In partnership with CBSSports.com
The place for Gamecock talk, news and information
The place for Gamecock football and recruiting talk, plus off-topic subjects.
The place for Gamecock basketball talk, news and information
The ultimate online destination for the latest scoop on Carolina's national power baseball program.
Everything from Gamecock Insider Tony Morrell, in case you missed it.
The place to read all past editions of Spurnotes
The best of the best
Buy and sell your Gamecock tickets here.
Feedback for TBS and 247Sports.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Vols are $200 million in the red.
This post was edited by COOTERUSC77 18 months ago
now that i'm finished weeping in their sorrows, i'll just say, "couldn't happen to a better bunch"
Didn't they spend $300,000,000 on Neyland recently?
Should have never forced Fulmer out.
They deserve it.
When you think how much they're paying coaches and AD's that no longer work there it's no shock. The old AD hired/fired in rapid fire fashion. If I'm not mistake they were paying 2 coaches in each major sport along with 2 AD's at the same time.
probably sheds a little light why so many coaches said "no"
I think this might possibly be sensationalizing it a bit.
Seems like they are talking 200m in facilities bond debt.
Which might be a problem given revenues vs other obligations, but probably isn't as fire as the big number suggests. At least I wouldn't think. Not bankrupt but constrained a little in what they can do.
Is a lesson though that the money is not bottomless and everything cannot be funded at the same time at the highest price point.
Also a reminder that the so-called money that is generated by athletic departments isn't all going in someone's pocket to be spent on cars and jets and fancy houses.
I don't thunk the peoe talking about the exploited athlete ever consider a lot of the realities...
Large majority of money is put back into athletics or a non profit's general fund. (and of course there is no market for these players that offers more than what they get in college).
I think if anything it would show the opposite, no? Fulmer, Kiffin, Dooley, ADs, and probably most of the staff are all living in fancy houses and flying around on jets. Yet, the University is deep in debt. Wouldn't that scenario show that the money is going into pockets and not back into the University?
If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.
UTjr is the biggest dumpster fire in the SEC.
I see where you are going with that, but seems like UT is deeply leveraged to build facilities while running department.
As usual bad phrasing by me. The money coming in, seems all to be heavily invested back into athletics with the rest going into non profit educational institutions budgets. Often scholarship funds.
You cannot really say coaches and the university are in same side of ledger. Coaches are employees, not investors.
It doesn't matter how much debt they have. It matters what their coverage ratios are.
If you are $100,000 in debt, and it cost you $10,000 a year to make your scheduled payments and you have $20,000 left over after you pay your regular bills to put toward debt service you're fine.
If you have $10,000 in debt and it costs you $1,000 a year to make your scheduled payments but you only have a $100 left over after you pay your regular bills to put toward debt service you're screwed.
Works the same way in a $100 million a year business like an SEC athletic program.
Without looking mire closely at it that doesn't really jump out at me and seems sensationalist. 200million in debt when they bring in 106million in revenue a year coupled with increasing revenues to boot doesn't seem that bad.
"Those who live in the past are cowards and losers" -- Mike Ditka
recent report by USA Today, you can type in Tennessee in search box at the bottom right
This post was edited by Knot Hole Cock 18 months ago
"The rest of the league's powerhouses might want to consider Tennessee to be a cautionary tale."
As in, you might not want to be so quick to fire your National Championship-winning coach after a bad season.
This post was edited by Kelso Red 18 months ago
There biggest problem seems to be the university is taking out an additional 7 mil a year over and above the schollies they pay for
My son's message to Obama, Clemson, and Georgia
They suspended that for the next few years, I read recently.
When you are giving away 7 million and keeping the lights on, you probably are not in that bad shape. It does seem like they were having some cash flow issues, as I read a month or so ago that their reserves have declined and they've made some cuts here and there to get things back into the black.
Very interesting article COOTERUSC. Thank you for linking it
I heard UT was so broke, they had to quit paying players.
Now that's funny, right there.
Here is an interesting follow up to the UT debt number comparing all SEC schools from 2 years ago. I was surprised we were 4th, especially since I know our number was up to $128mm by the time Hyman left. Maybe the other schools have moved up as well.
Tennessee is not in good shape, but what about everyone else?
The debt service on our 120m, is generally about 8.3 to 8.4m, with a peak year of 9.7m. USC isn't really leveraged to the hilt.
The assumption everyone seems to have, correctly or incorrectly, is that the SEC Network slash re-negotiation is going to raise 10-15 million per year.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports