»
Topic: Last year, SCU athletics made $22,000,000 MORE than Clemson.
Replies: 114   Last Post: Jun 28, 2012 10:41 AM by: tigertrain®
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 114  

Last year, SCU athletics made $22,000,000 MORE than Clemson.

[20]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:36 PM
 

And they spent about $22,000,000 more. They beat us in football, basketball, and baseball and played for a 3rd consecutive CWS and they dominated Nebraska in their bowl game.

WTEff about this does NOT make sense to you ACC proponents?


Increase in merchandise sales ....

[6]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:42 PM
 

from having a phallic symbol for a mascot that appeals to the gay community. The only real benefit of being a ####.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

Sometimes good things fall apart so better things can fall together.


That is a lot of queer 3-dollar bills.***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:04 PM
 



2020 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"When I was young, I was sure of many things; now there are only two things of which I am sure: one is, that I am a miserable sinner; and the other, that Christ is an all-sufficient Saviour. He is well-taught who learns these two lessons." -John Newton


Your solution is what?


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:44 PM
 

Go to the Big XII? That won't bring $22M/year more than what we get.

2020 student level member

It would help close the gap.***

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:45 PM
 




$3M? Not really.

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:47 PM
 

Especially considering the negatives (ACC buyout, half payout from B12, increased travel costs, etc.)

2020 student level member

only $3 million? hahahaha***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:48 PM
 



badge-donor-05yr.jpg

THE TIGERS ARE IN MY HEART..... BUT THE DUCKS ARE IN MY PANTS....


Prove me wrong then.

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:50 PM
 

Oh you can't because all you have are fantasy numbers from "The Dude".

2020 student level member

this has nothing to do with The Dude..


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:58 PM
 

let's see...

$23mil > $13 mil

How does that math work for you?

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

THE TIGERS ARE IN MY HEART..... BUT THE DUCKS ARE IN MY PANTS....


Link? Oh it doesn't exist. Thanks.***

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:01 PM
 



2020 student level member

Re: Link? Oh it doesn't exist. Thanks.***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 8:28 PM
 

3 mil more estimated BEFORE big12 expansion

Funny how you were the first to throw out a number. But if any one else does its fantasy.

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Ok show me your "real" numbers then.***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 8:31 PM
 



2020 student level member

Re: Ok show me your "real" numbers then.***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 8:47 PM
 

Show me yours where it's only 3 mil diff?

I've stated all along that the 20 mil forthe current 10 teams is estimated. What do you not understand about the word estimated?

How many times can I prove you wrong in one day?

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Like I said it does not exist.***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 8:50 PM
 



2020 student level member

Re: Like I said it does not exist.***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:04 PM
 

Here you go.

http://m.statesman.com/statesman/pm_21988/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=O6MRCmd6

Estimated 2.56 bil over 13 years comes out to 19.7 mil per team.

Anything else you would liked proved wrong on tonight? That's 4 already.

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


How does that prove me wrong?


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:07 PM
 

you need to go back and read.

2020 student level member

Re: How does that prove me wrong?


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:09 PM
 

Holy crap you're a mental midget. You asked me to give you a link to a nonexistent estimated big12 tv contract. I just gave it to you. That's how youre wrong. It does exist.

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Look.

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:15 PM
 

I said the monetary difference Clemson would make in the Big XII compared to the ACC would not be significant. Showing me a link that has the Big XII bringing in 19M/year from their TV deal and also mentioning the fact that WVU will not be recieving a full payment does not at all dispute that in the least.

2020 student level member

Re: Look.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:21 PM
 

That's before the renegotiation of adding Clemson and FSU and whoever else. Are you really going to act dumb and play like that deal isn't going to go way up when expansion takes place? If so, it is pointless to debate you because you're absolutely clueless.

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Re: Look.

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:23 PM
 

What value would a new member bring to the conference?
Neinas' response: “Our television partners agreed that the only new member that would enhance the Big 12 value for television was Notre Dame.”


Read more: http://newsok.com/big-12-interim-commissioner-chuck-neinas-notre-dame-the-only-school-that-would-add-tv-value/article/3688049#ixzz1z2yEZ2dR

2020 student level member

Re: Look.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:32 PM
 

FSU is a national brand. Clemson has fans all over the country. Like I said. Pointless.

