Monthly Archives: June 2019

If only they handed out championships for making money.

AirForceDawg has done his annual dive into the financial information available at the U.S. Department of Education’s Equity in Athletics Data Analysis (EADA) website and come up with the numbers for the fourteen SEC schools for the most current fiscal year.  (For year-over-year comparison purposes, you might want to review last year’s post on the subject.)

If you’re wondering whether Georgia did okay, well, judge for yourself.

– Revenues: $176,699,894
– Expenses: $124,029,698
– Profit: $52,670,196

– Men’s Teams
— Revenue: $142,260,691
— Expenses: $61,790,672
— Profit: $80,470,019

– Women’s Teams
— Revenue: $4,704,781
— Expenses: $19,328,309
— Losses: -$14,623,528

– Football
— Revenue: $129,023,591
— Expenses: $44,909,546
— Profit: $84,114,045

– Men’s Basketball
— Revenue: $10,252,418
— Expenses: $8,539,387
— Profit: $1,713,031

Overall athletic department revenue is up and so is the net profit. The real eye-opener is football profit, which increased from $56,947,313 in fiscal year 2017 to an astounding $84,114,045.  Doing the math, it appears that almost $32 million of that figure went into subsidizing other programs besides men’s basketball and, of course, general administrative expenses.

The comparison with Georgia’s thirteen SEC peers is quite remarkable, as well.

1. Georgia: $176,699,894 Revenue, $124,029,698 Expenses, $52,670,196 Profit
2. Alabama: $181,470,156 Revenue, $149,583,715 Expenses, $31,886,441 Profit
3. Auburn: $147,620,572 Revenue, $132,354,047 Expenses, $15,266,525 Profit
4. Mississippi State: $93,752,613 Revenue, $83,560,214 Expenses, $10,192,399 Profit
5. Texas A&M: $152,971,142 Revenue, $143,231,483 Expenses, $9,739,659 Profit
6. LSU: $145,422,795 Revenue, $137,451,522 Expenses, $7,971,273 Profit
7. Vanderbilt: $80,093,541 Revenue, $74,070,975 Expenses, $6,022,566 Profit
8. Arkansas: $132,545,645 Revenue, $130,595,275 Expenses, $1,950,370 Profit
9. Kentucky: $125,462,485 Revenue, $125,236,165, $226,320 Profit
10. South Carolina: $140,084,150 Revenue, $139,972,480 Expenses, $111,670 Profit
T11. Florida: $157,240,476 Revenue, $157,240,476 Expenses, $0 Profit
T11. Tennessee: $142,686,084 Revenue, $142,686,084 Expenses, $0 Profit
T11. Ole Miss: $99,157,535 Revenue, $99,157,535 Expenses, $0 Profit
T11. Missouri: $93,744,322 Revenue, $93,744,322 Expenses, $0 Profit

When you add it up, the total profit the other 13 schools racked up totaled $83,267,223, an average of $6,405,171.  As a percentage, Georgia’s profit alone comprised 38.75% of the SEC’s total profit.  Yowza!

Believe it or not, I mention this not as a lead in to a rant about player exploitation, but simply to note that you’d think with all that money available, Greg McGarity could pilot an athletic department to a more robust result in the NACDA Learfield Directors’ Cup than a mediocre 25th-place finish [Ed. note:  current showing, pending baseball results] overall and sixth best in the SEC.  But that would mean caring as much about general athletic excellence as the reserve account balance, and that’s not how the Georgia Way is wired.

I keep coming back to this quote from McGarity when he was hired.

McGarity, who played and coached tennis at Georgia and worked in its athletic administration before leaving for Florida, said “there is nothing greater than being part of championships. That’s why we do what we do.

“At the end of the day,” he continued, “all the time you put in at the office, the fun comes when you’re competing for championships and you see what these coaches have done over a number of years to finally get to the top of the mountain and you’re able to be just a small piece of that.”

You having fun yet, Georgia fans?

We may not have the athletic director we want, but we do have the athletic director the powers that be think we deserve.

