(03-27-2015 02:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 01:35 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 11:31 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  And as I've said, this thread is focusing on small wins, while losing the conference revenue war against our two nearest geographical counterparts. Yippee.

The ACC is not losing a "Conference Revenue War".

What is happening is that you are fixated on getting the same amount of income from football as does Bama, Florida, LSU, Tennessee, Ohio State and Michigan while continually forgetting that you sell on average 125,000 fewer football tickets because your stadium is so much smaller than theirs.

The following is from the US Department of Ed website:

School Home Games, Stadium Size, Tickets To Sale FB Revenue FB Revenue Per Seat

Bama - 7 - 714,000, 102K $95 million, $128 (Actually they sold another 35K for the Chick Fil-A opener 740,000)

Michigan - 7 - 763,000, 109K $91 million, $120 a seat

LSU - 7 - 714,000, 88K $88 million, $119 a seat, (And they sold another 35K to Dallas for that opener 740,000)

Florida - 7 - 623,000, 89K, $69 million, $110 a seat

Tenn - 7 - 714,000, 102K $70 million, $98 a seat - and they did not sell out last year

FSU - 7 - 574,000, 82K, $57 million, $96 a seat (and you sold about 20K for the opener in Dallas so 594,000)

Ohio State - 7 - 735,000, 105K, $66 million, $90 a seat

Clemson - 7 - 567,000, 81K, $42 million, $74 a seat

FSU sells 125,000 fewer tickets each and every year than the biggest programs. If you made $96 at seat on those seats you would make an additional $12 million a year. That would get your football revenue up to $70 million - equal to Tennessee and Florida but still far behind Bama, LSU, and Michigan.

What you continue to spin as a "Conference" thing is a actually a function of the drawing power of your own program, your history as a girls school, the geographic location of you school in your state, and the fact that in Florida there are other things to spend money upon whereas in places like Alabama, college football is the only game in town.

The average ACC football stadium seats 50K. The average SEC and B10 football stadium seats 85K and 75K, respectively. Why should a collection of schools with half the number of alumni as the B10, and 60% of the football seats per stadium make equal money to the B10 and SEC in football on televised football? What sense does that make?

You need to be realistic.

We have pretty much sold out the last two years, so I don't think we have a drawing problem.

Maybe if our conference had more than one or two draws capable of getting a higher ticket price the revenue gap wouldn't be as big.

Or if our conference didn't force us to play one of the few teams capable of being a bigger draw on Thursday Night where we have to cut the ticket price.

Maybe if our conference had some better draws we could add some additional seats and close the gap.

Maybe it's a conference problem afterall.

So it doesn't matter that you have 20K fewer seats to sell for each home game?

Maybe it's that Clemson is located in the middle of nowhere, like VT, with little to no accommodations until you get back to Greenville/Spartanburg and after you have been twice, you don't want to go back even though it's a great atmosphere for football because the parking and getting to the stadium is PURE HELL.

Maybe it's because your ticket prices are based on the economic base of South Carolina wages and AG/Engineering graduates instead of a wealthier area and Medical/Legal graduates.

Maybe it's because Clemson is a very small football school - enrollment wise and your overall fan base is aging and growing more female - a gender not known for foolish spending on ball game tickets and sports donations.

What do you charge for your concessions at Memorial? Are you raping your fans on the cost of water and Coke? Are you selling beer? Why are you grossing $20 or so less per seat when you have a more loyal and regular fan base than FSU (by loyal I mean willing to watch the school lose and still buy tickets).

How is it that you gross less per seat than FSU while almost always hosting a nearby SEC team (SC, Auburn, Georiga, etc.)?

Maybe you should sell beer and up the price of the tickets $20 bucks a pop and see what the market will bear.

The constant theme in the FSU or Clemson ***** and moan is rooted in the fact that some of their fans look at the top of the Mt. Everest and see a dozen to 20 schools ahead of them. They don't look down and see the 100 or so below them. They forget that that the 12-20 ahead of that started the climb before them (FSU), or had far more resources to begin the climb (CU).

Bama, Ohio State, Michigan, LSU, and Tennessee, were all football powers when every student at FSU had a ******.

Clemson has remained a small student population school when it's comparative Cow-college STEMS (NC State, VT) have doubled in size over the last 30 years.

