NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:41 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1064 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 71  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 4:50 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 10:22 am
Posts: 1030

Quote:
The catch would be getting the NCAA to allow the SEC to have a four-team football playoff, and permanently short-circuit any hopes of a national playoff. The BCS would probably also have to allow three teams from one conference to play in the BCS.



I have oven thought the next step would be for conferences to expand and have 3 five team divisions or a total of 15 (the same as your scenerio) and posted it here too a while ago (2004 or 2005?). It would be a way for conferences to increase their revenue by increasing the # of games, markets, and potentially the conference semifinals and finals. For the SEC and Big10, this could potentially be real moneymakers considering the SEC championship game gets about $10 million.

I'm not sure how the presidents and fans would feel about scheduling though as somone pointed out when I brought this up. In the 12 team situation like in the Big12, every team plays home and away every 4 years. You play your five division opponents each year and three in the opposite division. The next year you play the other three from the other division and it repeats until playing the opposite members H and Away every 4 years.

This would be completely disrupted once you goto 3 divisions of 5 teams. You would be less of a 'conference'. I'm not sure how that would play into things though.

Of course money generally trumps all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 4:53 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 10:22 am
Posts: 1030
BTW - I like your scenerio with Pitt going to the ACC. :) As a Pitt fan, I would much rather be in the ACC than joining the Big10. JMO.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:45 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 10:32 am
Posts: 122
Location: Naperville, IL
I don't see how any BCS conference would expand to more than 12 teams since that's the optimal number in terms of being able to hold a championship game while not having to split the revenue pie among too many schools. I guess if you could add Texas and Texas A&M, that would be a large impact, but that's definitely a pie-in-the-sky scenario. In fact, I think you'd be very hard-pressed to find anyone leave any of the BCS conferences other than the Big East - the amount of additional revenue gained by moving from the Big 12 to the SEC is not going to be that much and the break-up fee is going to be significant. The exception is the Big East since their revenues are substantially lower than the other 5 BCS conferences, making the break-up fee "worth it".

That being said, the SEC would probably be able to have its own regional network already without any expansion. The Florida Gators alone would have enough leverage to get carried statewide (the addition of FSU and/or Miami wouldn't be necessary) while most of the teams would be considered the most popular teams in each of their home markets (even more so than the pro teams in that region). That's a mix that's ripe for a TV channel.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:30 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 10:22 am
Posts: 1030

Quote:
I don't see how any BCS conference would expand to more than 12 teams since that's the optimal number in terms of being able to hold a championship game while not having to split the revenue pie among too many schools. I guess if you could add Texas and Texas A&M, that would be a large impact, but that's definitely a pie-in-the-sky scenario.

Agreed. But if the SEC is considering all options - especially for a TV contract, it would be nuts not to at least talk to them. 22 million people (and the corresponding TV sets) is ALOT. Also consider that the Big12 would NEVER be able to take a SEC team. A SEC channel with the 22 million from Texas and TA&M would dwarf any channel the Big12 could put together.

Do I think it would happen - probably not - but I am sure the SEC already knows that but it's crunching the numbers.


Quote:

In fact, I think you'd be very hard-pressed to find anyone leave any of the BCS conferences other than the Big East - the amount of additional revenue gained by moving from the Big 12 to the SEC is not going to be that much and the break-up fee is going to be significant.

Agree about the BE. The BE has one small sliver of hope to entice teams from other BCS conferences to join - and it's pathway is none other than the BTN. The chances are small but it's there.

Anyway, are you sure about the Big 12 breakup? I don't know the exit fees for the Big12, is it one year's conference share (ie about $10 million?).

Consider that each school in the SEC with UTexas and A&M - with a SEC channel - would make about $7.5 million just from this channel alone. That doesn't include the increase to their TV contracts for ABC/ESPN, BB revenue, Bowl games, etc.

Would the SEC make a 'similar' amount of money without Texas and Texas A&M - sure but Texas and Texas A&M could make MORE by being in the SEC over the Big12.

