If we were given the option to switch to the SEC...

While solely being an SEC school wouldn't hurt that perception, the fact we're in the ACC helps that perception.

No, it doesn't.

Being in the ACC does not help Miami in this regard, does not help FSU in this regard, and does not help VT in this regard.

Their ACC affiliation has granted them no leeway in the eyes of public opinion.


But they're not taking into account the difference between the annual revenue share between ACC member schools versus the annual revenue share between SEC member schools. That's nearly a million dollars a year right now, which wipes out the gate increase.
Before I take that as gospel, I want to see what the revenue sharing deal is overall, not just the average. I think Tech would be an above average SEC school, and therefore would receive an above average revenue share, depending on how the share is graded.

You got access to the SEC's rules for revenue sharing? I think with access to that data we might be able to put this whole thing to rest, and I'll either claim victory or sulk away in defeat. :)
 
Being in the ACC does not help Miami in this regard, does not help FSU in this regard, and does not help VT in this regard.

Free shoes and Thug U are beyond help.

The other side of this discussion is the impact all the other sports that don't involve a football. You can't argue that SEC basketball would be better.
 
You can't argue that SEC basketball would be better.

You can't argue that ACC basketball is what it used to be, or that the ACC tournament is remotely as cool as in the old days, or that the ACC treats all schools fairly with its media coverage, officiating, etc, or that Tech looking forward would have a better shake in the ACC than somewhere else.
 
Even if we were in the SEC, we would still lose recruits to UF, UGA, UT, Auburn, LSU and Alabama, except for now we would have to go play against the schools to which we lost all of our recruits.

People in the state would still love "Dem Dawgs" and we would even lose some UGA fans who also liked GT (trust me there are plenty of them and I know 3 or 4 personally) because we would now be a true in conference rival. being in the ACC is the one thing that keeps us unique and not so much like UGA's little brother.



We dont fit in with those schools. The SEC perception does not fit in with our image. I would not have gone to GT if it was an SEC school. And all of the people who would have wanted to go to GT if it was an SEC school would not have been able to get in anyway.

If anything I say we give them FSU and we take Vanderbilt.
 
I think there are two very distinct arguments going on here and they're sort of being rolled together. I agree with the benefit we could receive exposure wise playing in the SEC and potentially monetary increases...But I do not think Ole Miss or Miss St or Vandy is helped at all by playing in the SEC from a prestige point. Exposure only counts for so much when you're getting killed. I think it would only benefit us if we would be competitive. Look at SC, they're only a big time program in the eyes of those who support it. Do they benefit from being in the SEC? Maybe but then they're competing with UGAg in the division and when you look at Klimpsun they don't recruit as well even with Coach Steve. The fact is it has much more to it than mere affiliation conference wise. And money can only be part of the equation...this is still college sports we're talking about.

The argument I was making is that in trying to become competitive in the SEC we may compromise our standards further with SAs and this could have trickle down effect of hurting the Institute as a whole perception wise vis a vis Miami. Even UGAg suffers from this, while its no Vandy its a decent academic school but their behavior on and off the field is very negative and leads many to conclude its a thug school without reigns applied by the Admin. Look at Vandy even and the problems they had with their Athletic Dept and had to restructure. This is definately not something I want corrupting the entire system, its not worth it.

As for saying the ACC is no longer a BBall powerhouse I think is shortsighted and skewed. As little as I like the NC schools they plainly play serious ball. the only negative I can see is the recent school additions in BC, ThugU, and VT.

Fact is I don't want us refered to mockingly like Miami is in ThugU or FreeShoesUniversity. I think SEC competition may corrupt our mission leading admitting kids who commit infractions that reflect poorly. Keep track of the Fulmer Cup on Edsbs.com...tons of SEC violations every week.

I don't want to be called Georgia Tek-9.
 
You got access to the SEC's rules for revenue sharing? I think with access to that data we might be able to put this whole thing to rest, and I'll either claim victory or sulk away in defeat. :)

Don't think I'm going to be able to find either conference's "rules" for revenue sharing, as both conferences are exempt from having to publish those "rules" because there are one or more private schools in both conferences, nullifying the ability to get information under FOI laws.

HOWEVER, I did find the linked article:

http://blog.al.com/bn/2008/02/southeastern_conference_charte.html

which contains this information:

"In 2006, Georgia Tech's payout from ACC was $12.2 million, $2.5 million more than the average payout in the SEC that year."

