For instance, I would assume Alabama, OSU and Clemson all spend near the top of the heap, given the number of analysts, etc. they have.
I further assume that ND spends nowhere near what those schools spend, even though they enjoy raking in the money the same way those schools do.
But, my question, for the sake of clarity in dissection of this mess: what do schools like Oklahoma, Texas, Florida, A&M, Michigan, LSU, Georgia, USC, Oregon and others spend compared to those top 3? I would assume (only) that at least LSU, Georgia, Oregon would be the 3 that would try to spend what the top 3 spend.
I think it would be interesting to know how $$$ translates to competing for titles. I don't mean competing in the way BK considers ND to be competing. I mean how Gene Smith and Nick Saban see it. How Clemson sees it.
Clemson caught lightning in a bottle with Dabo, and upped their game. They have reaped more rewards for that decision to spend than any school I can remember, save for Miami or FSU in the 80's. Their school is now sought out by kids from all over the country as a destination, and their program is at the very top and will likely stay there even after Dabo is no longer the coach. Institutional Intestinal Fortitude goes a long way.
Alabama and OSU have spent on their history of being Top 5 programs. They weren't content to get there and hope. They paid elite coaches, and then spent what those elite coaches wanted to spend to win titles. By contrast, Notre Dame wants to reap the rewards of big-time football, but does it spend like it? Or, is that end of the bargain too much for them to consider?
For the record, I don't think money solves all the issues, as we know. I'd bet there are some in the top 10 in spending that aren't garnering a fair return on their investment. But, spending that money means there is a responsibility on the AD and the coach to deliver, and the message that sends might be as important as the money itself.
Consumers buy name brands not just for the name, but what the name has represented for decades. What is behind the name, and does that help sell the product. Why shouldn't Notre Dame go all in, invest in their name and history and tell their unique story in order to win championships, not play for 4th? You don't have to sell your soul to do this. Money is not evil if you don't let it become evil. It is possible to win without losing your soul.
I wonder if the recruiting/admissions excuse used by Kelly is allowed and even applauded, because the administration doesn't want to appear to be a football factory, but also doesn't want to spend what it takes to make that happen. As has been stated, they're happy with the return on investment. They do enough (shiny new practice facility, locker rooms) to appear to care on the surface, but are they investing (both monetarily and mentally) in the places that other schools invest?