Remember, the BTN is leading the race for additional revenue. Think about the money the BTN will get if they expand with RU or SU? Do you think the other conferences are going to sit by and let the Big 10 rake in huge amounts of revenue if there is a chance for those conferences to expand and get more revenue themselves?

Again, I don't think it would happen but certainly the SEC would have ALL options on the Table.

Of course the flip side to this is that the Texas and Texas A&M could consider the Pac10 or vice versa. Again, conference TV networks will change a lot about college athletics - especially if the BTN continues it's climb and gets Time Warner, Comcast, and the other major cable companies on board.


Quote:

That being said, the SEC would probably be able to have its own regional network already without any expansion. The Florida Gators alone would have enough leverage to get carried statewide (the addition of FSU and/or Miami wouldn't be necessary) while most of the teams would be considered the most popular teams in each of their home markets (even more so than the pro teams in that region). That's a mix that's ripe for a TV channel.


It's not a question as to whether the SEC could get the channel statewide in Florida - I'm sure they could. It's a question of how much they could charge - especially with FSU and a lesser extent Miami in the same state. Would an SEC channel be able to get $1.10 per channel or would they have to reduce their fees somewhat.

Pitt and ISU are the only schools inside their footprint for BTN fees. The PSU/Pitt situation is not like the FSU/UF situation in Florida. PSU is CLEARLY the statewide team. Pittsburgh is the only city in PA where Pitt obviously has more support. I don't know how the cable companies would react to the pricing in Florida.

However, IF the SEC was able to charge the $1.10 that the BTN charges in Florida, then obviously FSU wouldn't be a good option for them.

If these network channels take off, then conference expansion are going to require new markets. Again, if the Big10 is raking in huge amounts of cash - especially if TW and Comcast start showing the BTN on basic - why would other conferences sit by and why would conferences leave potential revenue sources sit out there. That makes schools that garner essentially state-wide support in large populous states expansion targets under THIS scenerio (UConn, SU, RU, etc). The NE with their populous states are obviously expansion targets. Its what the Big 10 did and what the ACC did.

IF the Big 10 wasn't interested in the 'NE' markets, then they could just cut to the chase and have perfect symmetry by letting Penn State go to the Big East and inviting Missouri and Nebraska into the league (as I posted in the Dream Conference Scenerio).

East Division - Ohio State, Michigan, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan State, Northwestern

West Division - Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Illinois,
Missouri

It makes them a 'true' midwestern conference, it gives them equal markets to what they would have now, and it perfectly balances their divisions in a way no other possible configuration could (other than doing the unthinkable and replacing Northwestern with Cincinnati). All the members would be AAU and reside in a continguous state with each other.

And it is a league that is extremely likely to happen if the Big Ten chose to pursue this make-up. However, we know why it would not.

Sorry about the rant.......


Last edited by panthersc97 on Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 2:59 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 556
Location: Dallas

Quote:

Quote:
I don't see how any BCS conference would expand to more than 12 teams since that's the optimal number in terms of being able to hold a championship game while not having to split the revenue pie among too many schools. I guess if you could add Texas and Texas A&M, that would be a large impact, but that's definitely a pie-in-the-sky scenario.

Agreed. But if the SEC is considering all options - especially for a TV contract, it would be nuts not to at least talk to them. 22 million people (and the corresponding TV sets) is ALOT. Also consider that the Big12 would NEVER be able to take a SEC team. A SEC channel with the 22 million from Texas and TA&M would dwarf any channel the Big12 could put together.

Do I think it would happen - probably not - but I am sure the SEC already knows that but it's crunching the numbers.


Agree about the BE. The BE has one small sliver of hope to entice teams from other BCS conferences to join - and it's pathway is none other than the BTN. The chances are small but it's there.

Anyway, are you sure about the Big 12 breakup? I don't know the exit fees for the Big12, is it one year's conference share (ie about $10 million?).

Consider that each school in the SEC with UTexas and A&M - with a SEC channel - would make about $7.5 million just from this channel alone. That doesn't include the increase to their TV contracts for ABC/ESPN, BB revenue, Bowl games, etc.