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Its straight out of the guys mouth. Nice try though.***

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:40 PM
 



2020 student level member

Re: Its straight out of the guys mouth. Nice try though.***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:43 PM
 

Of. Purse he said that. What else would be say when he's trying to bend over backwards to join the conf? Besides, ND isn't going anywhere now

If you don't think fsu and Clemson bring a renegotiated contract you're demented and I'm not even going to try to argue with you. You take things and spin them your way to oblivion. Night

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Re: Look.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 11:01 PM
 

Thing is Clemson isn't going to big 12. If you want to play IF 'S then what happens when ND joins the acc?

military_donation.jpg

Here are my links

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 8:54 PM
 

ACC 17M; Big 12 19M (aided by exit fees and paying a 12 team contract to 10)

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-14/sports/os-florida-state-acc-tv-deal-0613-20120614_1_fsu-acc-budget-deficit

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/06/01/3637038/big-12-to-distribute-19-million.html

2020 student level member

Re: Here are my links


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:05 PM
 

That 19 mil is before the espn contract. That's what they're paying them this year.

Espn contract is estimated at 19.7. See above.

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Re: Here are my links


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:08 PM
 

Besides only 13 mil of that fsu got was from tv contract. want me to add in the big12 stuff outside the tv contract. You don't want me to. That would be #5.

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


When you consider the ACC is only going to pay out $13M


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:49 PM
 

per year for the next 5 years, and the rumored renegotiated contract for the Big XII is around $25M/team, we're talking an increase of $12M per year, so yeah, really.


Every deal is backloaded.

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:52 PM
 

You guys always pull out that garbage. The average amount payed per school is just that. An average that each school is payed over the length of the contract. What kind of idiot would sign a deal that pays you the same amount today and 10 years from now?

2020 student level member

John Swofford.

[4]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:53 PM
 

End of discussion.


Not in this case, no.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:54 PM
 

Try again


Big12 numbers

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:55 PM
 

Don't include:

1. Money from a championship game (and said championship game's naming rights) if they go back to 12 teams.

2. Money from the new "Champions Bowl" with the SEC

I still don't think we leave unless Florida State leaves, but if FSU goes then we have to go with them or go to the SEC (if either is an option) because the ACC deal will get renegotiated for even less.


Fact - The ACC just paid out 17 mil per team

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:24 PM
 

Fact- the SEC just paid out 20 mil.

That's prior to either conferences renegotiated deals.

B12 was released-- don't remember exactly but believe it was 19 or 20 but they admitted that # was skewed by departure of Nebraska and Missouri not getting their share and TCU/WVU will only get 1/2 for several years

Everything else is just rumored #s and speculation


Exactly.

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:27 PM
 

Its hard to argue with fantasy numbers.

2020 student level member

Dude, you're arguing that we're better off with less money.

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:29 PM
 

or at the least, we're no worse off with less money.


Re: Dude, you're arguing that we're better off with less money.

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:31 PM
 

The reason South Carolina is winning is not because of money it is because they have better coaches. Better coaches recruit the talent and actually coach up the talent.


And if we had more money, we might've gone after Chris

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:33 PM
 

Peterson or someone better than Dabo but we couldn't b/c we still have to pay TB and there wasn't enough to go around.


Wrong.

[3]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:33 PM
 

Moving to the Big XII would not provide a significant increase to the money we bring in. Making $4M/year more while paying a $20M exit fee and having a half payout from the conference for years, while also paying more for travel will not bring us any closer to USCe. That is all.

You guys act like the Big XII is a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.

2020 student level member

Short term, its not a pot of gold but long term, it is...


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:45 PM
 

more so than the ACC.


And here comes the rumor and speculation.

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:52 PM
 

How much money they get depends on how well they play. Just like the ACC. To me looking at the ACC I see a lot of programs that have been good in the past, but down recently (Clemson, Miami, FSU, even UMD/UVA/BC to a lesser extent). In the Big XII I see Texas, Oklahoma and a bunch of teams that have been playing above where they historically have been.

To me I believe that an ACC at its peak is worth more than the Big XII at its peak.

2020 student level member

You might be the only 1 and what scares me is that


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:01 PM
 

the selection committee will be made up of people NOT like you.


You are misunderstanding.

[3]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:05 PM
 

I said I am not convinced that the Big XII teams will sustain success. I also believe that the teams that have been better historically in the ACC will improve. The selection committee does not factor into that at all.

2020 student level member

Re: You are misunderstanding.

