I got a couple more general comments I'm willing to share...

[18in32]

Fake news.

Does Title IX require that equal dollars be spent on men and women's sports?

No. The only provision that requires that the same dollars be spent proportional to participation is scholarships. Otherwise, male and female student-athletes must receive equitable "treatment" and "benefits."


You are trying to argue the "treatment" and "benefits" (scare quotes literally installed by NCAA) which simply defies what is occurring in the real world. The football players already get "treatment" and "benefits" far beyond what any of the women get. And its much worse at other schools.

You are wrong. (This is more fun that I thought it would be. I'm gonna turn into @gtleviathan.)

And your quote is from the same ideologically-skewed NCAA page that pretends Title IX did not cause schools to drop men's sports to achieve compliance. They don't want to admit what the law actually does. The purpose of Title IX is to make interest in and support for men's sports, pay for women's sports. It's not a secret, dude.

 

[gtleviathan]

You are wrong. (This is more fun that I thought it would be. I'm gonna turn into @gtleviathan.)

 

[GTCrew]

You are wrong. (This is more fun that I thought it would be. I'm gonna turn into @gtleviathan.)

And your quote is from the same ideologically-skewed NCAA page that pretends Title IX did not cause schools to drop men's sports to achieve compliance. They don't want to admit what the law actually does. The purpose of Title IX is to make interest in and support for men's sports, pay for women's sports. It's not a secret, dude.

OK. I'll stick with the NCAA interpretation, since thats what all the other schools are doing.

Of course, all of us are wrong and you are right. All of us. Every school. Doin it wrong while you know better. Its gotta be quite a burden.

 

[18in32]

OK. I'll stick with the NCAA interpretation, since thats what all the other schools are doing.

Of course, all of us are wrong and you are right. All of us. Every school. Doin it wrong while you know better. Its gotta be quite a burden.

Seriously, why are you arguing about this? It is not disputed anywhere that football doesn't get all the money it raises. This is trivially uninteresting.

In 2018, Alabama football got 57% of the dollars it generated, at UNC it was 49%, at Washington it was 48%, according to the federal database. GT football generated $52 mil and spent $25 mil. So in general Tech football gets 48¢ of every $1 it raises. Obviously marginal dollars will go to football at a greater rate, but it ain't gonna be 100% by any stretch.

How ever much money we can raise from moving games from BDS to MB, football will not get all the additional money.

 

[pianoman]

“Ticket sales increased by over $3 million in FY 2018 mainly due to sales of the Chick-Fil-A Kickoff game held at Mercedes-Benz Stadium against the University of Tennessee.”
Even if football gets only half of revenue, I assume the goal is to maximize revenue, correct?
Is there any way a uga at MB game does not likely maximize revenue?
Again, I think it makes sense regardless, for all the other reasons.

 

[texstinger]

Agreed. I cant understand why we dont milk the delusional dwag fans for 10-20 million like that. Clemson too.

You are assuming they would agree to it.

Vandy thought ut would and it backfired in a spectacular way.

Maybe, just maybe, we could focus on being fair to our S/As and do Everything possible to build a program we should have.

And, Heaven forbid, enlarge and redo Grant Field to accommodate a larger GT fan base.

Naw, why would we want that?

 

[pianoman]

You are assuming they would agree to it.

Vandy thought ut would and it backfired in a spectacular way.

Maybe, just maybe, we could focus on being fair to our S/As and do Everything possible to build a program we should have.

And, Heaven forbid, enlarge and redo Grant Field to accommodate a larger GT fan base.

Naw, why would we want that?

Vandy/UT deals and GT/uga in MB are apples and oranges imo. Nobody is proposing to be unfair to anyone, just discussing revenue.
I don’t remember the details or exact rationale for our last stadium expansion in north end zone...but there seems to be plenty of room up there already if local fans can be convinced to come and visit.

 

[GTCrew]

Seriously, why are you arguing about this? It is not disputed anywhere that football doesn't get all the money it raises. This is trivially uninteresting.

In 2018, Alabama football got 57% of the dollars it generated, at UNC it was 49%, at Washington it was 48%, according to the federal database. GT football generated $52 mil and spent $25 mil. So in general Tech football gets 48¢ of every $1 it raises. Obviously marginal dollars will go to football at a greater rate, but it ain't gonna be 100% by any stretch.

How ever much money we can raise from moving games from BDS to MB, football will not get all the additional money.

Perfect. Alabama shows we can go from our current 48% to as much as 57%. So pretend the net gain was 6 million and the new revenue would be 58 million. We use the whole 6 million for football means we now spend 31 million, which would still only be 53%.

Its only a 10% increase in revenue, but it would increase our football spending by 19%. Its hard to imagine that wouldnt help.

A gain of even 10 million could be used and still we would be under the 57%. And other teams might be higher.