Would the SEC make a 'similar' amount of money without Texas and Texas A&M - sure but Texas and Texas A&M could make MORE by being in the SEC over the Big12.


Again, you are avoiding a lot of questions that arise from that scenario. Supposing, UT joins your 15 team superconference and after a couple of seasons decides they don't like the setup and push to drop the 3 lightweights (ole' Miss, Miss St., and private Vandy) so they can go to a 12 team conference. That would certainly be a ton more profitable, but the SEC schools would never accept that.

That is in a nutshell why UT will never join the SEC. UT wants to be the Michigan of their conference, not the South Carolina. If the SEC wants to let UT wag them, UT would join. If not, they won't.

UT and A&M deliver Texas, 23.5M people vs. the SEC's total 56.6M. They can build a conference more profitable for them than the best the current SEC could offer.



Quote:
Of course the flip side to this is that the Texas and Texas A&M could consider the Pac10 or vice versa....


UT and Colorado were the Pac 10's targets because of their academics, Colorado bridging UT, and it has been theorized on this site many times over because of the "california culture" at both universities. I think there is a lot of truth to that.

PAC 10 expansion is dead now. UT isn't going anywhere without taking OU and even if UT wanted to dump A&M (which they don't), A&M wouldn't let UT go without taking them too.

The Pac 10 isn't going to 13 or 14.


Last edited by finiteman on Mon Dec 10, 2007 3:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:06 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 10:22 am
Posts: 1030

Quote:

Quote:

Agreed. But if the SEC is considering all options - especially for a TV contract, it would be nuts not to at least talk to them. 22 million people (and the corresponding TV sets) is ALOT. Also consider that the Big12 would NEVER be able to take a SEC team. A SEC channel with the 22 million from Texas and TA&M would dwarf any channel the Big12 could put together.

Do I think it would happen - probably not - but I am sure the SEC already knows that but it's crunching the numbers.


Agree about the BE. The BE has one small sliver of hope to entice teams from other BCS conferences to join - and it's pathway is none other than the BTN. The chances are small but it's there.

Anyway, are you sure about the Big 12 breakup? I don't know the exit fees for the Big12, is it one year's conference share (ie about $10 million?).

Consider that each school in the SEC with UTexas and A&M - with a SEC channel - would make about $7.5 million just from this channel alone. That doesn't include the increase to their TV contracts for ABC/ESPN, BB revenue, Bowl games, etc.

Would the SEC make a 'similar' amount of money without Texas and Texas A&M - sure but Texas and Texas A&M could make MORE by being in the SEC over the Big12.


Again, you are avoiding a lot of questions that arise from that scenario. Supposing, UT joins your 15 team superconference and after a couple of seasons decides they don't like the setup and push to drop the 3 lightweights (ole' Miss, Miss St., and private Vandy) so they can go to a 12 team conference. That would certainly be a ton more profitable, but the SEC schools would never accept that.

That is in a nutshell why UT will never join the SEC. UT wants to be the Michigan of their conference, not the South Carolina. If the SEC wants to let UT wag them, UT would join. If not, they won't.

UT and A&M deliver Texas, 23.5M people vs. the SEC's total 56.6M. They can build a conference more profitable for them than the best the current SEC could offer.


The scenerio I was talking in the previous post was where UT and UTA&M going to the SEC is for a 14 team conference only.

I agree that UT probably wants to be the big dog in a conference. And as you and others have said, it's not just about money or academics, or others but the whole package. However, conferences are cruching the numbers to see how they can get the most money and all options are on the table. Whether the schools are interesting in moving is another interesting question but the money will be there. And without the money, the conversations don't even get started.

I have to disagree with you in that how does the UT and TA&M build a conference more profitable than the best the current SEC could offer with no teams moving from the SEC? Are you speaking of only taking the best from the Big 12? The 14-team SEC could offer UT and TA&M about the same as what the Big 10 is offering their universities and that is ~ $18 million PER YEAR for the conference share.


