(12-29-2019 04:25 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(12-28-2019 05:46 PM)Indytarheel Wrote:  

(12-28-2019 10:33 AM)Hallcity Wrote:  So, what are these other schools doing with all that money? Building great teams in other sports? Supporting academic programs? Paying humongous salaries to administrators? Whatever they’re doing seems to have no visible effect. Their athletic programs aren’t more successful. Are we sure those numbers were compiled in the same way? How do we tell how much TV revenue Clemson football received from the ACC? I’ve never seen any breakdown of football versus basketball conference revenue

Why ask the questions? It is the same thing over and over again; yet, it is very interesting they never seem to be able to explain why the shortfall doesn't effect the outcome on the field. They have yet to demonstrate a correlation between success on the field versus TV revenue dollars etc. Hell, prior to Bowden retirement, if I am not mistaken, FSU nor Miami never brought in the cash compared to UF. Yet, FSU and Miami have more success on the football field than UF. Maybe it is something I am missing.

If you have $50 million dollars, and that's what's needed to field a competitive football team, what happens if the other guy has $100 million? If he plates the weights in the gym with gold, will that make his players play better? If the players he recruits can't take any of that gold home with them, will he sign better players?

Whatever Clemson has, it's obviously enough. Why do you need more than enough?

Short sighted, but not surprising coming from one of the biggest #goacc fanboys on the board.


We are competitive now. What happens when the schools with the excess revenue push the price of being competitive beyond our reach and we are partially handicapped by the ACC holding us back due to not being competitive in revenue with our peer conferences?