 

[daBuzz]

And, Heaven forbid, enlarge and redo Grant Field to accommodate a larger GT fan base.
Naw, why would we want that?

At this point in time, that would be a monumentally poor idea. We usually sell out one to two games per year and that is only when the UGA and/or other team brings many fans to a game. Increasing supply before there is increased demand is a very risky proposition. If/when we get to the point that seats at BDS@HGF are difficult to obtain then we should absolutely expand. Until then, not so much.

 

[18in32]

Perfect. Alabama shows we can go from our current 48% to as much as 57%. So pretend the net gain was 6 million and the new revenue would be 58 million. We use the whole 6 million for football means we now spend 31 million, which would still only be 53%.

Its only a 10% increase in revenue, but it would increase our football spending by 19%. Its hard to imagine that wouldnt help.

A gain of even 10 million could be used and still we would be under the 57%. And other teams might be higher.

Yeah, everybody is really just plain stupid for not spending 57% of their football revenue on football.

 

[Walton]

I don't like the idea and would not give up a home game for a MBS game with UGA. I would be OK with BDS-UGA-MBS, 3 game cycle; 2 home games, then a neutral game. It is probably a bad idea.

I would even be OK with not playing them every single year just to give some flexibility to the schedule.

 

[GTCrew]

Whether its a good idea or not is a different argument.

 

[GTCrew]

I don't like the idea and would not give up a home game for a MBS game with UGA. I would be OK with BDS-UGA-MBS, 3 game cycle; 2 home games, then a neutral game. It is probably a bad idea.

I would even be OK with not playing them every single year just to give some flexibility to the schedule.

You wouldnt move it for any dollar gain? Not even 20 million?

 

[gtg970g]

There is no way uGA would give up their home game for a game in MBS. I like the idea of 1 game a season (not uGA) in MBS to enhance ticket sales. Maybe have our opening ACC game (think September heat) annually at the Benz. While the environment and sight lines of BDS are far superior to what MBS has to offer there are some amenities that fans appreciate that will only be offered at an NFL caliber stadium.

 

[G776T]

There is no way uGA would give up their home game for a game in MBS. I like the idea of 1 game a season (not uGA) in MBS to enhance ticket sales. Maybe have our opening ACC game (think September heat) annually at the Benz. While the environment and sight lines of BDS are far superior to what MBS has to offer there are some amenities that fans appreciate that will only be offered at an NFL caliber stadium.

It helps cement the 404 idea, and I'm sure 18 yo kids will love the idea of being in an nfl locker room. I'd try to make those games our biggest recruiting weekends

 

[gtchief]

UGa is playing in the Benz over the near future in even years when they aren't coming to BDS. They know where the bread is buttered. The goal is to keep them out of Atlanta, not offering to give them a guaranteed game here every year instead of every other year

 

[GTCrew]

UGa is playing in the Benz over the near future in even years when they aren't coming to BDS. They know where the bread is buttered. The goal is to keep them out of Atlanta, not offering to give them a guaranteed game here every year instead of every other year

They are? Wow. I did not see that reported.

If that doesnt convince the skeptics that we should do it, then I dont know what does.

I would love to move non-UGA games, but the math wont make sense to move games where attendance for those games at BDS is 45k.

 

[User 10337]

The band has missed one game in recent history and it was not pretty. It occurred in Kansas.

there’s also old forklore about why Tech sends a band to all games.

Are you ööööting me? You're telling me we ööööed with lore in 2010?

 

[savbandjacket]

Are you ööööting me? You're telling me we ööööed with lore in 2010?

Yeah. If I recall the story correctly (it has been a while) the decision was made to not send the band to the 1929 Rose Bowl. Probably due to logistics and cost. Frank Roman, writer of RRFGT, died in his office on December 19, 1928 at age 51, allegedly distraught over the decision.

The story is that from there on, some contingent of the band traveled to all games. That is until Kansas. I have no idea if that is true or not. I do know that the band was sent to some pretty far places in my time (Seattle, San Jose, and Boise).

 

[Allen Koholic]

They are? Wow. I did not see that reported.

If that doesnt convince the skeptics that we should do it, then I dont know what does.

I would love to move non-UGA games, but the math wont make sense to move games where attendance for those games at BDS is 45k.

Trigger warning: Link contains mouth-breathers.

https://www.dawgnation.com/football/georgia-football-georgia-tech-mercedes-benz-stadium

Looks like 2020 against Virginia, 2022 against Oregon and 2024 vs. Clemson.

I don't see how giving UGA an annual presence in that stadium helps us. I don't see how we make dramatically more money moving the game there. And I certainly don't see how we leverage that into creating an atmosphere and legacy at Tech that keeps alumni coming and giving. I'm not a fan of moving any games there, but it is what it is, and moving things like the ND game or a really good OOC game isn't a terrible idea. I'd rather we right the ship and get into the CFA kickoff more often.