Quote:


Quote:
Of course the flip side to this is that the Texas and Texas A&M could consider the Pac10 or vice versa....


UT and Colorado were the Pac 10's targets because of their academics, Colorado bridging UT, and it has been theorized on this site many times over because of the "california culture" at both universities. I think there is a lot of truth to that.

PAC 10 expansion is dead now. UT isn't going anywhere without taking OU and even if UT wanted to dump A&M (which they don't), A&M wouldn't let UT go without taking them too.

The Pac 10 isn't going to 13 or 14.


I know about the Pac10 possible eariler expansion targets UT and Colorado and I wasn' talking about the Pac10 going to 13 or 14. I also wasn't saying expansion with UT and OU but UT and TA&M. Why would UT not leave without OU - because of the Red River Rivalry?

The Pac 10 could expand to 12 and they would make much more money than they are now. UT and TA&M would be great academic and althetic fits in the Pac10. They would deliver the necessary $$$ to make it very profitable to expand.

Again, they conversation doesn't even start if the money isn't there. Do you think that other conferences are not going to have any contingency plans in case the Big 10 network makes deals with Comcast, Time Warner, etc? The Big 10 will be making at least $8 million MORE per school than the others. Other conferences are at least have the numbers cruched.



Last edited by panthersc97 on Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 1:45 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1574
One prime element, and it is critical when AD's get together to discussion expansion or membership, is the question of whom the current members want to play? That can transcend the number of TV sets, proximity to urban markets, etc.

Since the SEC expanded and went for the Championship Games, every team in the western division, except Ole Miss, has played in the game. In the east, South Carolina, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt have not played in the Championship game, but those programs have certainly become competitive. It used to be that some SEC members could be counted on for a sure conference win, but none of them are dismissing anyone in the conference.

In the ACC, more balance has also occurred with expansion. It is no longer Florida State and everyone else. When Wake Forest, for example, challenges, that is good, and should not be viewed as conference weakness.

Conferences could expand to pick up powerhouses, if available, in neighboring states or regions. But there has to be a reasonable cutoff. With 12 regular season football games inclusive of out-of-conference desires/needs, as well as low or mid-twenty something basketball games inclusive of an appreciable number of home-to-home encounters; it is neither prudent nor advisable for conference to be expanding into teen numbers unless all adapt similar patterns and go for football championship games. Conferences, in itself, are suggestive everyone plays everyone else in it at least with some appreciable degree of frequency.

The Big East is the most hybrid. They have been that way based on origin, politics, geography, delayed/gradual inclusion, a raid, and compromising for replacements. Their current design in still relatively new, and by 2010, they shall decide if the model is to be kept, changed, or a split happens. Good or bad, they are also saddled with the Notre Dame factor per conference design.

As to the SEC when they were expanding and the SWC broke-up, they did talk to Texas and Texas A&M. Actually, A&M wanted to move to the SEC, but Texas politics kept them from breaking with what UT was willing to do, and they ended up being part of the Big 12 formulation. If the SEC somehow added UT & A&M, no doubt there would be folks chatting about adding Oklahoma, then Missouri, then Nebraska; it doesn't end.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:57 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3814
The rise of conference specific TV stations brings clearly into focus the goal of future expansion: TV revenue. This means that a programs strength int he eyes of marketers will be a key factor. It's not a pure science though. For example, UCF, being in Orlando, if a large market. But their program would not be taken over say, WVU. Also to factor in is national following. So Penn St., with a large national following outside of their own western PA market would be more appealing than say, Syracuse or rutgers.

While I don't think the SEc has any need to expand (since they have fans of the 12 programs all over the US since most of the programs are NATIONAL programs), I'll bite:

If the SEc wanted 2 more teams to increase the market sizes, I think there is a better chance that only Texas would be invited since Texas A&M would not add another market that Texas wouldn't cover. After them, I think the SEC could look north with a program like WVU. rutgers would be a stretch as would any other Big East program. ACC schools would stay put. Big XII examples could be Texas A&M.

