Or is the cause and effect in reverse? Unfortunately, we will never know the real answer to that. Necessarily, a narrative exists presently that UF was not recruiting well under Mullen (and the Signing Day results reflect this) but that UF is recruiting well under Napier (though the Signing Day results are roughly the same).
UGA does not have a plane, so some of cost is air travel for coaching staff. That said, direct correlation between spending and winning. You heard from Kirby’s mouth how important it is
Teams like Vandy prop up other sports with football money and neglect football. We seem to be somewhere in the upper middle with that scenario. I think if you go all out like Texas and generate 271 million because you are relevant, it helps take care of itself.
Yeah, my understanding is that a large portion of that gap is flying. UF is also fortunate that a lot of our recruiting footprint is driveable
I think this is a bit overrated. 1. Scout the players 2. Build a relationship 3. Visit them The reality is every school is roughly equal in building a relationship and visiting. We have the same number of coaches that can contact as UGA. And if Napier wants someone to be on the road they will be, he isn’t being told no. Scouting MAY scale with dollars. More people, more eyes, more models, etc. But does someone like UF/UGA truly need that? We are competing over the exact same pool of players. Either way that wouldn’t show up in terms of a higher rated class. To get players you need: 1. Relationship 2. Good culture (aka winning) 3. Development (can be pitched as PT or guys you get into the NFL) 4. And of course, NIL
This is what happens when you take on debt to upgrade athletic facilities but call it a "classroom" so the state will foot the bill.
What stands out to me is the increase % in spending between 2018-2022. Uga is at nearly 49% increase, A&M is at 56% increase in spending and ole miss is at 37% increase. While I'm happy to see our spending has increased by 18% we obviously have some room to make up. And I'm not sure having our own plane saves us money necessarily because it's like the difference from renting vs owning a house. Sure yiu pay more monthly to rent but you are not responsible for maintenance, repairs, and even sometimes utilities, where as the owner of the house has to cover the cost of the mortgage/taxes/ insurance plus repairs, maintenance etc. I've never checked but I can imagine upkeep, repairs, maintenance and of course jet fuel are not cheap
Depends where you live. I rented in San Diego because it was about a third of a mortgage in late eighties early 90’s
I think you meant "when" not necessarily "where". Not sure any of it, renting or mortgage is cheap anymore.