Has Tiger Football reached it's ceiling?

[Red Bird Classic]

People around the sport believe the Tigers are (if not right now, then over the last 3 years) at their ceiling. After following the program for decades, I can't help but wonder if they're right.

Even coach Drink says we don't have enough money to pay players.

Look at this:

Breakdown of football revenue sources for Texas and Missouri (FY2024)

Total Revenue
Missouri $168.0 million
Texas $331.9 million

FB Revenue:
Missouri $56.3 million
Texas $204.7 million

Contributions:
Missouri $36.7 million
Texas $137.0 million

Media Rights & Distributions
Missouri $37.2 million
Texas $40.7 million

Royalties, Licensing, Ads, Sponsorships
Missouri $11.4 million
Texas $68.8 million

Ticket Sales
Missouri $19.4 million
Texas $60.9 million

We could get more corporate sponsors etc. But the resource gap is so vast, it's hard to see how MU can compete with teams like Texas.

[Whatashame]

IF this is where football is going and it surely appears that it is, Mizzou is the small market team of baseball and Texas is the Dodgers. If it’s about how much can universities pay players then there are lots of SEC teams who can pay the players more. Mizzou would be towards the bottom following that criteria.

There are players staying in school instead of turning pro because frankly they can make more. I don’t know where college athletics will be in 5-10 years but there are drastic changes looming ahead.

[Armchair QB]

No we haven’t reached our ceiling. We’re competitive with Texas now.

Regarding ceiling, if Indiana can do it, we can do it.

[dugoutrex]

People around the sport believe the Tigers are (if not right now, then over the last 3 years) at their ceiling. After following the program for decades, I can't help but wonder if they're right.

Even coach Drink says we don't have enough money to pay players.

Look at this:

Breakdown of football revenue sources for Texas and Missouri (FY2024)

Total Revenue
Missouri $168.0 million
Texas $331.9 million

FB Revenue:
Missouri $56.3 million
Texas $204.7 million

Contributions:
Missouri $36.7 million
Texas $137.0 million

Media Rights & Distributions
Missouri $37.2 million
Texas $40.7 million

Royalties, Licensing, Ads, Sponsorships
Missouri $11.4 million
Texas $68.8 million

Ticket Sales
Missouri $19.4 million
Texas $60.9 million

We could get more corporate sponsors etc. But the resource gap is so vast, it's hard to see how MU can compete with teams like Texas.

Drink, just like Pinkle, has built a good program and has absolutely no idea how to get over the hump!

[acco40]

No.

P.S. Who is Pinkle? Did he recruit/coach Daniels?

[Armchair QB]

No.

P.S. Who is Pinkle? Did he recruit/coach Daniels?

Who’s better Zoellers or Daniels?

[acco40]

No.

P.S. Who is Pinkle? Did he recruit/coach Daniels?

Who’s better Zoellers or Daniels?

For my money, Brad Smythe was the best.

[rezero]

People around the sport believe the Tigers are (if not right now, then over the last 3 years) at their ceiling. After following the program for decades, I can't help but wonder if they're right.

Even coach Drink says we don't have enough money to pay players.

Look at this:

Breakdown of football revenue sources for Texas and Missouri (FY2024)

Total Revenue
Missouri $168.0 million
Texas $331.9 million

FB Revenue:
Missouri $56.3 million
Texas $204.7 million

Contributions:
Missouri $36.7 million
Texas $137.0 million

Media Rights & Distributions
Missouri $37.2 million
Texas $40.7 million

Royalties, Licensing, Ads, Sponsorships
Missouri $11.4 million
Texas $68.8 million

Ticket Sales
Missouri $19.4 million
Texas $60.9 million

We could get more corporate sponsors etc. But the resource gap is so vast, it's hard to see how MU can compete with teams like Texas.

Red Bird the other thing to note is revenue doesn’t necessarily link directly to disposable income that teams can use to win on the field, as they also had $325M in spending for only a $6M surplus. Texas carries a lot of expenses on non revenue sports that are funded by football.

Schools like Ohio State have $255M in revenue but had $293M in spending so they started cutting down on spend which impacted football. This is one reason Big10 was trying to leverage its future with private equity to let schools like Ohio State continue to operate with huge losses while they started trying to correct the ship. Michigan and USC both voted against private equity as their ADs were operating with $25 and $32M surplus.

[dhsux]

People around the sport believe the Tigers are (if not right now, then over the last 3 years) at their ceiling. After following the program for decades, I can't help but wonder if they're right.

Even coach Drink says we don't have enough money to pay players.

Look at this:

Breakdown of football revenue sources for Texas and Missouri (FY2024)

Total Revenue
Missouri $168.0 million
Texas $331.9 million

FB Revenue:
Missouri $56.3 million
Texas $204.7 million

Contributions:
Missouri $36.7 million
Texas $137.0 million

Media Rights & Distributions
Missouri $37.2 million
Texas $40.7 million

Royalties, Licensing, Ads, Sponsorships
Missouri $11.4 million
Texas $68.8 million

Ticket Sales
Missouri $19.4 million
Texas $60.9 million

We could get more corporate sponsors etc. But the resource gap is so vast, it's hard to see how MU can compete with teams like Texas.

Red Bird the other thing to note is revenue doesn’t necessarily link directly to disposable income that teams can use to win on the field, as they also had $325M in spending for only a $6M surplus. Texas carries a lot of expenses on non revenue sports that are funded by football.

