|
Replies: 18
| visibility 1,191
|
CU Guru [1105]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 1354
Joined: 2/20/11
|
Revenue #'s
May 30, 2012, 10:37 AM
|
|
I'm not sure if anyone has done this here yet, but I decided to waste a perfectly good morning by comparing current revenue numbers (BB and FB only) between the B12 & ACC. I included the revenues from recently added or to be added schools for each conference.
I threw out the high & low outliers (Texas, Baylor, UNC & WFU) and came up with an average revenue/team of $34.46 mil for the B12 and $33.18 mil per team for the ACC.
Use that info however you want, and I know it will change with new TV deals, but that's the most current data available. I barely passed stats, so if my math is wrong, sue me.
The only comment I'll make is WVU & TCU have combined revenues of $54.7 mil and SYR & PITT have $72.5 mil.
|
|
|
|
 |
Varsity [247]
TigerPulse: 33%
Posts: 335
Joined: 5/14/12
|
Re: Revenue #'s
May 30, 2012, 11:24 AM
|
|
nicely put. we may get a little more money in the big 12 with future tv deals, but travel costs for all of our sports would certainly negate any gains. everyone wants to get out of the big 12, while the acc has the potential to be the ELITE conference in college sports. clemson, vt, miami, and fsu have to win consistently, though. anyway, that's my two cents on a topic that is funny to discuss because clemson will NEVER join the big 12 hahahaha. it's hard to stop laughing at people that think it will actually happen. GO TIGERS!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19352]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 22266
Joined: 4/25/04
|
Re: Revenue #'s
May 30, 2012, 11:27 AM
|
|
Travel costs would increase by 1.5 million...
They would NOT negate gains from moving.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1105]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 1354
Joined: 2/20/11
|
Oklahoma
May 30, 2012, 11:45 AM
|
|
Oklahoma really skews those figures. Their revenues are nearly twenty mil. more than the next school in both conferences.
Take out the next tier of outliers (OK/Kansas & VT/Maryland) and the numbers are $33.07 mil./team ACC vs $30.91 mil./team Big 12.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [757]
TigerPulse: 72%
Posts: 1487
Joined: 5/23/12
|
I wish there were more rational people on this site....
May 30, 2012, 12:05 PM
[ in reply to Re: Revenue #'s ] |
|
The $$$$ and the common sense of a move to the Big Xii just doesn't cut it....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [79]
TigerPulse: 56%
Posts: 84
Joined: 5/27/12
|
It isn't how big UNC vs BU budgets are
May 30, 2012, 11:39 AM
|
|
Its whether or not Clemson takes advantage of available revenue strewams
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [79]
TigerPulse: 56%
Posts: 84
Joined: 5/27/12
|
It isn't how big UNC vs BU budgets are
May 30, 2012, 11:39 AM
|
|
Its whether or not Clemson takes advantage of available revenue streams
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1105]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 1354
Joined: 2/20/11
|
Re: It isn't how big UNC vs BU budgets are
May 30, 2012, 11:57 AM
|
|
CU currently has higher revenues than 70% of the teams in the Big 12.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27180]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16026
Joined: 10/13/08
|
I have to point out the error...the ACC numbers are back
May 30, 2012, 11:41 AM
|
|
loaded, so in fact they are considerably lower (in reality) than what you come up with. On average, they are about $5M per year lower, so over five years, you do the math.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1105]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 1354
Joined: 2/20/11
|
Re: I have to point out the error...the ACC numbers are back
May 30, 2012, 11:50 AM
|
|
I'm getting both the ACC & Big 12 numbers from the OPE.gov website. I assume they report to them comparable numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1105]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 1354
Joined: 2/20/11
|
Re: I have to point out the error...the ACC numbers are back
May 30, 2012, 11:55 AM
[ in reply to I have to point out the error...the ACC numbers are back ] |
|
Accoding to the OPE:
Big 12 Reporting Year = 9/1/2010 - 8/31/11
ACC Reporting Year = 7/1/2010 - 6/30/2011
Seems like a fair comparison to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27180]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16026
Joined: 10/13/08
|
Re: I have to point out the error...the ACC numbers are back
May 30, 2012, 11:56 AM
|
|
Going forward the numbers won't even be close. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [757]
TigerPulse: 72%
Posts: 1487
Joined: 5/23/12
|
Sorry, but some people can't face reality.....***
May 30, 2012, 12:06 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1895]
TigerPulse: 74%
Posts: 3258
Joined: 7/24/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23100]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 19803
Joined: 1/15/11
|
Thanks.
May 30, 2012, 11:56 AM
|
|
The conference jumping just for the sake of $$$$ crowd will not like the truth being told, But those that are interested in a move just for survival and relevancy have no problem admitting that the $$$ is almost a wash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1105]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 1354
Joined: 2/20/11
|
Relevancy vs Revenue
May 30, 2012, 12:47 PM
|
|
In the 2011 football season we defeated 3 teams with higher revenues than CU. We beat an Auburn team that brings in nearly 3 times as much as we do.
But, we also lost to 3 teams with lower revenues, so there's that to think about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1105]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 1354
Joined: 2/20/11
|
Make that 4 teams....I forgot about UNC*********
May 30, 2012, 1:01 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [79]
TigerPulse: 56%
Posts: 84
Joined: 5/27/12
|
It's beside the point. Which league grows Clemson's revenue? That is the question.***
May 30, 2012, 11:59 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [757]
TigerPulse: 72%
Posts: 1487
Joined: 5/23/12
|
Re: It's beside the point. Which league grows Clemson's revenue? That is the question.***
May 30, 2012, 12:01 PM
|
|
If you look at the demographics of the comparible areas, the ACC block has the most potential for growth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 18
| visibility 1,191
|
|
|
50