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 7:59 PM
 

Agreed. People on here make the Big 12 out to be a super conference because they had a great season in 2011. There were a few teams that have had limited success, teams with no success, and a few national teams. You have Texas and Oklahoma at the top. OSU has had 4 good recent years and have historically not been too good, Texas Tech has been historically mediocre, KSU has had 0 success outside Bill Snyder, Kansas, Baylor, Iowa State have always been garbage, TCU and WVU have been pretty good over the past decade.


Travel expenses alone will eat up $3mil.

[3]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:37 PM
 

It's one thing sending the football team to Norman to play the Sooners on national TV. It quite another to send the volleyball squad to Ames, Iowa, to play for 12 people and no gate.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Travel expenses alone will eat up $3mil.

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:44 PM
 

Also, the $20MM v. $17MM does not consider the fact that Big 12 teams are required to invest in their network which is like $4MM. The ACC doesn't require this and also reimburses its teams for championship/tournament expenses in all sports. The $3MM gap that some of the media are talking about is not really intellectually honest.


My solution is better than your solution which is

[6]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:46 PM
 

"do nothing and hope things work out for us."


My solution is "quit whining and win more games".

[3]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:48 PM
 

Last time I checked recruits play the game. I don't see them asking for bank statements before committing.

2020 student level member

They don't ask for bank statements. They just ask to see


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:52 PM
 

the facilities and the TVs and video games and such.

Just win? With inferior talent? That doesn't happen in football as often as you think.


So we don't have good facilities?***

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:01 PM
 



2020 student level member

Not as good as Sakerlina's and that will only get worse as


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:04 PM
 

they continue to spend that horrible revenue you seem to hate so much.


What? That's why they recruit so much better then right?***

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:05 PM
 



2020 student level member

Have you seen their current ranking vs ours right now

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:11 PM
 

despite us having the #1 player? Do you realize we lost out on Gilmore, Lattimore and Holloman to them recently?

do you realize that by them playing better competition in their confernece, that they've gotten better OOC?

While you continue to try and point out why moving woudl be a bad idea, which you haven't proven, you've given no facts to support your claim that staying is better and will help us.


What? They are not recruiting better than us.

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:12 PM
 

http://insider.espn.go.com/college-sports/football/recruiting/classrankings?&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fcollege-football%2frecruiting%2fclassrankings

2020 student level member

Look at Rivals. They're ranked higher. Scoutt too I think.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:23 PM
 

But you bring up a good point. If they're not out-recruiting us, maybe they're just getting better by playing tougher competition than we play in the ACC.

And they got Lattimore, we didn't. They got Holloman, we didn't. They got Gilmore, we didn't. And they got James Davis's brother when we were in need of a RB.


Latty grew up a coot, Hollowman and Gilmore decommitted from

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:07 PM
 

us cuz our coach got fired. Clowny grew up a coot. All the above examples are not the norm.


we got Nuk, they didn't, we got Peake they didn't, we got

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 11:16 PM
 

Townsend they didn't. O and Bowers and Sapp

military_donation.jpg

Re: What? They are not recruiting better than us.

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:44 PM
 

ESPN's recruiting rankings are the ONLY recruiting ranking source where USC is not ranked better than CU. ESPN has gotten better with their recruiting evaluations - at one time they were below even Scout.com, which is really saying something - but Rivals and 24/7Sports are still considered more comprehensive, and they rank USC's class higher right now, if only because USC's class currently has more commitments....


And clearly we can't recruit.***

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:46 PM
 



badge-donor-05yr.jpg

The West End Zone helps. But if we had more money,


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:14 PM
 

we could've gottten it built earlier.


Honest question...


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:54 PM
 

Why are you so opposed to Clemson changing conferences?


Moving to the Big XII would make no sense whatsoever

[3]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:00 PM
 

It would be terrible for the school and hurt our athletics programs. You guys are too concerned over a few pennies here and fail to see the big picture. Today at its worst, the ACC is still considered one of the top 5 football conferences in america. The ACC controls the entire east coast and has the potential to be the best football and basketball conference in the nation. Have the teams been great the last 10 years? no, that does not mean it will never change.

Anyway I'm just bored and doing laundry. I'm driving about 14 hours over the next few days so I'm just relaxing at home now.

2020 student level member

Few pennies? And let's be honest, we're not Top 5.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:03 PM
 

We're #5 and the gap between #4 and #5 is about where the gap between #5 and #6 was a year or 2 ago. Where is #6 now?


The ACC would be considered just as good as the Pac 12 if...


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:05 PM
 

We would win our bowl games. Its simple, you win and you get respect. Thats all there is to it.

2020 student level member

Right now, we're not seen as just as good and each year


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:09 PM
 

we fal behind financially, it will get exponentially harder to "just win."

Under your scenario, we just have to win.

Under my scenario, we still just have to win but it'll be easier to just win with more money.


If if's and but's were candy and nuts...***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:11 PM
 




"A few pennies" = 1 billion pennies? Inflation stinks.***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:06 PM
 




Talk about overstatement 1 billion?***

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:11 PM
 



2020 student level member

1 billion PENNIES

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:12 PM
 

or 10 million dollars


Someone doesn't like math***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:34 PM
 




I didn't TD you.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:35 PM
 

of course 10M is still far fetched.

2020 student level member

When you include


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:51 PM
 

revenues from the Champions Bowl and a reinstated Big 12 Championship Game, I don't think it's quite as far fetched.

I've got my qualms about both sides of the issue, but I think there's money to be had in the Big12


I never said a move was necessary, unless the ACC lost other


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:06 PM
 

members.

What happens IF FSU goes to the Big 12?

I think in that case Clemson MUST go with them. Staying would hurt CLemson and it's athletic programs.


Re: I never said a move was necessary, unless the ACC lost other


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:46 PM
 

So what are you debating? I honestly doubt you could find anyone with any sense that thinks if FSU leaves then we won't be forced to leave as well.

2020 student level member

That was my question exactly. I think a lot of the pro ACC


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:53 PM
 

posters are assuming no one is leaving.

A lot of the pro Big 12 posters are assuming changes are coming and Clemson needs to be ahead of them and not get run over.

So my question for TigerStyle13 and any other pro ACC fan is "what if FSU leaves". What is your opinion then?

And before you ask, I would prefer to stay in the ACC as long as all other members stay, and a few changes are made. Otherwise, I'm open to changing conferences.


I don't think anyone is going anywhere.

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:01 PM
 

I do think though FSU leaving would make us seriously consider our options, but I don't see it happening.

If this was a conversation about going to the SEC, then I could see its merit, but the Big XII, to me is just not a solution.

2020 student level member

Maybe not but.....


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:52 PM
 

it would decrease the gap moreso than remaining in a league that is governed by a group of incompetent self-serving fascists.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

Sometimes good things fall apart so better things can fall together.


Link to that number***

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:46 PM
 




Just read Mickey's blog at the top of the main page.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:47 PM
 

And this isn't really debateable. It's not like these numbers were just made up.


Re: Last year, SCU athletics made $22,000,000 MORE than Clemson.

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:46 PM
 

We have to WIN GAMES!! It's pretty darn simple. You lose - you go home.

Don't lose games and end up in a roadside ditch.


Don't end up in a roadside ditch.***

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:47 PM
 



badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Don't end up in a roadside ditch.***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:47 PM
 

Doesn't matter. Got laid......


Of course we do. We will in the Big 12 too. But it'll be a


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:50 PM
 

lot easier to win games with better talent.

More money makes recruiting easier and if you think the kids don't know who has the most or the best video games and weight rooms and fancy things, than you'll never get it.

and before you start talking about our current class with RNk, just remember that even with him, we're still behind SCU in most recruiting polls. And they've landed the # 1 player in state the past few years.


Re: Last year, SCU athletics made $22,000,000 MORE than Clemson.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:46 PM
 

I live in South Charlotte, and frequent the ##### Sporting goods in Pineville. I can tell you for a FACT that USCe gear was NON-Existant in this store 5 years ago. Now, USCe is 45% of the available merchandise, UNC is 45% and everyone else makes up that last 10%. I don't think I actually saw ONE thing that was Clemson in the entire store.

Just goes to show that winning National championships in baseball and having some success in football will seriously pump up the merchandise sales and revenue numbers.

Sucks, but it is what it is.

-ZA


Re: Last year, SCU athletics made $22,000,000 MORE than Clemson.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:01 PM
 

Last year I was in Albany, GA for the HS girls state track team (as a bus driver). In the mall there was a sports store called "all things sec" or something like that. There was a small section for USC, but there was a display almost 2X the size of UNC Basketball gear.


Re: Last year, SCU athletics made $22,000,000 MORE than Clemson.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:49 PM
 

USCjr. gear is essentially non-existent in Atlanta.

2020 student level member

Hate to burst your bubble, but

[5]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:53 PM
 

higher revenues do not equal higher profit. Nor do high revenues reflect on the overall health (success) of a business.


