If you’re still wondering what drives the D-1 revenue train…

it’s football, baby, football.

POST-SEASON MONEY DISTRIBUTIONS

The majority of conferences receive more revenue from the BCS than from the NCAA’s Basketball Fund:

Conference	BCS (millions)	NCAA (millions)
ACC	$21.2	$18.2
Big 10	$27.2	$18.5
Big 12	$21.2	$18.9
Big East	$21.2	$24.9
Pac 10	$27.2	$16.1
SEC	$27.2	$15.6
Mtn. West	$12.8	$5.0
Mid-American	$2.6	$1.7
Sun Belt	$1.9	$2.4
C-USA	$3.3	$6.9
WAC	$4.1	$2.9

SOURCE: NCAA, SportsBusiness Daily

Note that those numbers are for postseason revenues only.  In other words, football with its piddling one-game playoff and bowls which don’t mean anything seriously outgrosses March Madness. Toss in the regular season bucks and it’s an even bigger disparity between the two major revenue sports.

Now maybe you understand why guys like Delany are so fiercely guarding their turf when it comes to restructuring the BCS.

Advertisement

Dedication

Among all the first day of spring practice stories, this is admittedly a minor one, but it’s still my favorite.

… Chris Conley was out there, which is noteworthy because the sophomore receiver was expected to miss spring practice after wrist surgery. But he was out there in a green non-contact jersey, albeit with a cast. But he caught passes, so it looks like he’s going to try to practice over the next four weeks.

It’s easy with all the other crapola we get caught up in to forget sometimes about the effort these kids devote to improving themselves, their teammates and the program.  Good on ya’, Chris.

You’ve got to break a few scheduling eggs to make that 14-school omelet.

Sad face.

The future of Georgia’s scheduled football games with Clemson in the 2013 and 2014 seasons is up in the air due to expansion in the ACC.

Athletic director Greg McGarity confirmed on Tuesday that he’s talked to Clemson athletic director Terry Don Phillips about the games.

“I don’t think Clemson knows exactly where things stand as far as expansion but we’re just trying to see the lay of the land because we know that they’re going to expand at nine games at some point in time,” McGarity said about Pittsburgh and Syracuse joining the ACC. “When that is, we’re just trying to stay ahead of it. We’ve had a few discussions on the phone about where things stand and we’re just waiting to hear back from Clemson on what their plans are in the future.”

When it comes to conference expansion, you pays your money and you makes your choice.  Speaking of paying your money, if the SEC chooses to stick with eight games, it looks like McGarity will turn a neat $500,000 profit on the deal and pick up another home cupcake game, to boot.  Win-win, people!

That’s not to say the SEC is ready to embrace an eight-game schedule quite yet.  In fact, it sounds like about what you’d expect at this point.

… Meanwhile, the SEC plans to release this week future 14-member scheduling formats for the majority of its fall and spring sports. Larry Templeton, who helps head the SEC transition committee, said football and basketball formats won’t be part of that release.

SEC baseball will remain a 30-game, 10-weekend conference schedule in 2013, meaning three opponents will be skipped rather than one, Templeton said. “I’d like a shot to talk (the coaches) into 11 weeks, but you’d have to start the conference schedule a week earlier,” he said. “The calendar for baseball is tough to start earlier.”

After two AD meetings on future football schedules, Templeton said no recommendation has been made yet for the format beyond 2012. Another AD meeting must still occur and a decision will be reached before the SEC spring meetings in late May, Templeton said.

“I think everybody has had a chance to speak and be heard and there are different opinions, so it’s been all over the map,” Templeton said.

The SEC’s policy calls for ADs to handle scheduling. But because the football discussions impact permanent opponents across divisions, the presidents will receive a recommendation from the ADs to vote on, Templeton said.

I’m sure whatever they come up with will be wonderful.  After all, everything they’ve done so far has been with us fans in mind.

Stability? What stability?

There’s a rather astounding article at Coaches By The Numbers (h/t Team Speed Kills) about turnover in the upper tier coaching ranks at D-1 schools over the past few seasons.  You can take the time to pour over the charts for the details, but these two paragraphs tell the tale:

So think about this. If you signed a scholarship to play college football at an FBS program in 2009, there is a 68% chance that you are playing for a new head coach, an 86% chance that you are playing for a new offensive coordinator, and an 88% chance that you are playing for a new defensive coordinator.

Here is one final eye-opening statistic for all the wide-eyed high school recruits getting wooed by their favorite coach or coordinator. In the last 4 years (2009-2012), only eight FBS teams (roughly 7%) have had the same head coach, offensive coordinator, and defensive coordinator for all four years from 2009-2012.  [Emphasis added.]

Wow.

Of course, the selfish question for us is whether Georgia is past the hump on coaching turnover.  The contract extensions headed Richt’s and Grantham’s way would seem to indicate that.  But, man, given those numbers CBTN compiled, I’m not sure anyone should get too comfortable.

One more thing – I used to be at least somewhat sympathetic to the proposal that student-athletes should be free to transfer in the wake of a coaching change without having to sit out a year, but after looking at this, how chaotic would it be to allow that?

And now, some good news

If there’s a KC Joyner post entitled “Why UGA won’t win SEC East”, you should probably think strongly about getting a bet down in Vegas on Georgia.

Seriously, if there’s anyone who’s used stats in poorer service to explain what goes on in the division than Joyner, I’d love to know whom.

Nick Saban doesn’t have time for Larry Scott’s shit.

Seeing as how his team just won a national title without winning the SEC, I don’t think it comes as a surprise to anyone that Nick Saban isn’t exactly enamored with the concept of a conference champs-only playoff.

But that’s because it’s all about you, SEC, not him.

“I don’t think there’s a parity in college football like there is in the NFL, where you can make a statement like that. No disrespect to any conference, but there are conferences that are in the BCS that if they played in the SEC their champion may be in fourth or fifth place. So because there’s not a parity, I don’t think it’s fair to make a statement like that.”

Honestly, there’s nothing in that quote with which I can disagree.  Except that Scott’s proposal isn’t as much about making sure the playoffs have the best field as it is making sure the wealth gets spread around.