The last comparison I saw was in 2005. The highest per school payout in the SEC was $900,000 less than the per school payout in the ACC. I'll keep looking for a source for that information...
 
I've been to ACC games and to SEC games. As a Tech Fan first and a college football fan second, I would love to see us go back to the SEC; but it will never happen. That being said, the atmosphere in the SEC on a football game day surpasses ACC football game day. More people, larger stadiums, etc.
 
Interesting speculation.

I think I would rather poach Vandy and Florida from the SEC. :D

It would be a major coup to wrap up all the Florida teams and take the most Southeastern state from the SEC. And I think Vandy could thrive in the ACC and actually improve itself in sports.

Of course, that has less chance of happening than us going to the SEC because Tobacco road would resist the ACC balance of power shifting heavily outside North Carolina.
 
Here's a little more info:

In 2006, the average SEC payout was $10,168,997. The highest payout of $10,714,082 was to LSU; the lowest payout of $9,766,122 was to Mississippi State.

In 2006, the average ACC payout was $10,853,810. The highest payout of $12,472,707 was to FSU; the lowest payout of $10,809,796 was to Wake. (I did not include payouts to BC, Miami or VPI, as they were provisional members, financially, in 2006).

The difference in the averages was $684,813 (and the ACC average was low in 2006 because the payouts to VT, Miami and BC were low). There was a $1,758,625 difference at the high end, and a $1,043,674 difference at the low end.

The source for this info is at:

http://blog.al.com/bn/2008/02/show_me_the_money_division_i_a.html

I'm afraid your financial case is busted...
 
No, it doesn't.

Being in the ACC does not help Miami in this regard, does not help FSU in this regard, and does not help VT in this regard.

Their ACC affiliation has granted them no leeway in the eyes of public opinion.


:)

I beg to differ. Many know better, but I have had more than one Florida grad express frustration that FSU had gained cache' in general public opinion of academics because of its inclusion in the ACC.

Does "general public opinion" matter when those familiar with the schools know better? I don't know.

But ACC affiliation has helped FSU in some small way and SEC affiliation has hurt Florida in some small way by association.
 
Re: Here's a little more info:

In 2006, the average SEC payout was $10,168,997. The highest payout of $10,714,082 was to LSU; the lowest payout of $9,766,122 was to Mississippi State.

In 2006, the average ACC payout was $10,853,810. The highest payout of $12,472,707 was to FSU; the lowest payout of $10,809,796 was to Wake. (I did not include payouts to BC, Miami or VPI, as they were provisional members, financially, in 2006).

The difference in the averages was $684,813 (and the ACC average was low in 2006 because the payouts to VT, Miami and BC were low). There was a $1,758,625 difference at the high end, and a $1,043,674 difference at the low end.

The source for this info is at:

http://blog.al.com/bn/2008/02/show_me_the_money_division_i_a.html

I'm afraid your financial case is busted...

There's some accounting shenanigans going on here. For example, the ACC has about 13 mil. dollars from the NCAA basketball tournament while the SEC shows no revenue at all from the tourney. The SEC could, for example, let the tourney teams keep the money for themselves instead of sharing it with the rest of the conference. Since no standards exist, it can become pretty tricky looking at athletic budget.

It also doesn't include gate receipts. I'm guessing the typical SEC team, including even Kentucky or Ole Miss, nets much more than the average ACC team.
 
I'm only addressing CONFERENCE revenue splits.

It also doesn't include gate receipts. I'm guessing the typical SEC team, including even Kentucky or Ole Miss, nets much more than the average ACC team.

Gate receipts are NOT included. NCAA tournament revenues ARE included for both conferences (see line item under SEC, "Postseason basketball games $26,952,015").

The ACC split--on average and from highest to lowest--is the best of any conference in the nation, and has typically averaged $1,000,000 more per school per year than the SEC split has.

As far as gate receipts go, we may or may not fill all 55K seats at BDS on a more regular basis if we were in the SEC. But we're already filling 90+% of our seats; thus, the hypothetical difference in gate receipts for BDS would be about a "wash" with the absolute difference between an ACC split and an SEC split.

My only point here is that it's not a very compelling argument to leave the ACC.

 
Well done, Stick. My financial case, rooted in additional season ticket sales, is indeed busted.

And that was the strongest element of the case.

