a down season in terms of talent but every conference matchup could be a good game. Excitement and blood pressure levels ️.
Sent from my iPhone using Butler Hoops mobile app
Perhaps a bit optimistic, but I like your thinking.
Separate names with a comma.