(06-15-2015 06:35 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 06:24 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(05-29-2015 10:06 AM)LSUtah Wrote:  Not bad considering the 1st year of SEC network included buying back tier 3 rights. Also really good news for Mizzou and A&M as they were fully vested as SEC members on day 1...no partial revenue sharing years 1-3. In case anyone wonders why the SEC does not have a grant of rights or exit penalty...


http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...er-schools

How much of that 31.1 million do you fans get? Anything less than 50% to the fan base is a highway robbery.

Our ticket prices and mandatory donations went up...

What a shame....disgusting state of affairs in college football.....

(06-15-2015 07:50 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 06:35 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 06:24 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(05-29-2015 10:06 AM)LSUtah Wrote:  Not bad considering the 1st year of SEC network included buying back tier 3 rights. Also really good news for Mizzou and A&M as they were fully vested as SEC members on day 1...no partial revenue sharing years 1-3. In case anyone wonders why the SEC does not have a grant of rights or exit penalty...


http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...er-schools

How much of that 31.1 million do you fans get? Anything less than 50% to the fan base is a highway robbery.

Our ticket prices and mandatory donations went up...

What a shame....disgusting state of affairs in college football.....

That's why some are happy being G5 and some are not. You get what you're willing to pay for.

(06-15-2015 07:50 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 06:35 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 06:24 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(05-29-2015 10:06 AM)LSUtah Wrote:  Not bad considering the 1st year of SEC network included buying back tier 3 rights. Also really good news for Mizzou and A&M as they were fully vested as SEC members on day 1...no partial revenue sharing years 1-3. In case anyone wonders why the SEC does not have a grant of rights or exit penalty...


http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...er-schools

How much of that 31.1 million do you fans get? Anything less than 50% to the fan base is a highway robbery.

Our ticket prices and mandatory donations went up...

What a shame....disgusting state of affairs in college football.....

Yup, it's becoming less and less about the game, or even the institutions. It's a real shame.

(06-15-2015 07:31 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 06:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You are thinking small, I told you already that the whole splitting of rights has to do with a bigger picture. You are looking at this with blinders and only seeing Big Ten, ESPN, Fox. I am saying there is a bigger picture and this kind of agreement ONLY happens if the big 12 is to dissolve and Fox needs more content.

If that was to happen, Fox would be willing to put up huge money to get ALL of The Big Ten's rights. ESPN will have to pay up big just to get half.

So, either look at this properly or we cannot have a conversation about this. You aren't debating me on my point, you are debating a straw man.

You do realize that just because you think something, does not make it true, right? The sooner you realize that the sooner you will have more civilized and informative discussions. That and despite your claims, there is no absolutely no precedent to back it up. that does not mean your idea has no merit, but it absolutely positively means your seeming notion that you are right and absolutely no one should question you, pretty laughable. And finally, your idea is thinking small. It escapes your grasp that by splitting in half, your best case scenario you mentioned above, is about the status quo for a one package deal. however if both are satisfied with half, like they are with the Big 12 and Pac 12, there is a sizable downside which is very real, even probably, and you are making it out as though there is zero chance it happens. And that is wrong to assume.

Sure, whatever. Thing is, you care so much that you insult me. I care so little...that I wont bother to respond in kind. You will see, eventually.

You ignore what ESPN stands to gain by the whole situation, in fact you ignore the entire situation altogether because it does not suit your argument. You wish this argument to remain focused upon some isolated situation between The Big Ten, Fox and ESPN. It's not isolated and it doesn't even happen in an isolated situation for the exact reasons you state. But hey, nevermind that, keep on insulting me and telling me that you understand when you obviously don't.

$31.1 million - how much of that money is going into football stadium or locker room upgrades, or coaches' salaries compared to every other sport?

Does the SEC give an equal share to the league office?

I'm not going to read this whole thread to see if that has been addressed.

Also, I'm reading online that the SEC had $455.8M in revenue and that $19M was withheld as bowl payouts for the participating schools? That left $336.M for the 14 schools to split evenly, equaling $31.2M/school.

But isn't that ignoring SEC expenses, like the cost of hosting non-revenue sport championships/tournaments and paying administrative salaries? Unfortunately, the sports "journalists" who report these figures are often misinformed when it comes to how the payouts actually work, and seemingly confuse "revenue" with "profit" and then pass that error onto the "payout" calculations.

So does anybody know for sure? I ask because the media always over-reports the ACC's figures because they never account for ACC expenses and the office's share.

Regardless, it doesn't change the figures too much. If the $455.8M was total revenue, and the SEC office takes an equal share, that's still $29.1M/school after taking out the same $19M for the bowl participants. And when dividing that $19M equally among the 14 schools (for comparative purposes only), it's close to $1.4M. And you wind up with $30.5M/school instead of $32.6M/school ($1.4M bowl money + $32.1M conference payout).

(06-16-2015 02:16 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Does the SEC give an equal share to the league office?

I'm not going to read this whole thread to see if that has been addressed.

Also, I'm reading online that the SEC had $455.8M in revenue and that $19M was withheld as bowl payouts for the participating schools? That left $336.M for the 14 schools to split evenly, equaling $31.2M/school.

But isn't that ignoring SEC expenses, like the cost of hosting non-revenue sport championships/tournaments and paying administrative salaries? Unfortunately, the sports "journalists" who report these figures are often misinformed when it comes to how the payouts actually work, and seemingly confuse "revenue" with "profit" and then pass that error onto the "payout" calculations.

So does anybody know for sure? I ask because the media always over-reports the ACC's figures because they never account for ACC expenses and the office's share.