I'm totally happy with the ACC essentially bribing us a million dollars a year to stay in the conference, even if it means flying to Boise half the time.

I stand down. :)
 
You're wrong on two counts...

Payout (from a previous post)

Read the last sentence of the sentence of the GT section. Our ACC payout was 12.2 million in 2006. This was 2.5 million more than the average SEC payout.

Academics - NC State, VT and Clemson are all very good academic schools. They rate higher in a lot of categories than all but 1 or 2 of the SEC schools. Additionally, Miami is a private school, and aside from it's terrible reputation is an excellent academic university which is also highly rated. Boston college is also a great university in one of the most academic cities in the world.

Plus, we in the ACC have a little thing called class and character, which they are still trying to figure out in the SEC.


I agree 100%. I really like the ACC and hope we don't go anywhere anytime soon:fingersx:
 
Our AA would jump at the chance to be in the SEC...
Why? From the above it appears the financial argument holds no water. If that's indeed true, and our AA wanted to join the SEC, we should fire them all immediately. Their job is to look after the finances for the program.
 
Yup.

Rubber meets the road on money, and I'm totally cool to let the ACC bribe us a million dollars a year to stay put, which is what the above math works out to, essentially. I'm convinced.
 
How the Southeastern Conference got rich

Birmingham News February 24, 2008

When it comes to money, revenue or profits, conference second to none

By Jon Solomon and Mike Perrin
Birmingham News staff writers

Roy Kramer remembers when taking home $200,000 from the Southeastern Conference in the late 1970s was a boon for his school.
"Man, I thought that was great," said Kramer, then Vanderbilt's athletics director. "Today, schools would think it's pocket change."
SEC schools received on average $10.2 million from the conference office in 2007. And that's nothing compared to the revenue schools produce for themselves, mainly through ticket sales and booster donations.

Per athlete, no conference spends more money, accumulates more revenue or has a higher net profit than the SEC, according to an analysis by The Birmingham News of institutional data filed to the U.S. Department of Education for 2006-07. The numbers reflect that in this, the 75th anniversary of the SEC, the conference is not only about championships and tradition. It is also about money -- lots of it.
While intercollegiate athletics is thought of as an enhancement to student life, it is also a big business, and there the SEC shines. In the past decade, it has doubled its payouts to member schools, reaching a record $122 million in 2007.
The result is more money spent on teams to win, but a higher price tag for fans to pay through tickets, donation requests and apparel.
It is no accident the increasing wealth of the SEC coincides with football's growth in popularity. Football revenue at schools in the SEC and the Big Ten, the two most lucrative conferences, accounts for 57 percent and 49 percent of their income, respectively.
In 2006-07, five of the top nine football-revenue schools came from the SEC: Georgia ($59.5 million), Florida ($58.9 million), Auburn ($56.8 million), Alabama ($53.2 million) and LSU ($48.1 million).
Through television contracts, marketing and bowl games, the SEC has become a financial giant along with the Big Ten, whose schools averaged $70.4 million in revenue in 2006-07, slightly more than the SEC's $66.8 million.
David Ridpath, who defends academic integrity as executive director of The Drake Group, said major conferences are simply fulfilling their calling to make money for their members.
"Conferences don't exist for academic reasons," said Ridpath, a former Mississippi State faculty member. "They exist for monetary reasons and TV exposure."