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:17 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 556
Location: Dallas

Quote:

Quote:


Again, you are avoiding a lot of questions that arise from that scenario. Supposing, UT joins your 15 team superconference and after a couple of seasons decides they don't like the setup and push to drop the 3 lightweights (ole' Miss, Miss St., and private Vandy) so they can go to a 12 team conference. That would certainly be a ton more profitable, but the SEC schools would never accept that.

That is in a nutshell why UT will never join the SEC. UT wants to be the Michigan of their conference, not the South Carolina. If the SEC wants to let UT wag them, UT would join. If not, they won't.

UT and A&M deliver Texas, 23.5M people vs. the SEC's total 56.6M. They can build a conference more profitable for them than the best the current SEC could offer.


....
I have to disagree with you in that how does the UT and TA&M build a conference more profitable than the best the current SEC could offer with no teams moving from the SEC? Are you speaking of only taking the best from the Big 12? The 14-team SEC could offer UT and TA&M about the same as what the Big 10 is offering their universities and that is ~ $18 million PER YEAR for the conference share.


Well this is quick math, but here goes.
SEC now
56.6M / 12 = 4.71M per school

SEC + texas = 56.6M + 23.5M =80.1/14 schools= 5.72M per school

likely
Texas = 23.5
Colorado = 4.8
Missouri = 5.8
Kansas = 2.8
Oklahoma = 3.6
Arkansas = 2.8
Nebraska =1.8

possibilities
(Lousiana = 4.3)
(New Mexico =1.9)
(Utah = 2.5)

Dealing just with the flagships under likely's, that is 45.1M/8 schools = 5.64M per school--- much better than today's SEC. And they rule the conference with backing from like minded schools A&M, OU, ARK.

It should be noted that this is a VERY quick and esay breakdown-- a real breakdown would be by media market, but it conveys the jist of my arguement.

Quote:


Quote:



UT and Colorado were the Pac 10's targets because of their academics, Colorado bridging UT, and it has been theorized on this site many times over because of the "california culture" at both universities. I think there is a lot of truth to that.

PAC 10 expansion is dead now. UT isn't going anywhere without taking OU and even if UT wanted to dump A&M (which they don't), A&M wouldn't let UT go without taking them too.

The Pac 10 isn't going to 13 or 14.


I know about the Pac10 possible eariler expansion targets UT and Colorado and I wasn' talking about the Pac10 going to 13 or 14. I also wasn't saying expansion with UT and OU but UT and TA&M. Why would UT not leave without OU - because of the Red River Rivalry?

The Pac 10 could expand to 12 and they would make much more money than they are now. UT and TA&M would be great academic and althetic fits in the Pac10. They would deliver the necessary $$$ to make it very profitable to expand.

Again, they conversation doesn't even start if the money isn't there. Do you think that other conferences are not going to have any contingency plans in case the Big 10 network makes deals with Comcast, Time Warner, etc? The Big 10 will be making at least $8 million MORE per school than the others. Other conferences are at least have the numbers cruched.



To answer your question, I think it is becoming apparent that being a border school far out of a footprint is a tough road to hoe. You don't do it if an equal or better local option is available.

I attended UT. As far as rivals, UT's rivals are

1) OU
2) A&M
3) Arkansas
4) Tech

With the exception of Tech (who may have A&M as their #1 rival and UT #2) all of the above consider UT their #1 rival --- as far as I know.

While where OU was didn't matter to UT before the Big XII, the athletic departments seem to have discovered they are soulmates. They run the Big XII with a shared vision and seem likely to be together for the foreseeable future. UT/OU is a happy marraige, but I think the happy couple would love to knock off some of the in-laws.


Last edited by finiteman on Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:19 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 556
Location: Dallas
I'd like to modify my vote as I have been swayed by the virginia arguement.

Drop Mississippi, Miss St., and Vandy

Add FSU, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Virginia, and Virginia Tech for a 14 team 2 division monster conference.

