Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Will play a game against the SWAC


ESPN is paying $1M per conference for the game

That is really sad.

Hey NEC/AEast, care to offer us an invite?

I'm guessing the slimy SWAC is behind this. I think they've been trying for years to leave the playoffs and give their own champion something to do post season.

And I can't believe ESPN offered them $1 million to do that. Of course I"m sure what happened is that the SWAC went to ESPN and said, "look if we can get the MEAC to agree to join us in this will you be interested." I doubt that it started off as ESPN's idea.

I hope some of the better programs in the MEAC do decide to leave the league.

They have not been competitive for a while, as they may not have the financial backing of many other FCS schools. The million dollar payday will be big for their conferences.

$1M divided amongst an entire conference doesn't leave all that much for an individual school....

Nevermind. Moved to What Happens To Playoffs Next Year Thread.

This was talked about a decade earlier and again the meac backed out and kept its playoff status.

Two thoughts...

1- where does Del State and South Carolina State go next?

2- Will the Patriot League offer the same deal to the Ivy League?

dbackjon wrote:ESPN is paying $1M per conference for the game

The 8,200 fans in Orlando to watch the MEAC/SWAC Challenge this year must have impressed ESPN.

Does anybody have a link to an article about this? I tried looking at the MEAC site and Googling when the thread started and couldn't find anything. Just now I tried Googling again then looking at the SWAC site and at the MEAC site again and couldn't find anything. I'll admit that I didn't spend TOO much time on it but it's certainly not something that just pops up easy to find. Not for me anyway.

JohnStOnge wrote:Does anybody have a link to an article about this? I tried looking at the MEAC site and Googling when the thread started and couldn't find anything. Just now I tried Googling again then looking at the SWAC site and at the MEAC site again and couldn't find anything. I'll admit that I didn't spend TOO much time on it but it's certainly not something that just pops up easy to find. Not for me anyway.

I think there was a link on AGS to the MEAC commissioner acknowledging it.

Bertram wrote:http://hamptonroads.com/2015/01/possibi ... me-returns

Ok that means that as of January 8 we don't really know it's going to happen. Hopefully not. The SWAC is constantly trying to drag the MEAC down into its muck. I hope the MEAC doesn't do it.

It's just a shame South Carolina State didn't get some better draws in playoff games when it had some really good teams a few years ago instead of having to do things like go play at Appalachian State during Appalachian State's zenith. That way there's a good chance we wouldn't be saying the league hasn't won a playoff game since 1999 and maybe that would impact the situation.

SuperHornet wrote:$1M divided amongst an entire conference doesn't leave all that much for an individual school....

I just checked the standings. There are 11 teams in the MEAC. If ESPN only gave the conference $1M, that comes out to less than $91K per school. Idiots!

SuperHornet wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:$1M divided amongst an entire conference doesn't leave all that much for an individual school....

I just checked the standings. There are 11 teams in the MEAC. If ESPN only gave the conference $1M, that comes out to less than $91K per school. Idiots!

And even less when you factor in that the participants usually garner a larger cut and that the MEAC office will get their customary 10-15%.

But some would argue that $1>$0 (playoffs)

DSUrocks07 wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:
I just checked the standings. There are 11 teams in the MEAC. If ESPN only gave the conference $1M, that comes out to less than $91K per school. Idiots!

And even less when you factor in that the participants usually garner a larger cut and that the MEAC office will get their customary 10-15%.

But some would argue that $1>$0 (playoffs)

If it were really all about money made or lost on athletics most colleges would not have football programs and might not have athletic programs at all.

There are only a handfull of NCAA institutions that don't lose money on football. And of course there are even fewer that don't lose money on athletics overall.

JohnStOnge wrote:

DSUrocks07 wrote: And even less when you factor in that the participants usually garner a larger cut and that the MEAC office will get their customary 10-15%.

But some would argue that $1>$0 (playoffs)

If it were really all about money made or lost on athletics most colleges would not have football programs and might not have athletic programs at all.