Regardless, it doesn't change the figures too much. If the $455.8M was total revenue, and the SEC office takes an equal share, that's still $29.1M/school after taking out the same $19M for the bowl participants. And when dividing that $19M equally among the 14 schools (for comparative purposes only), it's close to $1.4M. And you wind up with $30.5M/school instead of $32.6M/school ($1.4M bowl money + $32.1M conference payout).

The 455.8 m was what was distributed. It's very possible that they made more, and took out the expenses. It's no lock at all what you are saying.

It was quite clearly a question, not a declaration. Thanks for not providing any information of use other than repeating what I had said in my own comment.

(06-16-2015 02:22 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(06-16-2015 02:16 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Does the SEC give an equal share to the league office?

I'm not going to read this whole thread to see if that has been addressed.

Also, I'm reading online that the SEC had $455.8M in revenue and that $19M was withheld as bowl payouts for the participating schools? That left $336.M for the 14 schools to split evenly, equaling $31.2M/school.

But isn't that ignoring SEC expenses, like the cost of hosting non-revenue sport championships/tournaments and paying administrative salaries? Unfortunately, the sports "journalists" who report these figures are often misinformed when it comes to how the payouts actually work, and seemingly confuse "revenue" with "profit" and then pass that error onto the "payout" calculations.

So does anybody know for sure? I ask because the media always over-reports the ACC's figures because they never account for ACC expenses and the office's share.

Regardless, it doesn't change the figures too much. If the $455.8M was total revenue, and the SEC office takes an equal share, that's still $29.1M/school after taking out the same $19M for the bowl participants. And when dividing that $19M equally among the 14 schools (for comparative purposes only), it's close to $1.4M. And you wind up with $30.5M/school instead of $32.6M/school ($1.4M bowl money + $32.1M conference payout).

The 455.8 m was what was distributed. It's very possible that they made more, and took out the expenses. It's no lock at all what you are saying.

Correct. The SEC issued a press release saying what was distributed.

(06-16-2015 02:16 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Does the SEC give an equal share to the league office?

I'm not going to read this whole thread to see if that has been addressed.

Also, I'm reading online that the SEC had $455.8M in revenue and that $19M was withheld as bowl payouts for the participating schools? That left $336.M for the 14 schools to split evenly, equaling $31.2M/school.

Someone (I think Bullet) stated the SEC does take an equal share. Someone else stated that certain expenses are later billed to the teams. I have no clue myself, just relaying what I remember seeing.

(06-15-2015 10:45 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 07:31 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 06:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You are thinking small, I told you already that the whole splitting of rights has to do with a bigger picture. You are looking at this with blinders and only seeing Big Ten, ESPN, Fox. I am saying there is a bigger picture and this kind of agreement ONLY happens if the big 12 is to dissolve and Fox needs more content.

If that was to happen, Fox would be willing to put up huge money to get ALL of The Big Ten's rights. ESPN will have to pay up big just to get half.

So, either look at this properly or we cannot have a conversation about this. You aren't debating me on my point, you are debating a straw man.

You do realize that just because you think something, does not make it true, right? The sooner you realize that the sooner you will have more civilized and informative discussions. That and despite your claims, there is no absolutely no precedent to back it up. that does not mean your idea has no merit, but it absolutely positively means your seeming notion that you are right and absolutely no one should question you, pretty laughable. And finally, your idea is thinking small. It escapes your grasp that by splitting in half, your best case scenario you mentioned above, is about the status quo for a one package deal. however if both are satisfied with half, like they are with the Big 12 and Pac 12, there is a sizable downside which is very real, even probably, and you are making it out as though there is zero chance it happens. And that is wrong to assume.

Sure, whatever. Thing is, you care so much that you insult me. I care so little...that I wont bother to respond in kind. You will see, eventually.

You ignore what ESPN stands to gain by the whole situation, in fact you ignore the entire situation altogether because it does not suit your argument. You wish this argument to remain focused upon some isolated situation between The Big Ten, Fox and ESPN. It's not isolated and it doesn't even happen in an isolated situation for the exact reasons you state. But hey, nevermind that, keep on insulting me and telling me that you understand when you obviously don't.

This ^^^^^^. This guy loves to insult.

(06-16-2015 02:16 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Does the SEC give an equal share to the league office?

I'm not going to read this whole thread to see if that has been addressed.

Also, I'm reading online that the SEC had $455.8M in revenue and that $19M was withheld as bowl payouts for the participating schools? That left $336.M for the 14 schools to split evenly, equaling $31.2M/school.

But isn't that ignoring SEC expenses, like the cost of hosting non-revenue sport championships/tournaments and paying administrative salaries? Unfortunately, the sports "journalists" who report these figures are often misinformed when it comes to how the payouts actually work, and seemingly confuse "revenue" with "profit" and then pass that error onto the "payout" calculations.

So does anybody know for sure? I ask because the media always over-reports the ACC's figures because they never account for ACC expenses and the office's share.

Regardless, it doesn't change the figures too much. If the $455.8M was total revenue, and the SEC office takes an equal share, that's still $29.1M/school after taking out the same $19M for the bowl participants. And when dividing that $19M equally among the 14 schools (for comparative purposes only), it's close to $1.4M. And you wind up with $30.5M/school instead of $32.6M/school ($1.4M bowl money + $32.1M conference payout).

Marge the SEC office does get an equal share, but that share is taken out prior to distributing the checks to the schools. What was reported was what was divided among the schools. Also that 15th share that was held out before the distribution goes to covering not only conference operating expenses but also the staging of the kinds of non revenue tournaments of which you speak. The SEC like almost everyone else leaves licensing, concessions, radio broadcast monies, and other such revenue enhancements to the schools and does not count any of that in distributions from the conference.