Many of these constraints are not just outside the league's ability to control, they are outside of FSU's ability to control, because you can't change history and you can't change geography.

If Clemson were located 30 minutes from Myrtle Beach, you could have a 110K stadium and easily charge $30 more per ticket. If FSU were located in Orlando instead of on the panhandle the same truism applies.

If you get a Thursday night game and you have to discount it $15 dollars you lost $1,200,000 - a drop in the bucket compared to the reality - you have 20K fewer seats, a smaller alumni base, and a smaller economic base on which to base a ticket charge.

(03-27-2015 04:08 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The constant theme in the FSU or Clemson ***** and moan is rooted in the fact that some of their fans look at the top of the Mt. Everest and see a dozen to 20 schools ahead of them. They don't look down and see the 100 or so below them. They forget that that the 12-20 ahead of that started the climb before them (FSU), or had far more resources to begin the climb (CU).

Bama, Ohio State, Michigan, LSU, and Tennessee, were all football powers when every student at FSU had a ******.

Clemson has remained a small student population school when it's comparative Cow-college STEMS (NC State, VT) have doubled in size over the last 30 years.

Many of these constraints are not just outside the league's ability to control, they are outside of FSU's ability to control, because you can't change history and you can't change geography.

If Clemson were located 30 minutes from Myrtle Beach, you could have a 110K stadium and easily charge $30 more per ticket. If FSU were located in Orlando instead of on the panhandle the same truism applies.

If you get a Thursday night game and you have to discount it $15 dollars you lost $1,200,000 - a drop in the bucket compared to the reality - you have 20K fewer seats, a smaller alumni base, and a smaller economic base on which to base a ticket charge.

Thank you for the insightful posts. Always amaze me that you get that whining but the chickens of SC routinely sold a ish load of tickets even though they weren't winning squat. Their fans didn't care. They went and supported their team regardless of wins, regardless of opponent and regardless of conference. If they can support that product over decades of losing seasons, why the hell can't two powerhouses like FSU and Clemson. Never mind, it's because the conference didn't (insert lame excuse here).

(03-27-2015 04:08 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The constant theme in the FSU or Clemson ***** and moan is rooted in the fact that some of their fans look at the top of the Mt. Everest and see a dozen to 20 schools ahead of them. They don't look down and see the 100 or so below them. They forget that that the 12-20 ahead of that started the climb before them (FSU), or had far more resources to begin the climb (CU).

Bama, Ohio State, Michigan, LSU, and Tennessee, were all football powers when every student at FSU had a ******.

Clemson has remained a small student population school when it's comparative Cow-college STEMS (NC State, VT) have doubled in size over the last 30 years.

Many of these constraints are not just outside the league's ability to control, they are outside of FSU's ability to control, because you can't change history and you can't change geography.

If Clemson were located 30 minutes from Myrtle Beach, you could have a 110K stadium and easily charge $30 more per ticket. If FSU were located in Orlando instead of on the panhandle the same truism applies.

If you get a Thursday night game and you have to discount it $15 dollars you lost $1,200,000 - a drop in the bucket compared to the reality - you have 20K fewer seats, a smaller alumni base, and a smaller economic base on which to base a ticket charge.

As usual Lumber types a whole bunch saying nothing when he could just admit that once again he's pulling stuff straight out his ass.

Let's check the logic here.......it would be better for Clemson to be in the Myrtle Beach/Conway CSA with it's 450k population base than the Greenville/Spartanburg/Anderson CSA with it's 1.5 million population base.

Lay some more of that logic on me....I need a good laugh.

(03-27-2015 04:16 PM)Indytarheel Wrote:  Thank you for the insightful posts. Always amaze me that you get that whining but the chickens of SC routinely sold a ish load of tickets even though they weren't winning squat. Their fans didn't care. They went and supported their team regardless of wins, regardless of opponent and regardless of conference. If they can support that product over decades of losing seasons, why the hell can't two powerhouses like FSU and Clemson. Never mind, it's because the conference didn't (insert lame excuse here).

South Carolina fans went to get drunk while tailgating. It was (and still somewhat is) a social event. You go to be seen.

