Nobody said it was impossible. So you're not really proving me wrong.

Houston and rice, come on down.

(06-17-2015 08:04 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(06-16-2015 06:24 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I don't think you can just disregard Knight's contributions. He's literally paying for state of the art facilities that are helping their entire program.

And these are their budgets from 2014 backwards through 2010: $196M, $115M, $95M, $85M, $122M.

Just saw HOKIE MARK article.... FSU got $20.20...SEC schools 20.9....(2013-14) I still do not understand why you love the SEC since FSU can get SEC money from the ACC...

DO you think if FSU was in the SEC you would get more DONOR/CONTRIBUTIONS???

I don't love the sec. Quit saying stupid crap like that. I don't love the acc either. But the sec is a better geographical fit, is clearly a better football conference, makes more money per school, it's members receive the benefit of the doubt come polls/rankings/playoffs and absolutely would increase revenue from boosters and ticket sales. That's an undeniable, 100% fact.

Better games => more fan interest (both FSU and visiting) => more tickets sold => higher ticket prices/higher minimum booster contributions => more revenue

And you're talking about old revenue. Look at the 2014-15 revenue, the expected 2015-16 revenue and beyond. Oh wait, you already have. That's why you chose old data to make your point.

(06-17-2015 09:25 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 08:04 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(06-16-2015 06:24 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I don't think you can just disregard Knight's contributions. He's literally paying for state of the art facilities that are helping their entire program.

And these are their budgets from 2014 backwards through 2010: $196M, $115M, $95M, $85M, $122M.

Just saw HOKIE MARK article.... FSU got $20.20...SEC schools 20.9....(2013-14) I still do not understand why you love the SEC since FSU can get SEC money from the ACC...

DO you think if FSU was in the SEC you would get more DONOR/CONTRIBUTIONS???

I don't love the sec. Quit saying stupid crap like that. I don't love the acc either. But the sec is a better geographical fit, is clearly a better football conference, makes more money per school, it's members receive the benefit of the doubt come polls/rankings/playoffs and absolutely would increase revenue from boosters and ticket sales. That's an undeniable, 100% fact.

Better games => more fan interest (both FSU and visiting) => more tickets sold => higher ticket prices/higher minimum booster contributions => more revenue

And you're talking about old revenue. Look at the 2014-15 revenue, the expected 2015-16 revenue and beyond. Oh wait, you already have. That's why you chose old data to make your point.

All of that may be and very likely is true...but this is also an undeniable fact: FSU will never be invited to the sec. Put a flaming bag of poo on the porch of Bobby Bowden and whoever else made the decision to join the acc over the sec if you want, but complaining about it incessantly won't change it. Get over it and move on.

I'm discussing facts. It's many of the rest of you that are crying. If you don't like what I have to say, DON'T READ IT. For crying out loud.

I was asked a question. I answered it. I guess I should no longer answer questions on this site that are directed towards me because some of you are pansies and can't handle the truth and can't handle the answers.

Maybe you should get over what you perceive to be other peoples' "complaining"? Quit being a hypocrite like the rest of your lot.

(06-17-2015 09:25 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 08:04 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(06-16-2015 06:24 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I don't think you can just disregard Knight's contributions. He's literally paying for state of the art facilities that are helping their entire program.

And these are their budgets from 2014 backwards through 2010: $196M, $115M, $95M, $85M, $122M.

Just saw HOKIE MARK article.... FSU got $20.20...SEC schools 20.9....(2013-14) I still do not understand why you love the SEC since FSU can get SEC money from the ACC...

DO you think if FSU was in the SEC you would get more DONOR/CONTRIBUTIONS???

I don't love the sec. Quit saying stupid crap like that. I don't love the acc either. But the sec is a better geographical fit, is clearly a better football conference, makes more money per school, it's members receive the benefit of the doubt come polls/rankings/playoffs and absolutely would increase revenue from boosters and ticket sales. That's an undeniable, 100% fact.

Better games => more fan interest (both FSU and visiting) => more tickets sold => higher ticket prices/higher minimum booster contributions => more revenue

And you're talking about old revenue. Look at the 2014-15 revenue, the expected 2015-16 revenue and beyond. Oh wait, you already have. That's why you chose old data to make your point.

Interesting SEC LOVE.... Wonder why FSU isn't in the SEC... Also I have looked at the current data, however there is no tax return until next year for you to drool over...

I can not help it if you do not understand that the ACC made 96.2M from the CFP/Bowl season, for a 6.8M payout to every ACC team....

In the 2013 football season, having one team in the BCS resulted in a conference payout of approximately $24 million, and if you had two teams in a BCS bowl, the conference received an additional $6.3 million for the second game. So, for last season the ACC received approximately $30 million, or $2.14 million per team. This year for the ACC, the CFP will result in a payout of approximately $6 million per team. That additional $3.86 million (or probably more due to the CFP paying most of the travel expenses) pays a lot of bills.

You are correct while FSU and GT will be close to 28M and only 3M behind the SEC, Wake Forest is going to however at 22M...

I can't fix STUPID!!

(06-17-2015 08:15 AM)EvilVodka Wrote:  

(06-15-2015 04:26 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  How the hell are you listing Oregon as a medium/small- budget school? Just further proof you know nothing. I somehow forgot VT. So there you go.

Only ONE non-big budget school not named Miami has played for a national title since the early 90s. But some of you idiots think budgets don't matter.

that's a bad litmus test

TCU, Boise State, Utah, and Cincinnati all were hovering around the top 5 while the BCS was still going

It's completely possible

I think the closest may have been 2007 when Missouri and West Virginia were #1 and #2 going into the final week that year. And both lost their game. The Big Boys breathed a sigh of relief that year.

Cheers,
Neil

(06-16-2015 06:24 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  I don't think you can just disregard Knight's contributions. He's literally paying for state of the art facilities that are helping their entire program.

And these are their budgets from 2014 backwards through 2010: $196M, $115M, $95M, $85M, $122M.

That isn't what they are reporting to federal government. And the majority of the money figures given out by USA Today tend to match what those institutions reported to the OPE Equity in Athletics site.

So I remain suspicious. I remember one year K-State was the most "profitable" according to USA Today and in the Top 12 in total revenue, but what they did is that year they had just ended a capital campaign and they took the total dollars of the promised athletics contributions (that would be either paid out over several years or were legacy contributions to be given after the death of the donors) to inflate their figures with USA Today.

USA Today just takes the figures that are given to them by the institution. They do not check it against what was actually reported to the federal government and then go back to those institutions with a large discrepancy between what was reported to them versus what was on the OPE site for all to see and ask them why it so.

Then, of course, there are critical thinking skills. Which seems more likely? A program that averages 57.5K in football attendance (with a max season ticket of $520 and a minimum of $350, and club access for $1000 donation) plus less than 8K in bb attendance is making nearly as much as Ohio State and Michigan and producing $120 million in revenue as reported to USA Today? Or is it more likely they are in the range of the likes of Louisville, UNC, UVa, and SU which the OPE figures show?

I know which I think is more likely. But everyone is free to believe as they choose.

Peace,
Neil

So Oregon shouldn't get credit for large contributions made by a wealthy donor that directly benefit their AD?

(06-17-2015 09:19 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  Houston and rice, come on down.

you have finally seen the light

GT just annouced 2014-15...23.8M from ACC..... Marge Schott is correct there looks to be no 28M-30M ACC team.... I am guessing FSU probably had 25M

LINK
http://www.ajc.com/photo/sports/college/...al/pChQhW/

Hey-o.