Of course not but having less revenue than your competitors


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:01 PM
 

is bad, no matter how you slice it.

It's almost as if you're saying that having that money won't help us.


it won't. We can't pay the players. Unless we can get


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:31 PM
 

Steve Spurrier to coach for us and Ray Tanner to coach for us, money hasn't been the issue. It could certainly become an issue one day, when the need arises to build new facilities and pay more for coaching, but money has NOTHING to do with our current futility against the coots. They have had better coaches.

2020 white level member

Re: it won't. We can't pay the players. Unless we can get


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:56 PM
 

But the improvements at USC in facilities has also paid HUGE dividends in their recruiting success overall, too. Carolina Stadium - while not the biggest college baseball stadium - is still one of the nicest facilities for college baseball, and often draws awe-inspired comments from opposing OOC teams that play there in season or regional play. It's played a tremendous role for USC's recruiting process....almost in-step with the role the CWS successes have played. The coaching staff is top-notch in recruiting, and has for years before the stadium was built, but added with the recent successes on the diamond, Carolina Stadium was a great addition...

Then there's the Dobie Education Center: recruits for ALL the athletic programs are taken there, and are amazed. The improvements with a football players weight and training facilities, players lockerrooms, players lounge, etc. has also generated positive results. The improvements of the Farmer's Market parking areas as well as the new video board will also continue the momentum.

It all works together hand-in-hand...


none of those upgrades are a result of newly negotiated TV


Posted: Jun 28, 2012 10:41 AM
 

contracts. All of those things have been in the pipeline a long time. Yes, it is better to have money than to not have money. Clemson has not gotten beaten to date by money or facilities. Clemson has lost because USC has better coaching.

Money may make a difference in the future, but it has had nothing to do with your coots current success. Congrats for hiring two great coaches in Spurrier and Tanner, but neither came to USC for money. Spurrier could have taken USC for a lot more $ if he wanted to. He should, now that you coots feel you have so much of it.

2020 white level member

They've had better coaches cuz they have money to pay


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 7:35 PM
 

them. We hired Dabo in part b/c of how expensive TB was to us and paying TB off after paying Tommy West off, etc... played a huge part in why we hired Dabo instead of going after a proven winner.


spurrier is coaching for them out of charity and ego, not $


Posted: Jun 28, 2012 10:35 AM
 

He could have made lots more somewhere else.

2020 white level member

This is true.....


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:34 PM
 

but try to make a bean counter look at something other than the bottom line. :)

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Is financial profit our main goal?


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:06 PM
 

If we have more revenue to pay higher quality coaches (and give raises to keep good ones), which will increase our costs (lower profits), sounds like a good thing!

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

If those numbers are accurate, don't want to hear a word . .


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:56 PM
 

out of William "Mr. 1000% ACC" Swinney when CootU blisters us in facilities, etc. in the next 5 years. It will be difficult for him to pipe it down, but he's aided tremendously in making our ACC bed . . .


if we win, we'll be in the championship game


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 2:58 PM
 

sorry, just wanted my chance at being obtuse.

(end of sarcasm)


Seriously, I really don't know many, if any, lifelong Clemson people (and by "people", I don't mean FANS, there's a difference) who wouldn't be willing to jump through a hundred burning hoops to get out of the ACC and away from the Tobacco Road mafia.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

money had zero to do with them beating us.***

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:07 PM
 



2020 white level member

No but perhaps toughness from playing an SEC schedule


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:32 PM
 

had a lot to do with them beating us.

We are the company we keep and we keep ACC company which in football, isn't very good, comparatively.


SEC schedule HAD NOTHING to do with it either.

[1]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:35 PM
 

ITS COACHING!!!!!!

They were in the SEC for 15 years and we were kicking their @rse. Spurrier felt sorry for them and coached them for less than he could have made elsewhere. It was pity and EGO that made Spurrier coach at USC. He is a good coach. Ray Tanner is a Great coach. Brownell should be ashamed of losing to them in basketball. Otherwise, they have had better coaching. PERIOD.

2020 white level member

Re: Last year, SCU athletics made $22,000,000 MORE than Clemson.

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:09 PM
 

Texas athletics made 120 million last year - about 60 million more than CU. They were .500 in football and did not make the baseball post season. Money isn't everything.


You can also look at Texas's recruiting classes each of the


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 3:26 PM
 

past few years. They're ALWAYS near the top of recruiting. Always.

AT the end of the day, while I might not be able to say with concrete proof that money means better recruiting, I think I can say that without money, recruiting DOES suffer.