Of course it also helped that instead of NC State, Syracuse, UNC, and Duke they get to see games against Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, and Alabama. That helps attendance by drawing the casual fan, and because they actually bring fans to games.

But yeah..totally the same comparison.

(03-27-2015 04:42 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 04:16 PM)Indytarheel Wrote:  Thank you for the insightful posts. Always amaze me that you get that whining but the chickens of SC routinely sold a ish load of tickets even though they weren't winning squat. Their fans didn't care. They went and supported their team regardless of wins, regardless of opponent and regardless of conference. If they can support that product over decades of losing seasons, why the hell can't two powerhouses like FSU and Clemson. Never mind, it's because the conference didn't (insert lame excuse here).

South Carolina fans went to get drunk while tailgating. It was (and still somewhat is) a social event. You go to be seen.

Of course it also helped that instead of NC State, Syracuse, UNC, and Duke they get to see games against Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, and Alabama. That helps attendance by drawing the casual fan, and because they actually bring fans to games.

But yeah..totally the same comparison.

What about when they were independent? They still drew pretty big crowds as bad as they were. I've never really understood the opponent driving attendance argument. I can see it to a certain extent but at the end of the day, you're either a big time support or you don't. FWIW, I'd say Clemson fits in the "big time" category.

As crappy as our Indy days were and as sorry as our conference affiliations have been, ECU still draws 40K to 50K. We drew 48K once to see us play UAB. I mean, a lot of programs would kill to draw 80K under any circumstance. I guess I'm saying be thankful for what you've got. We don't have jack squat compared to Clemson or anybody else in the ACC for that matter. Reading all the Clemsonand FSU fans bitching about money kind of makes my stomach turn. Is that all it's about now? What happened to sports being fun?

(03-27-2015 04:42 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 04:16 PM)Indytarheel Wrote:  Thank you for the insightful posts. Always amaze me that you get that whining but the chickens of SC routinely sold a ish load of tickets even though they weren't winning squat. Their fans didn't care. They went and supported their team regardless of wins, regardless of opponent and regardless of conference. If they can support that product over decades of losing seasons, why the hell can't two powerhouses like FSU and Clemson. Never mind, it's because the conference didn't (insert lame excuse here).

South Carolina fans went to get drunk while tailgating. It was (and still somewhat is) a social event. You go to be seen.

Of course it also helped that instead of NC State, Syracuse, UNC, and Duke they get to see games against Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, and Alabama. That helps attendance by drawing the casual fan, and because they actually bring fans to games.

But yeah..totally the same comparison.

No surprise that a Clem's-hen fan looks longingly at a Games-****.

Your sad.

(03-27-2015 05:00 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 04:42 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 04:16 PM)Indytarheel Wrote:  Thank you for the insightful posts. Always amaze me that you get that whining but the chickens of SC routinely sold a ish load of tickets even though they weren't winning squat. Their fans didn't care. They went and supported their team regardless of wins, regardless of opponent and regardless of conference. If they can support that product over decades of losing seasons, why the hell can't two powerhouses like FSU and Clemson. Never mind, it's because the conference didn't (insert lame excuse here).

South Carolina fans went to get drunk while tailgating. It was (and still somewhat is) a social event. You go to be seen.

Of course it also helped that instead of NC State, Syracuse, UNC, and Duke they get to see games against Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, and Alabama. That helps attendance by drawing the casual fan, and because they actually bring fans to games.

But yeah..totally the same comparison.

What about when they were independent? They still drew pretty big crowds as bad as they were. I've never really understood the opponent driving attendance argument. I can see it to a certain extent but at the end of the day, you're either a big time support or you don't. FWIW, I'd say Clemson fits in the "big time" category.

As crappy as our Indy days were and as sorry as our conference affiliations have been, ECU still draws 40K to 50K. We drew 48K once to see us play UAB. I mean, a lot of programs would kill to draw 80K under any circumstance. I guess I'm saying be thankful for what you've got. We don't have jack squat compared to Clemson or anybody else in the ACC for that matter. Reading all the Clemsonand FSU fans bitching about money kind of makes my stomach turn. Is that all it's about now? What happened to sports being fun?

It goes back to the social scene. Being located in the state capital it's where the politicians and lobbyists are. They either get a luxury box or a Cockaboose and have a party every home game Saturday. I know people who would travel an hour one way to games just to party in the Cockabooses with their group. Out of 25 or so people there maybe a quarter of them set foot inside the stadium and most of the ones who did were back at the Cockaboose by halftime.

And when they were indy they typically sold out one game a year....Georgia in the even numbered years and Clemson in the odd numbered.

And we are bitching about money because unlike the rest of our conference mates on here we know that it's going to take money to remain competitive and to reach the levels we want to reach. Unlike our basketball oriented conference mates our focus on football doesn't end when Midnight Madness starts. Unlike our newest member who shares a state with the only SEC team that doesn't care about football we share states with SEC schools where football is their priority.

(03-27-2015 05:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 05:00 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 04:42 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 04:16 PM)Indytarheel Wrote:  Thank you for the insightful posts. Always amaze me that you get that whining but the chickens of SC routinely sold a ish load of tickets even though they weren't winning squat. Their fans didn't care. They went and supported their team regardless of wins, regardless of opponent and regardless of conference. If they can support that product over decades of losing seasons, why the hell can't two powerhouses like FSU and Clemson. Never mind, it's because the conference didn't (insert lame excuse here).

South Carolina fans went to get drunk while tailgating. It was (and still somewhat is) a social event. You go to be seen.

Of course it also helped that instead of NC State, Syracuse, UNC, and Duke they get to see games against Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, and Alabama. That helps attendance by drawing the casual fan, and because they actually bring fans to games.

But yeah..totally the same comparison.

What about when they were independent? They still drew pretty big crowds as bad as they were. I've never really understood the opponent driving attendance argument. I can see it to a certain extent but at the end of the day, you're either a big time support or you don't. FWIW, I'd say Clemson fits in the "big time" category.

As crappy as our Indy days were and as sorry as our conference affiliations have been, ECU still draws 40K to 50K. We drew 48K once to see us play UAB. I mean, a lot of programs would kill to draw 80K under any circumstance. I guess I'm saying be thankful for what you've got. We don't have jack squat compared to Clemson or anybody else in the ACC for that matter. Reading all the Clemsonand FSU fans bitching about money kind of makes my stomach turn. Is that all it's about now? What happened to sports being fun?

It goes back to the social scene. Being located in the state capital it's where the politicians and lobbyists are. They either get a luxury box or a Cockaboose and have a party every home game Saturday. I know people who would travel an hour one way to games just to party in the Cockabooses with their group. Out of 25 or so people there maybe a quarter of them set foot inside the stadium and most of the ones who did were back at the Cockaboose by halftime.

And when they were indy they typically sold out one game a year....Georgia in the even numbered years and Clemson in the odd numbered.

And we are bitching about money because unlike the rest of our conference mates on here we know that it's going to take money to remain competitive and to reach the levels we want to reach. Unlike our basketball oriented conference mates our focus on football doesn't end when Midnight Madness starts. Unlike our newest member who shares a state with the only SEC team that doesn't care about football we share states with SEC schools where football is their priority.

According to ALL the ratings, they out-recruit us every year. They get ALL that SEC $ and prestige yet still lose year after year. They get ALL the quality opponents but are downsizing their stadium. **** envy is no way to live.

No wonder you hate us.

It's easier to dismiss legitimate concerns and questions as "blthch and moan" than it is to actually answer them, discuss their validity and show your avoidance of the subject is nothing more than your own ignorance.

That's for you, self proclaimed acc insider. You know who you are. And I know you're full of it.

(03-27-2015 06:48 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  It's easier to dismiss legitimate concerns and questions as "blthch and moan" than it is to actually answer them, discuss their validity and show your avoidance of the subject is nothing more than your own ignorance.

That's for you, self proclaimed acc insider. You know who you are. And I know you're full of it.

Me?

(03-27-2015 05:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 05:00 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 04:42 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 04:16 PM)Indytarheel Wrote:  Thank you for the insightful posts. Always amaze me that you get that whining but the chickens of SC routinely sold a ish load of tickets even though they weren't winning squat. Their fans didn't care. They went and supported their team regardless of wins, regardless of opponent and regardless of conference. If they can support that product over decades of losing seasons, why the hell can't two powerhouses like FSU and Clemson. Never mind, it's because the conference didn't (insert lame excuse here).

