🏈 The SEC's issue: Is bigger better?

Next years numbers are going to look crazy when it's all divided out.

Consider...

Back in 2007 our Athletic Department was generating a little less than 75MM a year. In the report published for the previous year (7-1-08 to 6-30-09) the Ath. Dept. has eclipsed 100MM for the last fiscal year for the first time in our history. (almost 104MM)

NOW...

Add the increased success, exposure and somewhere between 12-14 more million from TV alone to next years coffers?
 
I'm going to say that bigger has been better so far, but I wonder about that point when big becomes a problem. Will there come a point when the SEC has so much influence over what NCAA football does administratively, that an attempt is made to split the conference, or realign football to water it down.

Certainly the old guard of the Big 10, Notre Dame, and members of the non-BCS conferences gripe right now about a deemed unfair advantage. Most of us live in SEC country, and love the coverage we get of our teams, but do other parts of the country love it as much?

Bigger has been better, much better, so far. But there is a point when Big will be too big. Congress has nothing else to worry about but equity and fairness in FBS football.:lance:
 
If Mack Brown is locked in until 2016, what happens to Muschamp? I just don't see him waiting that long.

I don't see him waiting that long either. Muschamp is one of the hottest coordinators in the country. Anyone REALLY think he is going to wait for 6 more years? I am not one of those people.

I'm going to say that bigger has been better so far, but I wonder about that point when big becomes a problem.

It may be a slightly apples to oranges comparison in terms of the bureaucracy and structure, but it has worked out well for the NFL. As far as I can see, the bigger the better for the SEC.
 
Back
Top Bottom