Again, an argument to refute the ideas of those who want to leave the ACC but nothing to prove or show how/why staying would be the smart move.


Re:Do you get a trophy for recruiting?***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:01 PM
 




Some of these numbers are surprising....

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:00 PM
 

School FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 Change (2010-12)

Clemson $57.6 $58.4 $62.5 +8.5%
Florida State $48.1 $55.0 $57.9 +20.4%
Virginia $58.5 $64.7 $67.7 +15.7% '
Ohio State $118.1 $128.4 $126.5 +7.1%
Michigan $84.6 $103.9 $109.8 +29.8%
Alabama $96.2 $94.6 N/A N/A
Tennessee $100.9 $100.0 $103.3 +2.4%
West Virginia $56.0 $58.0 $58.0 +3.6%
Texas $129.9 $136.8 $153.5 +18.2%

By the numbers:
WVU should never beat Clemson
Alabama should never beat Tennessee
Clemson should never beat UVA
Texas should never lose, ever.

Also:
Conference by conference

% INCREASE FROM 2010-12 MEDIAN BUDGET
ACC 14.60% ACC $60.5M
Big 12 12.60% Big 12 $57.8M
Big East 11.20% Big East $62.0M
Big Ten 10.10% Big Ten $78.8M
Pac-12 9.10% Pac-12 $55.8M
SEC 8.40% SEC $90.3M

* Projections were used for schools whose 2012 budget has not yet been approved.


Information from:
Athletic budgets continue to climb
By Michael Smith, Staff Writer

Published August 22, 2011

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

"I've played multiple sports and would bet any amount that I'm still more athletic than you at this present time...."


Those were athletic budgets by the way.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:02 PM
 

Also, it didn't cut and paste well, but I think you will get the idea.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

"I've played multiple sports and would bet any amount that I'm still more athletic than you at this present time...."


Re: The Eleventh Commandment: Thou shall make a


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 4:03 PM
 

profit. And you darn sure had better know how to invest the net.


Re: The Eleventh Commandment: Thou shall make a


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 10:02 PM
 

Profit means nothing in college athletics - you want to spend every dime so you have the best coaches and facilities you can get. Now you don't want your program to run a deficit, but you certainly don't want to try and maximize profit. If an AD is not spending money to make the program better, then he is an AD who will soon be out of a job.


Re: Last year, SCU athletics made $22,000,000 MORE than Clemson.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 5:06 PM
 

You're just banging your head against the wall. They won't listen. They're all a bunch of dainty Donnie Munson's tapping away at their keyboard and trying not to spill their Zima.


If I was South Carolina's Governor,


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 7:38 PM
 

I'd be really pissed about throwing $22 million down a rat hole.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

You're one big excuse. USC has always out spent us.***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 9:42 PM
 



2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Re: You're one big excuse. USC has always out spent us.***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 10:08 PM
 

Joseph, I don't think that is true. Wasn't IPTAY the difference maker up until the 90's, essentially making Clemson's athletic department rich by comparison to other schools?

I recall a recent quote from Swofford and he said that football and basketball revenue were about 50/50 up until the 90's and then TV revenue for football changed drastically and that is when booster club revenue became a smaller percentage of the revenue pie. Football TV money for the SEC has been the difference for SCAR in the last 10 years.


Pretty sure they have always raised more and spent more.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 10:22 PM
 

Only when we lose does it become an issue.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


12M MORE than Clemson.was from contributions


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 10:40 PM
 

Are you sending more? I am.

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

Orange Googlers Unite

Save Tigernet--Boot the coots(you know who I mean).


Re: Last year, SCU athletics made $22,000,000 MORE than Clemson.


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 10:47 PM
 

Yeah but they saved about ten million by using the Whitney instead of athletic dorms


lol!***


Posted: Jun 27, 2012 10:49 PM
 



2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


If I can make an observation about this 100+ post thread....

[2]
Posted: Jun 27, 2012 10:54 PM
 

over 100 replies and this is almost like a normal discussion----people using facts and strong opinion to back up their assertions. No nastiness to speak of, and some occasional "good point" references!

Congratulations to all who are participating!!

And I think its due to two things.......no chickentrolls and no blue_caddy

That speaks volumes

2020 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Replies: 114  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: SEASON TICKETS FOR SALE IN THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS, ALL IN THE LOWER DECK, SOUTH STANDS (HOME) S...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
4994 people have read this post