re: Tennessee, Nebraska and Miami

quote:

---

We see this type of “wave of the hand” nod toward money by our posters way too much. My lad, money doesn’t grow on trees.. you actually have to have it, or raise it, or have a prospect of making it so you can borrow for it.

---

But once upon a time, all three understood the benefits of winning and the money it brings

quote:

---

Miami doesn’t draw significant attendance. it is a smaller private school, smaller number of alums, many who don’t much care about football because the students don’t. All schools have to live in a monetary budget, despite what many young’uns on this board believe

---

Miami's actually the prime example of what money can do.

Yep, it was small, ... when they started making the Orange Bowl and other such bowls, it was a HUGE boost to their budget. Remember, they were independent. No sharing, etc. This was before they joined the Big East, and then the ACC; and before guaranteed TV money was insane. Going to a bowl was the way to make money, and doing so as an independent made you richer than if you were in the SEC (the SEC still shared bowl earnings, so if LSU went to the Sugar, they'd get a cut. IF I remember rightly, the way it went was-
team that went got cost of travel. You take what was left over, divide it equally among every team in the conference, and I think the conference got an equal share too. And the team that went got 2 shares, to everyone else's 1.)

As stated, Miami got the whole thing. So for awhile they were "wealthy".

Conference TV money blew that all away, killing a lot of incentive to do well. Now, it's about maintaining the conference image, and personal pride in the program. Florida State, and then Clemson maintained the ACC image; there's really no push to do more.