South Carolina fans went to get drunk while tailgating. It was (and still somewhat is) a social event. You go to be seen.

Of course it also helped that instead of NC State, Syracuse, UNC, and Duke they get to see games against Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, and Alabama. That helps attendance by drawing the casual fan, and because they actually bring fans to games.

But yeah..totally the same comparison.

What about when they were independent? They still drew pretty big crowds as bad as they were. I've never really understood the opponent driving attendance argument. I can see it to a certain extent but at the end of the day, you're either a big time support or you don't. FWIW, I'd say Clemson fits in the "big time" category.

As crappy as our Indy days were and as sorry as our conference affiliations have been, ECU still draws 40K to 50K. We drew 48K once to see us play UAB. I mean, a lot of programs would kill to draw 80K under any circumstance. I guess I'm saying be thankful for what you've got. We don't have jack squat compared to Clemson or anybody else in the ACC for that matter. Reading all the Clemsonand FSU fans bitching about money kind of makes my stomach turn. Is that all it's about now? What happened to sports being fun?

It goes back to the social scene. Being located in the state capital it's where the politicians and lobbyists are. They either get a luxury box or a Cockaboose and have a party every home game Saturday. I know people who would travel an hour one way to games just to party in the Cockabooses with their group. Out of 25 or so people there maybe a quarter of them set foot inside the stadium and most of the ones who did were back at the Cockaboose by halftime.

And when they were indy they typically sold out one game a year....Georgia in the even numbered years and Clemson in the odd numbered.

And we are bitching about money because unlike the rest of our conference mates on here we know that it's going to take money to remain competitive and to reach the levels we want to reach. Unlike our basketball oriented conference mates our focus on football doesn't end when Midnight Madness starts. Unlike our newest member who shares a state with the only SEC team that doesn't care about football we share states with SEC schools where football is their priority.

Ok... So what? People stay and party in the Cockabooses ( had to look that up). Even without selling out they still drew pretty well. Everywhere I've been theres a couple thousand that tailgate all game. That happens everywhere.

(03-27-2015 06:48 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  It's easier to dismiss legitimate concerns and questions as "blthch and moan" than it is to actually answer them, discuss their validity and show your avoidance of the subject is nothing more than your own ignorance.

That's for you, self proclaimed acc insider. You know who you are. And I know you're full of it.

Yet you can't seem to articulate a legitimate concern and your questions keep getting answered, but you don't like the answer. FSU needs to tend to it's own problems instead of blaming the ACC for your shortcoming.

You didn't want a 9th game - you got that.
You begged for more money to take your band and 300 officials to the ACC football title game - you got that.
You begged to add Miami - you got that.

Other than getting to play GT and Miami each year, and not having to play WF, Duke, BC, or Syracuse, what does it take to please you?

Had you been taking care of business instead of allowing old Bobby to run the program down the last 5 years, the value of ACC football would not have been down so much when the 2010 contract was being negotiated.

Take some responsibility for your own issues.

What on earth are you talking about? You're proving my point that you're full of (sh)it. You fabricated a straw man argument.

This NCAAT is doing little to close the revenue gap the SEC and Big Ten (will) have on the ACC and that gap is only likely to expand, even with the ACC routinely having NCAAT like this.

The stuff you brought up has literally nothing to do with this topic and wasn't even broached by me in this thread.

Keep moving the goal posts Marge. Keep bitching about the money that SEC schools make when if you were in the SEC you would be just another SEC school and certainly not Alabama.

You want everything your way and when you get it your way - you remain unhappy. Your "legitimate concern" about SEC or B10 money is like a 5' 10'' man's legitimate concern that he is not 6' 4", or being concerned about death. You can be concerned, but nothing is going to change the outcome. You have the best of all worlds now, you are getting 85% of what you would in the SEC or B10 but you only face one team a year that can match your talent instead of 3-4. You have a near cake-walk to the Orange Bowl most years and a great pathway to the playoff, but it's just not enough for you.

(03-27-2015 10:37 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  What on earth are you talking about? You're proving my point that you're full of (sh)it. You fabricated a straw man argument.

This NCAAT is doing little to close the revenue gap the SEC and Big Ten (will) have on the ACC and that gap is only likely to expand, even with the ACC routinely having NCAAT like this.

