Cajuns #39 in BCS

[Cajun90]

it sucks we have to share th emoney, at least the no bowl presents us the chance to break even...which is better than losing money.

and we have a winner. From a monetary standpoint the disparity for college bowls is incredible. When UConn lost money going to the Fiesta bowl I had to scratch my head a bit. I started doing some research and was amazed at who really makes the money in bowl games. Lets just say you can't get a much better gig than being the commissioner for a bowl game.

The SEC schools make money because they will usually have at least three schools in BCS games with revenue sharing approaching 58 million. Toss in another half-dozen SEC schools in bowls that can at least break even and in some cases bring a few bucks back to the conference office and the revenue sharing isn't bad. Big 12, PAC, Big 10, ACC can meet with some revenue success as well but they have also had numerous looks at some red ink on that bottom line.

For the rest of college football it is usually a very different story from the likes of the SEC.

A large percentage of schools with bowl teams will say " it is a reward to the student athletes for a great season". Another words this is gonna cost us. With a budget as tight as ours the last thing we need is a "reward" in Detroit, Michigan; Boise, Idaho; or any other such destinations.

From a revenue perspective it just doesn't get much better than New Orleans right now and that isn't to say we are bringing home a wad of cash but at least we didn't lose our shirt.

[moorecajun]

I've heard most conferences share bowl revenue. Dont' think that would change if we went ot CUSA and had to subsidize schools losing a ton of money going to Hawaii.

But at this point, the only bowl/team that made any money during bowl season (SBC) was us; there really needs to be a caveat in the distribution of funds until everybody (SBC bowl teams) is chipping in, and chipping in positively.

And our bowl expenses need to go up.

[moorecajun]

Let's share our revenue with the conference teams that share in our desire to be called "Louisiana"!

[GeauxCajuns]

and we have a winner. From a monetary standpoint the disparity for college bowls is incredible. When UConn lost money going to the Fiesta bowl I had to scratch my head a bit. I started doing some research and was amazed at who really makes the money in bowl games. Lets just say you can't get a much better gig than being the commissioner for a bowl game.

The SEC schools make money because they will usually have at least three schools in BCS games with revenue sharing approaching 58 million. Toss in another half-dozen SEC schools in bowls that can at least break even and in some cases bring a few bucks back to the conference office and the revenue sharing isn't bad. Big 12, PAC, Big 10, ACC can meet with some revenue success as well but they have also had numerous looks at some red ink on that bottom line.

For the rest of college football it is usually a very different story from the likes of the SEC.

A large percentage of schools with bowl teams will say " it is a reward to the student athletes for a great season". Another words this is gonna cost us. With a budget as tight as ours the last thing we need is a "reward" in Detroit, Michigan; Boise, Idaho; or any other such destinations.

From a revenue perspective it just doesn't get much better than New Orleans right now and that isn't to say we are bringing home a wad of cash but at least we didn't lose our shirt.

I agree with most of this, but, the SEC can only send two teams to BCS games and that includes the National Championship Game

[BananaHammock]

I don't see any other invitation coming at this point, UL will indeed take the NO Bowl invite. But let's make this clear and Jay alluded to this another thread, UL did not make any money off the NO Bowl last season. Once the SBC presidents voted to share the bowl revenue, and UL covered expenses there was little if any revenue left to pocket. I don't have those numbers in front of me now, but I was given them back in the spring. We aren't going to the NO Bowl because we are making money, but because its our only option at this time.

Well covering our expenses is way better than going to another more "prestigious" bowl game and losing money at this point for our program. Just my opinion.

P.S. thanks for clarifying the money situation as I was wrong in a previous post.

[Boomer]

Anybody know where we could get the money (Income/expenses/distribution of funds left over from the Bowl to UL after expenses and proportional amounts) report??? I just wonder if the Bowl pays for the rings and just what other things like parties etc.!!!If I am correct the conference only started splitting funds last year---correct???

[Cajun90]

I agree with most of this, but, the SEC can only send two teams to BCS games and that includes the National Championship Game

You are correct that the SEC has never sent more than two teams. My mistake. However given the correct circumstances they could send more than two. Not likely however.

[Cajun90]

Not sure about the SBC revenue sharing plan but found this for the SEC from a couple of years back. Seems like a reasonable take on revenue sharing.

*For bowl games with receipts <$1.5M, the participating school retains $925k plus travel expenses; the remainder is remitted to the SEC.

*For bowl games with receipts of $1.5M or more, but <$4M, the participating school retains $1.125M plus travel expenses; the remainder is remitted to the SEC.

*For bowl games with receipts of $4M or more, <$6M, the participating school retains $1.325M plus travel expenses; the remainder is remitted to the SEC.

*For bowl games with receipts of >$6M, the participating school retains $1.825M ($1.925M if it's the MNC); the remainder is remitted to the SEC.

All of the money that is remitted to the SEC above is pooled; the SEC and each member school get 1/13 of the pool.

[CajunEXPRESS]

The problem with the SBC is this. Only one team is pulling the wagon. The other one, or two bowls are not, and none of the non participants are. I do believe at one point each team in the SBC was responsible for a minimal number of NOLA Bowl tickets, not to sure about that. The formula changed when we blew away the NOLA Bowl. The very next season the SBC decided to take most of the money above our costs.

So in theory if UL needs to sell 12K seats to break even, then the next 12K is split between the eight football schools. Thus we are getting about .125 percent of those 12K seat revenues, and the Hoax is getting the same while spitting in our faces.

Next year it will be split by 11 teams making it even worse.

[Hammer58]

The problem with the SBC is this. Only one team is pulling the wagon. The other one, or two bowls are not, and none of the non participants are. I do believe at one point each team in the SBC was responsible for a minimal number of NOLA Bowl tickets, not to sure about that. The formula changed when we blew away the NOLA Bowl. The very next season the SBC decided to take most of the money above our costs.

So in theory if UL needs to sell 12K seats to break even, then the next 12K is split between the eight football schools. Thus we are getting about .125 percent of those 12K seat revenues, and the Hoax is getting the same while spitting in our faces.

Next year it will be split by 11 teams making it even worse.

In that case we need to get creative in our accounting and spend lavishly on our players, coaches administrators and support staff leading up to and during bowl week. That should also include lavish parties to entertain CUSA, AAC and BigXII conference officials (dream big, call it the J. Kelly Hall Memorial Bash). Also purchase any new uniforms and equipment and chalk it up to Bowl expenses. Hire a Hollywood accountant, those guys are notorious for making blockbuster movies show zero profit. Bialystock and Bloom come to mind. Leave the a Hoax and those other worthless leaches with nothing to split.