GT1992
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 161
As I recall, the split occurs after expenses are deducted, so even though we share, every school is essentially encouraged to spend all the money.
Sugiura Says Bowl Game in 2015/16 "Not Going To Happen"
- Thread starter TheGridironGeek
- Start date
As I recall, the split occurs after expenses are deducted, so even though we share, every school is essentially encouraged to spend all the money.
RonJohn
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 4,996
Yes we do. If you add the actual expenses associated with going to a bowl(travel, lodging, food, absorbed tickets) and subtract that from the expenses paid by the ACC(travel and absorbed ticket costs) it comes out negative. However, there is a revenue sharing deal for the teams in the ACC. You get a portion of the TOTAL bowl revenue that the ACC earns. GT gets a 1/14 share of not only a lower level bowl, but a 1/14 share of every bowl that an ACC team is in. If teams in the ACC decline to go to bowls, it lowers the revenue of EVERY ACC team. It all has to do with accounting practices. Football teams show that they lose money on trips to bowl games, but that only counts direct costs and direct revenue. There is a better description here:
http://regressing.deadspin.com/teams-in-the-orange-bowl-dont-make-any-money-and-othe-1494130032
ClydeBrick
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 961
A program gets their split of other team's bowls whether they go bowling or not. So they best way to ensure you "make" money during bowl season is to stay home. However if everyone stays home, everyone gets nothing.
From this page:
Expense allotment = a predetermined amount of expenses, not spend all you want - we'll split what is left.
Skeptic
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 6,372
Imagine how Paul Johnson feels every Saturday.
reubenjet
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 110
- Location
- Hawkinsville
Yeah, last Saturday had to suck for him!
RonJohn
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 4,996
The article that I linked to it shows that VT accounting showed that they lost $420k going to the Orange Bowl in 2010-2011. However, only counting their share of the Orange Bowl money, they got $1.6 million. So their net profit(Orange Bowl only) was $1.2 million. For the lower tier bowls, the payout is not as high, so you might lose money. However, it is no where near as high as stated.
Skeptic
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 6,372
By focusing on profit/loss from any bowl game, the other reasons for a bowl trip are diminished or ignored, and with those considered the "loss" might better be seen as an investment, oversimplifying, kind of a grocery store loss leader to get folks into the aisles, or perhaps more apt, newspaper circulation that costs money but results in higher ad rates.
Increased admission requests, and I have never seen any bowl year in which the following class was not higher in applications than the previous, and from that the increased revenue from out-of-state students, for instance (hey, college is a business, seriously, and professors are sometimes rated on how many students register for their classes, particularly the el cheapo summer courses, which are essentially all profit), TV exposure and revenue, both at the game and the following season, as in GT starting out in 2015 to fizzle with the losses; and the reward factor, not just for the players where all the focus is, but the band and cheerleaders, pom pom squads, etc., which work and rehearse so hard all season, and various staff positions that get little notice.
Unfortunately-- in my opinion -- it also extends to unseemly large numbers of administrators and hangers on who never show up at a game but get a free bowl trip and all the parties. My view is no-shows when "their" team is battling for titles should be banned from celebrating, or they can do it at home. Then of course there is recruiting, itself a subjective measurement maybe, but it doesn't take much to convince me that Tech's '14 success and the OB mashup helped immensely to eliminate any defections from the spring's recruiting class.
I am not arguing that a deficit of $400,000 for a bowl is insignificant. Just that you cannot make that the litmus test. In that event, no decision is necessary at all: lose money, stay home. Next problem.
RonJohn
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 4,996
The point I was trying to make is that the "significant loses" are the only effect of creative accounting. VT showed a $420k loss, however going by their share of the Orange Bowl alone, they had a $1.2 million profit. If you go to the Sun Bowl, the share of the revenue is only about $140,000, so it would not cover a $420,000 deficit. However, if you don't go, every team in the ACC would lose the $140,000 that they would have gained had the team had gone. If three ACC teams decided not to go, you would lose more revenue than your loss for attending a low tier bowl.
As you pointed out, there are many advantages to going to a bowl game. The coaches would probably be willing to spend $400k to have an extra three weeks of practice. I have seen basketball teams decide not to go to a lower level basketball tournament, but I don't recall teams declining bowl games except for instances where they sit out to try to avoid NCAA sanctions later.
Supersizethatorder-mutt
Banned
- Messages
- 13,443
- Location
- Augusta, GA
There are a few others who agree with you, but I like him just the way he is. Some of his articles this Fall have been very, very good, and he has proven he can cover the Jackets in a positive and factual manner without being a cheerleader. I like and respect him for that.
swampsting
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,868
If he did, he'd get pulled off the beat immediately.
Skeptic
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 6,372
The point about additional practices might be the best single reasons coaches like bowls. Even ahead of bonuses as hard as that is to believe. But it does give extra reps to the underclassmen while sliding the seniors out the door.