The stuff you brought up has literally nothing to do with this topic and wasn't even broached by me in this thread.

Why are you even commenting in this thread? This is about basketball, right?

(03-27-2015 10:57 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 10:37 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  What on earth are you talking about? You're proving my point that you're full of (sh)it. You fabricated a straw man argument.

This NCAAT is doing little to close the revenue gap the SEC and Big Ten (will) have on the ACC and that gap is only likely to expand, even with the ACC routinely having NCAAT like this.

The stuff you brought up has literally nothing to do with this topic and wasn't even broached by me in this thread.

Why are you even commenting in this thread? This is about basketball, right?

Because to Marge - everything goes back to football and conference money:

Marge Schott Online
All American
*


Posts: 4,132
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 34
I Root For: YouAreButtHurt
Location: OnTopOfDwarfMountain


Post: #73
RE: NCAA Units Earned For 2015

And as I've said, this thread is focusing on small wins, while losing the conference revenue war against our two nearest geographical counterparts. Yippee.

Update:
Number of teams remaining is in front

3 ACC (20) $32 mil or $2.13 mil/team
0 Big East (11) $17.6 mil or $1.76 mil/team
2 Big Ten (16) $25.6 mil or $1.83 mil/team
0 Big 12 (12) $19.2 mil or $1.92 mil/team
1 SEC (10) $16 mil or $1.14 mil/team
1 Pac12 (12) $19.2 mil or $1.6 mil/team

Potential remaining units and maximum possible payout
3 $36.8 mil ACC
0 $17.6 mil Big East
2 $28.8 mil Big Ten
0 $19.2 mil Big12
1 $17.6 mil SEC
1 $20.8 mil Pac12

(03-27-2015 11:46 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  Update:
Number of teams remaining is in front

3 ACC (20) $32 mil or $2.13 mil/team
0 Big East (11) $17.6 mil or $1.76 mil/team
2 Big Ten (16) $25.6 mil or $1.83 mil/team
0 Big 12 (12) $19.2 mil or $1.92 mil/team
1 SEC (10) $16 mil or $1.14 mil/team
1 Pac12 (12) $19.2 mil or $1.6 mil/team

Potential remaining units and maximum possible payout
3 $36.8 mil ACC
0 $17.6 mil Big East
2 $28.8 mil Big Ten
0 $19.2 mil Big12
1 $17.6 mil SEC
1 $20.8 mil Pac12

In a way, the above data shows why football is still king. As great a tournament as the ACC is having, it translates to only $200K per team more than the Big 12 and $300K more than the Big ten. It's better than getting less than them, but that doesn't do much to close the revenue gap.

(03-28-2015 09:33 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(03-27-2015 11:46 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  Update:
Number of teams remaining is in front

3 ACC (20) $32 mil or $2.13 mil/team
0 Big East (11) $17.6 mil or $1.76 mil/team
2 Big Ten (16) $25.6 mil or $1.83 mil/team
0 Big 12 (12) $19.2 mil or $1.92 mil/team
1 SEC (10) $16 mil or $1.14 mil/team
1 Pac12 (12) $19.2 mil or $1.6 mil/team

Potential remaining units and maximum possible payout
3 $36.8 mil ACC
0 $17.6 mil Big East
2 $28.8 mil Big Ten
0 $19.2 mil Big12
1 $17.6 mil SEC
1 $20.8 mil Pac12

In a way, the above data shows why football is still king. As great a tournament as the ACC is having, it translates to only $200K per team more than the Big 12 and $300K more than the Big ten. It's better than getting less than them, but that doesn't do much to close the revenue gap.

But there has always been a revenue gap that the conference could never make up as a conference. Again, large flagship universities with large alumni bases have huge ticket sells at huge stadiums. Lumberpack demonstrated this. It would be up to the school itself to figure a way to draw more crowds to their games.

Sure, a better media deal will make it easier. I still want to see where the extra cash equates to competing advantage on the field. Tell the Boise States of the world that they need more cash to win, because they seem to be doing fine without it. Tell Vandy, Minnesota, Indiana etc that they have totally underachieved because they haven't but that extra cash to work. Hell, FSU won i spite of this revenue disadvantage; but I guess that was blind luck. Of course it wasn't.