Schools like Ohio State have $255M in revenue but had $293M in spending so they started cutting down on spend which impacted football. This is one reason Big10 was trying to leverage its future with private equity to let schools like Ohio State continue to operate with huge losses while they started trying to correct the ship. Michigan and USC both voted against private equity as their ADs were operating with $25 and $32M surplus.

Great point RZ.

Do you know Missouri's spending side for '24?

[MizzouMarv]

Texas has always had big advantages over Mizzou. More money, more tradition & a lot more great athletes in TX, but not long ago they had a decade where they stunk. They do have a better chance a staying in the top echelon. Mizzou might not be able to compete for the Top 10 every year, but if Drink can keep building, Mizzou can have a great season every once in a while. Perhaps, with a little luck*, we can get into the CFP & compete for the NC soon.
*We are due some good luck. 2 QB's & our kicker hurt! Bizarre officiating & terrible luck in the Vandy game. So close vs Bama....

[hdhntr148]

despite the disparity in revenue Drink put a Uber competitive team on the field as CEO. He is a great salesman and promoter of program and is planting seeds for the Fortune 500 companies in MO to step up and advertise and contribute. Can't believe Boeing and others don't. Would love it if Josh Kroenke would step up and start Bigtime contributions as a good alumni and steward of his families fortune. IF I had that fortune would want to contribute to Eli as he is the best when it comes to getting top players out of TP who are best value for money.

IMO Eli will use all this gossip about him being considered by other top programs, most of whom arn't really considering someone like him who fans wouldn't like nor has he ever beaten a Big Brand in SEC, to really up his NIL budget in order to be more competitive.

Of course the number one thing he must do is FIRE KIRBY MOORE and go out and attract a top OC to run his offense. THAT is job one.

[Red Bird Classic]

Texas has always had big advantages over Mizzou. More money, more tradition & a lot more great athletes in TX, but not long ago they had a decade where they stunk. They do have a better chance a staying in the top echelon. Mizzou might not be able to compete for the Top 10 every year, but if Drink can keep building, Mizzou can have a great season every once in a while. Perhaps, with a little luck*, we can get into the CFP & compete for the NC soon.
*We are due some good luck. 2 QB's & our kicker hurt! Bizarre officiating & terrible luck in the Vandy game. So close vs Bama....

It's not just Texas.

In program revenue, the Tigers lag far behind, OU, Alabama, LSU, Georgia, A&M, and behind Auburn, Tenn., Ol Miss, Florida, and even Arkansas.

So even when Texas is down, OU and Albama are up, and the problem for the Tigers remains.

In fact, if you list the dominant teams in the SEC football, that list correlates closely with the revenue these teams have for the athletic departments.

The Tigers' revenue ranks with teams like SC, Kentucky, and Mississippi State. Teams that along with Vandy are not seriously competitive in football.

I'm not saying we should leave the SEC or give up playing football, but I think Drink is right about needing more support. It seems very unlikely that the Tigers will be able to match ALbama, Texas, OU, or Other big names brans like OSU or Michigan if we can't get closer to those schools in football revenue.

There are no guarantees, but having more money to spend creates a powerful financial advantage that significantly increases a program's chances of success.

In short: the Tigers have to create a virtuous cycle, where more revenue allows for investment in talent and infrastructure, which improves performance and leads to more revenue, cementing the top teams' position as a real contender.

The trouble is it takes time. It may take a decade or more for the Tigers to gain near parity with the big money teams. Or they may never make it.

Which gets me back to my point: If we're ever going to compete with these big-name schools with their many advantages, the commitment level of the school, alums, and other supporters has to increase. Money talks. These kids are looking for the best deals. We're not even in the upper half of the conference in terms of money to spend on players or coaches. If that doesn't change, we're never going to reach the top of this conference.

[LGB73]

The program is essentially somewhere in that middle pack of 7th-10th in the SEC. I don't expect that to change. They can have some short term success for a season or two but to vault any higher they'd have to show they can notch 9+ win seasons year over year for probably 6-7 seasons. That means beating one of the higher ranked programs every single year. They haven't shown the consistent ability to do that as a program.

[Red Bird Classic]

BTW: If anyone is foolish enough, I'm taking bets on Tigers/Sooners.

I'd say the Tigers have about one chance in ten of winning that game, not because the Tigers aren't trying or Coach Drink isn't a good coach, but simply because the Sooners have better players or more top-notch players.

Players win games. You can complaint all day about the coaches, but you could have the best Head Coach in the world, with the best OC and DC, but if OU has better players they're still more likely to win. It might be different if I were coaching the sooners, but they've got much better coaches than me. And even second best coaches are more likely to win with better players.

[Red Bird Classic]

The program is essentially somewhere in that middle pack of 7th-10th in the SEC. I don't expect that to change. They can have some short term success for a season or two but to vault any higher they'd have to show they can notch 9+ win seasons year over year for probably 6-7 seasons. That means beating one of the higher ranked programs every single year. They haven't shown the consistent ability to do that as a program.

The money comes first. If coach Drink had Texas money, we'd be a NT contender in two seasons at most.

[MrPostman01]

No we haven’t reached our ceiling. We’re competitive with Texas now.

Regarding ceiling, if Indiana can do it, we can do it.

"Who's your" source?