VERY Rough numbers attendence #s:
2 Tennessee 107k
5 Georgia 86k
6 LSU 86k
7 Florida 85K
8 Auburn 83K
10 Alabama 82K
11 Florida State 81K
13 South Carolina 80K
16 Clemson 79K
23 Kentucky 64K
27 Arkansas 67k
29 Virginia Tech 65K
31 Virginia 60K

NW
2 Tennessee 107k
6 LSU 86k
8 Auburn 83K
10 Alabama 82K
23 Kentucky 64K
27 Arkansas 67k
46 Georgia Tech 51K


SE
5 Georgia 86k
7 Florida 85K
11 Florida State 81K
13 South Carolina 80K
16 Clemson 79K
29 Virginia Tech 65K
31 Virginia 60K

The Viginia U's are ramping up football to SEC levels and bring in major TV too. this also leaves open the possibility of an expansion to 16 teams with the addition of UCF and USF if both schools eveolve into FBS powers in the next 10 years (as I think they will). (Like adding FSU, adding UCF and USF would remove a competing conference's toehold in florida).


Last edited by finiteman on Mon Dec 31, 2007 6:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:34 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 10:46 am
Posts: 42
Major Bump.

As SEC commishiner, I would strive to rebrand the SEC as football richest conference. First, I would start by taking eight of the conference's most powerful schools and leaving behind four
others. I'll be starting with:

Kentucky
Tennessee
Alabama
Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Arkansas
Louisiana State

Mississippi and Mississippi State were the easiest schools, as they bring very little to the table. Vanderbilt is too small, and has great academics, but its home market (Nashville) is dominated by
a team already in my conference (UTK) and a pro sports franchise(Tennessee Titans). South Carolina was the hardest team to cut. However, a small market size combined with poor preformance
in Revenue sports make Kentucky (and thier top-flight hoops team) more valueble to the conference. Both schools bring similar attributes and market shares to the Commish's table.

Secondly, I would take our remaining schools (we'll hold on to the SEC name), and make an offer that the Power schools of Texas can't refuse: Membership to a twelve team conference that has a way better per-team share and exposure than the big twelve. We'll offer spots to four schools: Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech and Oklahoma. This gives me two more state flagships, a foothold in every large city in Texas, and three of the most powerful football programs in the nation. This gives me the following schools:

SEC West: Arkansas, LSU, Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, Oklahoma
SEC East: Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn

Secondly, I would lay the groundwork for an SEC conference TV network. However, I would plan it differently than the Big Ten planned thier network because the SEC has different needs. I would start by giving each region occupied by a SEC school a different channel. I would give the teams in each region a 25%
share, 25% of each SEC network channel would belong to the SEC and this share of the profits would be divided evenly among the conference members. The other 50% would belong to the highest bidding network. This network would get first dibs on both the local tv package and more importantly, the rivalry games. For simplicities sake, we'll say CBS is the highest bidder.


The network would regulary air: SEC Baseball games, Women's basketball, and Second-tier SEC football and basketball games, plus important non revenue sports matchups (like track and field or rowing), all usually involving the local team. This network would be basic cable in the designated region (similar to Fox Sports South) and outside of the designated region for a .10c charge. Also, a team can choose to sell up to 50% of the local SEC network's material to a local network affilate (preferably CBS)if they so desire. Important revenue sport matchups would be availible to CBS for the right price.


SEC roundup every evening (basically replacing fox sports south)