37 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football, It's Just Bidness

A gap to bridge

I picked up my copy of Phil Steele’s 2019 Football Preview yesterday and I’ll have more to say about it tomorrow.  One thing I have to note is that, while Steele is certainly complimentary about the Dawgs — he has Georgia third in his power ratings and fourth in his rankings after factoring in scheduling — there’s still something of a sense of being a little underwhelmed about them.

I can think of a few reasons why Steele comes off that way, but one is because I sense the existence of a sizeable gap between Georgia and his top two teams, which are Alabama and Clemson (duh).  He’s hardly along alone in that (duh, again).  Here, for example, is Matt Hinton’s annual exercise in listing college football’s top 100 players.

It may not be definitive, but it is useful.  Check out the number of players from those three schools who make Matt’s list:

  • Alabama 13
  • Clemson 7
  • Georgia 4

It’s not that Georgia’s showing is unimpressive there.  No other SEC program has as many as four on that list.  It’s that ‘Bama and Clemson lap the field.

If you buy this as mid-June reality, Georgia’s got some player developing to do.  That’s not to say it’s an impossible task, but a task it is.

29 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football

On the road, again

I guess it’s my day for asking questions, but for those of you who advocate moving the Cocktail Party out of Jacksonville and making it just another SEC East home-and-home deal because having that extra game in Athens every other season is more advantageous for the Dawgs, doesn’t that line of thought apply equally to this?

Isn’t it just as much a disadvantage for Georgia to travel to places like Oklahoma and FSU instead of scheduling another home cupcake as it is to play in Jax?  In fact, as those games aren’t being played at neutral sites, but at opponents’ stadiums, isn’t it more of a disadvantage?  Is Kirby dumb for pursuing this approach as hard as he has?

26 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football

Human nature being what it is…

Serious question for debate here, although first I have to say that I find this hypothetical a bit of a stretch, simply because I think the NCAA will be forced to come up with something more favorable to student-athletes on the NLI front that the politicians will accept, but read this:

Isn’t it at least as likely that the California law gives state schools a recruiting advantage over every other jurisdiction in that they can offer student-athletes the opportunity to receive payments for things banned in the other 49 states?  I mean, money being money and all that, why wouldn’t that be a plus?

18 Comments

Filed under It's Just Bidness, Political Wankery, The NCAA

Nothin’ but respect

This is pretty cool.  Georgia named one of its defensive calls after Tagovailoa.

It worked pretty damned well, too.

Best part of that clip is watching Kirby sprint down the sideline like a madman, gesturing for an intentional grounding call.

6 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football, Strategery And Mechanics

Speaking of Bill Connelly…

I got a few emails this week asking if I knew where he was going.  I didn’t then, but I do now.

Good for him, of course.  I just hope Mickey doesn’t bury him behind a paywall.

9 Comments

Filed under ESPN Is The Devil, Stats Geek!

Yeah, that could be a challenge.

To reiterate something Bill Connelly posted,

The higher the number, the more likely returning production in these areas is to coincide with strong offense:

  • Receiving yards correlation: 0.324
  • Passing yards correlation: 0.234
  • Rushing yards correlation: 0.168
  • Offensive line starts correlation: 0.153  [Emphasis added.]

Life in the big city, 2019.

One set of those numbers is most definitely not like the others.

We are about to find out if Georgia really is at the “reloading, not rebuilding” stage.

73 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football, Stats Geek!

Steelemas, 2019

The preview mag hits the newsstands today.  I’ll grab a copy on my way home, but in the meantime, here’s a peek at his strength of schedule rankings.

Screenshot_2019-06-25 Twitter

That is three SEC teams in the top four, six in the top ten and nine in the top twenty.  At 51, Kentucky has the softest ranking.  Alabama clocks in at a towering 44th, but we all know Saban could use the help.  (To be fair, ‘Bama hasn’t played ‘Bama.)

Tough neighborhood.

18 Comments

Filed under Phil Steele Makes My Eyes Water, SEC Football

$405,401

Let’s hear it for Phil Fulmer:  because UT didn’t fire any coaches this fiscal year, the athletic department, flush with an operating revenue of $135.3 million, didn’t finish in the hole.

The man’s a fiscal genius.

