The SEC Made Bank in First Year of SECN and CFP

The return, which the conference provided Thursday in response to a request from USA TODAY Sports, also shows that SEC had $527.4 million in total revenue for a fiscal year that ended Aug. 31, 2015. That was the first fiscal year in which the conference began receiving money from the formation of the SEC Network and from the new College Football Playoff.

The total revenue figure is more than 60% greater than the SEC reported for a fiscal year ending Aug. 31, 2014.

The conference announced last spring that it would be distributing about $455.8 million to its 14 member schools — or about $31.2 million per school.

In its fiscal year ending Aug. 31, 2009, the SEC reported total revenue of just under $150 million.

Click to expand...

luvthat_TIDE said:

Let's not start talking like Texas.

Click to expand...

4Q Basket Case said:

I see your point, but also think that the purpose of a conference is to ensure the long-term prosperity of all members. It's just not the same goal as for an individual institution.

The benefit evens out over time, as all schools go through good times and lean times. True, since the inception of the conference, Alabama has provided more than it has received. But to me, that's just part of the price of greatness. Also, id be willing to bet that we've benefitted more than we've provided on the basketball side of things. I'm thinking that UK is to basketball money what we are to football money.

I don't know if it's still done similarly, but back in the days of a 10-team league, they used to divide money from each bowl into 12 shares -- the participating team got two shares, the SEC Office got one, and the other nine schools got one each. It was the only way Vandy, MSU and some others could find competitive programs.

Your point about sharing equally is valid, but I think we have only to look to UTw and the Big 12-2 to see what happens when some members are significantly more equal than others on a permanent basis.

Click to expand...

TideEngineer08 said:

I disagree, for one reason only. Well, let me say I don't care, rather than I don't agree because by definition you are right in saying it's not fair. The one reason why I don't care is, Big 12. I don't ever want the SEC to be like them in any way, and while Vanderbilt does not invest in being great like Alabama does, I value their membership in the conference and I recognize the reality that, if Alabama is going to dominate and win, someone else has to lose.

So, not fair? Correct. But in this endeavor I'd rather keep it equal instead of fair. Fair begats situations like the Big 12 cratering into a mid major league.

Click to expand...

GP for Bama said:

I hope that the universities can get a handle on this extra money so that it doesn't all just end up going into higher salaries for coaches

Click to expand...

GP for Bama said:

I hope that the universities can get a handle on this extra money so that it doesn't all just end up going into higher salaries for coaches

Click to expand...

In case you didn’t know, college athletics is big business and there’s a ton of financial hoarding going on as revenue from a variety of ventures, particularly in football, increases exponentially every year FBS-wide.

But despite statistics revealing the opposite from the overwhelming majority, there are some athletic departments that have pumped more money back into their campuses for academic purposes over the last four fiscal years than its athletic subsidies.

This is a sign, albeit a small one, of hope.

According to a recent statistical analysis and examination of financial reports by The Chronicle, only 10 athletic departments of the 40 (205 total surveyed) who reported giving money to their universities for academic purposes “gave more money back to the campus than the departments received in subsidies”, a disappointing number.

Click to expand...