Kramer said the SEC had contracts with four bowl games prior to the BCS. Today, the conference has eight guaranteed bowl spots and, because of a lucrative at-large spot with the BCS, often has a chance for nine.
Bowl games accounted for $23 million of revenue for the SEC office in 2005-06, trailing only football TV and postseason basketball games as the highest sources of revenue.
Cedric Dempsey, the executive director of the NCAA from 1994 to 2002, said he supports TV contracts for individual conferences and schools, but is "disturbed" by how they changed the bowl system.
"I think the bowl system needs tremendous overhauling," Dempsey said. "We've moved away from what the initial purpose of the bowl system was - a celebration of success. Going 6-6, to me, is not really highly successful."
Dempsey said that at least half of the 32 bowls are not moneymakers and believes a playoff is possible if the six conferences with automatic BCS bids were not so reluctant about sharing funds with other leagues whose teams make the playoff.
Kramer said he does not envision the bowl landscape changing any time soon. 
 "Those are the conferences that have the dominant stadiums," Kramer said of the BCS-affiliated conferences. "When you get down to it, that's where the (fan) interest is. That's where the market is for television."
Marketing
The SEC was not always a financial juggernaut. Former SEC Commissioner Harvey Schiller said there were no conference sponsorships before he took over in 1986.
"Some of the schools, like Tennessee, were not making any money on their radio broadcasts," Schiller said. By the time Schiller left, the SEC was on the verge of expanding to 12 schools by adding Arkansas and South Carolina. The league added a football championship game - it produced $13.2 million in revenue in 2006 - and new geographic areas joined the SEC.
"Arkansas got the SEC some of the Texas market, which was really significant," Schiller said.
Bill Battle, a former Alabama football player under Bear Bryant and chairman of The Collegiate Licensing Company, said universities were slow to realize the amount of money they could make from athletic licensing.
In the mid-1980s, Battle said, universities were ecstatic when they generated $100,000 a year from athletic licensing. Back then, a Georgia fan who wanted a Bulldogs T-shirt had to drive to the bookstore in Athens.
Today, it's easy to go to a local Wal-Mart and find college apparel. CLC, which represents all SEC schools except Mississippi State, estimates the SEC was responsible for $600 million in retail sales of officially licensed products in fiscal year 2007. That ranks No. 1 among CLC's leagues.



Although professional sports now compete with colleges in the South, Battle said the SEC years ago wisely targeted a core group of fans that support universities.
"The college market has an advantage," Battle said. "Once every four years, if not every year, there is a turnover as college graduates move into the marketplace. Every year a new crop of (high school) seniors enters college and that's a totally new market."
As the financial landscape has changed, so too has the job description of SEC athletics directors. Businessmen are a priority over ex-head football coaches, who once were automatically anointed as athletics directors. A new breed of athletics directors is exemplified at Georgia, where 37-year-old Damon Evans says his business background is important to manage a $78 million athletic budget and cut deals.
"I do believe the face of the athletics director and type of person is evolving and changing," said Evans, who once considered working on Wall Street.
"That's not to say individuals from a different era -- what I call the veterans -- don't have a recipe for success."

'Poorly run business'
In an analysis by The News, the SEC last fiscal year averaged $135,846 in expenses per athlete and $148,352 in revenue per athlete, for a net profit per athlete of $12,506. The SEC's net was 40 percent higher than the Big Ten, the next-closest conference.



Seven SEC schools were among the top 10 nationally in revenue per athlete, six were in the top 10 in expenses per athlete, and four were in the top 10 in net per athlete. Only Texas generated more revenue per athlete than Tennessee, Florida, LSU, Auburn, Alabama and Arkansas.
This comes at a time when the NCAA is focused on keeping the growth rate of athletic spending from exceeding the rate of higher education spending in general. Studies show athletic expenses are growing at a faster rate than athletic revenues and many athletics departments are being subsidized by universities.
For the 2006 fiscal year, 19 institutions in Division I-A football reported a profit from athletics, with an average of $4.3 million, according to Dan Fulks, an accounting professor at Transylvania University who analyzes athletic finances for the NCAA. Those 19 included many SEC schools, he said. The 99 other schools lost an average of $8.9 million.
In Division I, much of the increased expenditures are the result of large investments in facilities.
"The schools that are making money now are making more money, and the schools losing money are losing more money," Fulks said. "The gaps between the financial haves and have-nots are getting wider. It's only natural that sooner or later, you're going to hit a ceiling with revenues. You can only get so much money out of ticket sales before fans will rebel."
Lately, the haves are coming from the same circle of schools. Of the top 15 revenue-producing athletics departments in 2006-07, six are in the Big Ten, six are in the SEC, and the three others are Texas, Notre Dame and Southern California. That pool produced nine of the past 12 participants in football's national championship game.
Ridpath, the executive director of The Drake Group and an assistant professor of sport administration at Ohio University, said college athletics has become a "poorly run business.
"They don't manage the business. It's all build, build, build, more, more, more," Ridpath said. "It's not going to hurt anybody like Alabama or Auburn, but it does hurt a place like Ohio University. In theory, they are at the same level, but we're playing a game we can't win."
Three decades after he collected checks at Vanderbilt, Kramer admits he couldn't have foreseen the SEC's wallet looking quite like this.
"You have to be a little amazed at it all," he said.
jsolomon@bhamnews.com
 
That's great info. I wonder why/how the ACC's guaranteed payout is bigger.
 
Back
Top