(h/t)

9 Comments

Filed under Because Nothing Sucks Like A Big Orange, It's Just Bidness

2019 SEC Unit Rankings: Offensive Line

At And The Valley Shook, Poseur is back with another SEC unit ranking post, this time for one of our favorite spots, the offensive line.  I’ll get to his criteria in a moment, but let’s cut to the chase with his top three lines:

And because y’all asked for it, last year’s predicted rank is in parenthesis for purposes of mockery.

1. Georgia (3). There’s not much this unit couldn’t do. Georgia had the best rushing average in the conference, though some of that might have been the pair of backs they had. The Dawgs also allowed a low number of sacks, and they return a bulk of their experience. They place a player on each of the top three All-SEC teams with Andrew Thomas receiving top honors. They are pretty loaded up front.

2. Alabama (4). A trend you’ll see this year is most of the top lines last year lost a ton of talent while the bottom half of the SEC is bringing back a lot of experience, as if they were all spending last year building the lines. Bama brings back just 49 games of experience from one of the country’s best lines, but they get the Bama pass. They’ve proven they can plug and play, and Athlon placed Jedrick Wills on the first team and Alex Leatherwood on the second.

3. Missouri (1). The last of our clear top tier. They were top three in production last year and they return 77 career starts. The run blocking fell off out of nowhere, but they allowed just 2.9 sacks per 100 attempts, which is fantastic. Tre’Vour Wallace-Simms gets the first team as a reward for the line’s efforts.

His rankings are based on (1) a formula of his own devising (“I take the yards per average rush and compare their standard deviation from the SEC average. I do the same for sacks allowed per 100 pass attempts. This makes 0 perfectly average, though I multiply the score by 100 to make it easier to read. 100 is one standard deviations from SEC average.”); (2) a look at Athlon’s preseason All-SEC team for general reputation; and (3) the number of career starts returning according to Phil Steele.

With regard to the third, I don’t want to say I reject that as a significant factor entirely, but I am mindful of Bill Connelly’s assessment of returning production on the offensive line.

Returning experience on the offensive line doesn’t have nearly the statistical impact that we expect. But with more data in the bank — and a new set of tweaks to S&P+ that I’ve been unveiling at Football Study Hall — we can see there’s a little correlation.

The higher the number, the more likely returning production in these areas is to coincide with strong offense:

  • Receiving yards correlation: 0.324
  • Passing yards correlation: 0.234
  • Rushing yards correlation: 0.168
  • Offensive line starts correlation: 0.153

With more data, the offensive line correlations have begun to grow stronger, which makes sense, but the conclusion remains: continuity in the passing game matters a hell of a lot, and continuity in the run game doesn’t have as strong an impact.

So there’s that.  One reason I suspect it’s the case — and mind you, I’m pulling this straight out of my ass — is what Poseur cites as a reason for Alabama’s showing despite the low returning starts number.  Alabama recruits on the offensive line like a sumbitch and it’s got quality backups who are ready to start without missing a beat.  Granted, there are few other SEC teams who operate similarly.  Further granted, Georgia is one of those.

Anywho, with that in mind, here are a few random observations of my own:

  • Georgia is not only coming off an extremely productive 2018 season, it also brings the second-most experienced set of starters in the conference.  That’s an impressive combination.
  • Auburn is tops in returning starts, but, jeez, were those guys crappy run-blocking last season.  That’s not a good place to be in a Malzahn offense.
  • Then there’s Florida:  “They went from terrible to one of the best lines in the SEC thanks to returning 100+ career starts, a mistake I’m rectifying by promoting Auburn this season, this year’s closest comp to last year’s Gators. But they are back down to 24 career starts, less than last year’s SEC low mark of 35 for LSU, and we see what happened to the Tigers. Experience matters on the line, and Florida has almost none.”  I’m good with that.
  • He’s not high on his Tigers, and after watching the LSU spring game, I can understand why.  Granted, it’s a small and questionable sample size, but I was surprised by how unimpressive they looked, especially in comparison with some of the great o-lines they’ve had over the years.
  • Arkansas, post-Sam Pittman, isn’t a pretty sight.

What do y’all see?

4 Comments

Filed under SEC Football