SECBama (Alabama, Auburn): Alabama including Birmingham and Mobile
Alabama 12.5%; Auburn 12.5%; SEC 25%; CBS 50%
SECGeorgia (Georgia): Georgia including Atlanta
Georgia 25%; SEC 25%; CBS 50%
SECTenn (Tennessee): Tennessee including Nashvile
Tennessee 25%; SEC 25%; CBS 50%
SECKentucky (Kentucky): Kentucky including Louisville and Lexington
Kentucky 25%; SEC 25%; CBS 50%
SECFlorida (Florida): Florida including Miami, Orlando, Tampa and Jacksonville
Florida 25%; SEC 25%; CBS 50%
SECETexas (Texas A&M, Texas) Most of Texas (Houston, San Antonio, Austin, DFW)
Texas A&M 12.5%, Texas 12.5%, SEC 25%, CBS 50%
SECWTexas (Texas Tech) West Texas
Texas Tech 25%, CBS 50%, SEC 25%
SECArkansas (Arkansas) Arkansas including little rock
Arkansas 25%, SEC 25%, CBS 50%
SECOklahoma (Oklahoma) Oklahoma including Tulsa and Oklahoma City
Oklahoma 25%, SEC 25%, CBS 50%
SECLouisiana (LSU) Louisiana including New Orleans
LSU 25%, SEC 25%, CBS 50%

I'd also create a SEC rivalry week (lasting two saturdays) that I would then pitch to a major network:

Saturday One:
LSU-Arkansas
Texas-Oklahoma
Texas A&M-Texas Tech
Georgia-Florida
Kentucky-Tennessee
Alabama-Auburn

Saturday Two:
Texas-Arkansas
Texas A&M-LSU
Georgia-Auburn
Tennessee-Alabama

I would use my new conference member to gain an invite to the new cotton bowl, replacing my automatic berth with the SEC West #1 (unless that team is LSU) guarenteeing a local favorite will play. If LSU wins the SEC West, the cotton bowl gets the number two ranked SEC West Team. The SEC East's #1 will go to the Sugar Bowl. This would effectivly make the cotton bowl BCS-level.

I believe with this model the SEC can top the Big Ten's payout and regain its rightful place on the podium of college football. I'm guessing the current Championship game could top the B12's 11M and the conference network would easily surpass the BTN's 66 million, especially with the prominence of baseball in the southeast. I could see the SEC raking in over 200 million a year with this plan.



Last edited by thelurker on Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:28 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:57 pm
Posts: 1292
Location: Portland! (and about time!)
Lurker touched on something I've thought about for a LONG time. However, he misses a crucial point, and I get to offer a shocking alternative.

South Carolina is ALMOST as big as Alabama. It's become clear who has stature between Alabama and Auburn.

Cutting Auburn does not jettison most of the state. Cutting South Carolina is a worse TV market move. Auburn will always have the end of season game with Alabama.

Moneywise, I truly believe Auburn is smarter to cut than South Carolina.

CAVEAT- I'd keep Auburn over Texas Tech, who is only a regional consideration in a relatively sparsely populated region of Texas. ON THE OH-SO-IMPORTANT OTHER HAND, I could go after any of the following with #12:

North Carolina
Missouri
Virginia
Miami

I'm avoiding the fact that it is a virtual guarantee that the conference would have a new name, that leaving schools behind means leaving the name of the conference behind. It's worth the money, however.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 4:20 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 10:22 am
Posts: 1030
I would think they would go after VT instead of UVa. VT is more of an SEC type school. As far as I know there aren't many 'wine and cheese' crowds in the SEC. Same with NCSt versus UNC I think.




Last edited by panthersc97 on Sat Aug 23, 2008 4:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:14 am 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:43 pm
Posts: 107

PantherSC97 wrote:
I would think they would go after VT instead of UVa. VT is more of an SEC type school. As far as I know there aren't many 'wine and cheese' crowds in the SEC. Same with NCSt versus UNC I think.


Georgia is pretty posh ("Between the Hedges" and all that), and Florida is in the AAU.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Your the SEC Commish?
PostPosted: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:54 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 556
Location: Dallas
Wow. I thought I was rough. Dumping Auburn, the #8 attended program in the nation because they overlay in a small state... Wow. (Not to say I don't see the financial implications or the logic.)

I firmly beleive that Baylor alums are rich enough and there are enough of them and Tech alumns are motivated and in large enough numbers that any plan for stealing UT & A&M ---regardless of how financially ridiculous it would --- would be blocked in the state legislature. Someone would threaten to choke off the state money pipeline and UT & A&M would pass. One of them, maybe. Both? I can't see it.

