Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Paul Johnson's job
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Vespidae" data-source="post: 254730" data-attributes="member: 2957"><p>I was looking at various athletic association financials and for most of them, administration support runs about 3% of the operating budget. In the case of Tech, and I am assuming it is similar at the other schools, "institutional support" is the out-of-state tuition fees waived for those student-athletes recruited from out of state. It also includes payroll and other services to administer the AA. In other words, it's pretty much zip.</p><p></p><p>The low administration support is not the problem. Tech, like other programs, separate the AA from the school and operate it as a wholly separate unit. In other words, it's pay as you go and don't come to me for help. Pretty standard.</p><p></p><p>There are three things I saw with just a casual perusal:</p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"><strong>Lack of consistency.</strong> Depending on whether you look at the AA documents, the Hill's documents, the Strategic Plan, or the Financials ... the AA mission is different in every one of them. Florida, on the other hand is clear ... to provide athletics and <em>enable the UF brand</em>. I don't know how you get alignment across Tech if every one sees the mission as different. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"><strong>Strong endowment and fundraising campaigns.</strong> The larger programs like UT, UF, Bama etc are in fund-raising mode all the time. Tech is not bad, but it's way off in terms of what other teams are doing. Todd has mentioned this, so let's see what he does here. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"><strong>Impact and use of booster programs.</strong> All the other programs mentioned the impact of a strong booster program on fund-raising for the program. Tech, as I have described before, has almost no organized booster program by comparison. </li> </ol><p>In most cases, football pays for all of the other sports, so a strong and financially-solid football program is essential. I was pleased to see that some programs provide scholarships back the the university to keep the faculty on board. That is clearly true for the SEC schools, and perhaps they are a special case because they can generate $100-125MM a year in revenue. Perhaps just looking at ACC will be more interesting. </p><p></p><p>Can Tech do this? I think we can generate additional sales to the season-ticket holders (but we are only talking $10MM or so) but the real trick is going to get a fundraising campaign underway that is significant and consistent. And a booster program. </p><p></p><p>I'll dig in more when I have time.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Vespidae, post: 254730, member: 2957"] I was looking at various athletic association financials and for most of them, administration support runs about 3% of the operating budget. In the case of Tech, and I am assuming it is similar at the other schools, "institutional support" is the out-of-state tuition fees waived for those student-athletes recruited from out of state. It also includes payroll and other services to administer the AA. In other words, it's pretty much zip. The low administration support is not the problem. Tech, like other programs, separate the AA from the school and operate it as a wholly separate unit. In other words, it's pay as you go and don't come to me for help. Pretty standard. There are three things I saw with just a casual perusal: [LIST=1] [*][B]Lack of consistency.[/B] Depending on whether you look at the AA documents, the Hill's documents, the Strategic Plan, or the Financials ... the AA mission is different in every one of them. Florida, on the other hand is clear ... to provide athletics and [I]enable the UF brand[/I]. I don't know how you get alignment across Tech if every one sees the mission as different. [*][B]Strong endowment and fundraising campaigns.[/B] The larger programs like UT, UF, Bama etc are in fund-raising mode all the time. Tech is not bad, but it's way off in terms of what other teams are doing. Todd has mentioned this, so let's see what he does here. [*][B]Impact and use of booster programs.[/B] All the other programs mentioned the impact of a strong booster program on fund-raising for the program. Tech, as I have described before, has almost no organized booster program by comparison. [/LIST] In most cases, football pays for all of the other sports, so a strong and financially-solid football program is essential. I was pleased to see that some programs provide scholarships back the the university to keep the faculty on board. That is clearly true for the SEC schools, and perhaps they are a special case because they can generate $100-125MM a year in revenue. Perhaps just looking at ACC will be more interesting. Can Tech do this? I think we can generate additional sales to the season-ticket holders (but we are only talking $10MM or so) but the real trick is going to get a fundraising campaign underway that is significant and consistent. And a booster program. I'll dig in more when I have time. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What jersey number did Joshua Nesbitt wear?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Paul Johnson's job
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top