There are only a handfull of NCAA institutions that don't lose money on football. And of course there are even fewer that don't lose money on athletics overall.

Most of the P5 profits on football.

Most of the P5 profits on football.

From http://thedailybanter.com/2014/10/upon- ... y-schools/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;:

According to Jeff Benedict and Armen Keteyian, authors of The System: The Glory and Scandal of Big-Time College Football (2013), figures from the 2010-11 academic year show that only 22 of the 120 top-tier football programs broke even or made a profit. That means that while these big-time teams generate millions of dollars of revenue, the cost of running such programs usually exceeds that revenue.

Separate but equal?? This is ridiculous.

JohnStOnge wrote:

Most of the P5 profits on football.

From http://thedailybanter.com/2014/10/upon- ... y-schools/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;:

According to Jeff Benedict and Armen Keteyian, authors of The System: The Glory and Scandal of Big-Time College Football (2013), figures from the 2010-11 academic year show that only 22 of the 120 top-tier football programs broke even or made a profit. That means that while these big-time teams generate millions of dollars of revenue, the cost of running such programs usually exceeds that revenue.

They are wrong.

According to the Businessofcollegesports.com, during the 2009/2010 season they listed the 150 most profitable college football and basketball programs. 126 showed a profit, 64 football teams and 62 basketball. Of those 64 football, all 64 were BCS. That means for 2009/2010, 64 of 66 BCS football made a profit. 0 of 54 non BCS made a profit.
http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011 ... t-profits/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
During the that same 10'-11' season you cited, they only listed the 100 most profitable football and basketball programs, 60 were football. There were 3 non BCS in there (Utah, Boise State, and Army).
http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011 ... -programs/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011 ... -programs/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For 2013/2014,
"In 2013-14, the average FBS program generated $25.5 million in revenue, spent $15 million and netted $10.5 million."

The medians are lower at $20 million for revenue, $17.7 million for expenses and $2.6 million in net revenue.

In speaking with the college athletics administrators who prepare these numbers for the Department of Education (DOE), they tell me the DOE discourages reporting of negative numbers. The DOE’s theory is that athletic departments aren’t actually overdrawing their bank accounts, so they shouldn’t report negative numbers. So, when a program – or the athletic department as a whole – is in the red, they apply subsidies (student fees, direct support from the institution or state government) to break even or report in the black. Those subsidies are reported as revenue in this context. The programs you see breaking even are almost assuredly using subsidies to break even."
http://businessofcollegesports.com/data ... -finances/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

84 of 125, including 100% of the P5, are shown as making a profit. 34 are shown as breaking even, and only 7 shown as losing $. Assuming that 100% of those listed as breaking even are losing $$, then that would still mean 84 profitable and 41 losing $$.

Of the 65 P5 schools, by my count
62 show a at least a million profit (only Cal, Pitt, and UVA arent)
58 show at least a 3 million profit
56 show at least a 5 million profit
47 show at least a 10 million profit
33 (just over 1/2) show at least a 15 million profit.

So I understated it by saying most P5 schools profit on football. In 2013 looks like all P5 schooled profited on football.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Could not possibly care less.

kendradad wrote:ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Could not possibly care less.

No one asked you dipstick.

andy7171 wrote:Two thoughts...

1- where does Del State and South Carolina State go next?

2- Will the Patriot League offer the same deal to the Ivy League?

I don't know about DelState but it would make sense for SC State to go to either the SoCon or the Big South. Unfortunately, with their money problems, it might be a hard sell. SC State would be a good fit for the Big South, IMO.

Ibanez wrote:

andy7171 wrote:Two thoughts...

1- where does Del State and South Carolina State go next?

2- Will the Patriot League offer the same deal to the Ivy League?

I don't know about DelState but it would make sense for SC State to go to either the SoCon or the Big South. Unfortunately, with their money problems, it might be a hard sell. SC State would be a good fit for the Big South, IMO.

A&T wants into the Big South, but Liberty is blocking them.