(On a related note Texas is talking about adding one or two more schools as what they refer to as "tier 1" --- essentially a state flagship. They would get like 70M a year in state funds. Texas is talking about 1-4, but most think the number will be 1 or 2. Houston appears the frontrunner, but I suspect when it is all said and done the state will chose UH AND Tech --- making the inclusion of Tech in conference talk appear not to be as out of place as it has been.)

OK you guys have opened the topic of an all B#st#rd SEC with the real big wigs cutting to the bone. Vandy, Miss State, Ole' Miss...When you look at the resources they add, a dispassionate view would say that is cutting fat. Auburn, you are talking about cutting muscle to hopefully add more muscle... I don't think there is enough legislative power to do that, but lets play this out as far as you could go.

Do you draw a line at 4M people in the state? If so, do you count Memphis under Arkansas? Do you give LSU and Alabama credit for parts of Mississippi? Do you grandfather them in? Or are they all cut? What are you willing to do for Texas? Are you willing to add 4 teams (UT, A&M, OU, & Tech) to get the 24 M Texas Market? (Oklahoma + Texas = 27.5M)

I think any group you cut would be in the remaining SEC/ACC, underlying your conference. I think there is a definite point where you are cutting off your nose to spite your face--- creating much rougher competition than you want.

And I think the question of ABC/CBS/FOX vs. Subscription SEC Network TV does need to be answered. If you are talking Network TV adding a school like USF with it's enormous alumni base into the discussion might make sense. If you are talking one of the tradional networks a seperate distant DMA like Miami makes more sense.

I could see something like replacing a Virginia Tech with UNC or Maryland in my example above --- letting the ACC have a strong team ---as long as they are mostly almost outside of the SEC footprint. Or maybe they go to 16, keeping VT and adding UNC and Maryland, but again...you are talking huge political fights there in most of those scenarios. Maybe a NCST and Maryland pair would be more doable.

There is no question the SEC could be making more money.

Here are all of the states with their population totals...

2 Texas = 24M
4 Florida = 18M
9 Georgia = 9.5M
10 North Carolina = 9.1M
12 Virginia = 7.7M
17 Tennessee= 6.2M
18 Missouri = 5.9M
19 Maryland = 5.6M
23 Alabama = 4.6M
24 South Carolina = 4.4M
25 Louisiana = 4.3M
26 Kentucky = 4.2M
28 Oklahoma = 3.6M
31 Mississippi = 2.9M
32 Arkansas = 2.8M
33 Kansas = 2.7M
37 West Virginia = 1.8M

Now looking at it from this perspective a conference might want to stretch from Florida to Texas with as few members as possible as required to own Texas and Florida, but when you do the math, the Texas/OU 4 average 6.5-7M per what they bring. Is that worth the footprint? To really dominate Florida you really need 3 schools, Florida, FSU, and Miami ---again getting you to 6M per...and frankly the emergence of all the new schools are really cutting into the old powers' dominance.

I think that is the real hurdle facing the SEC. They have to cut schools in or face having a larger conference of strong teams undercutting them.

if you go with a cutthroat:
Florida
FSU
Georgia
UNC
Virginia
Tennessee
Maryland
Alabama
Clemson (SC and Charlotte, NC)

You certainly have a cuttroat league that should be good money, but look at what that leaves you in the SEC and ACC. The ACC would probably pull in USF to partner with Miami (cutting back into Central and Northern Florida), take SC to replace Clemson, Steal Vandy as they match the privates, and add Rutgers and UCONN to get back up to 12. Same footprint, same number of teams, Still in NC, SC, FL, VA, and now in NYC and CT. Much stronger conference with much bigger TV. They'd probably be ahead of the cutthroat SEC.

The leftover SEC would likely fall to a BE level conference.

I think if you do something like this, you have to really cut into the ACC's ability to raid the BE. You have to turn it into a BB first conference.





Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1064 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 71  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jbb and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 

cron




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group