09-26-2017, 09:02 AM
Now this would certainly change the SEC's expansion strategy. That much is obvious. I don't think there's much that would change the SEC's hunt for Oklahoma and Texas as those are the 2 biggest prizes available, but there are certainly others that would appeal to us.
I would like to explore though how likely or unlikely this prospect is. Below are a few points to consider in this discussion:
1) I was a little surprised when the ACC Network was made official. It seemed that ESPN had been dragging their feet on the project and perhaps looking for an out. Perhaps the main reason for that was the weakening market for new linear channels. That had to be part of the consideration and I still can't believe that ESPN is completely thrilled that they're having to start a new one in this climate.
If for no other reason, when streaming becomes mainstream then these designations between linear channels are going to fade. You can market product any way you like online, but you don't need new infrastructure for that. The same is especially true for the LHN.
2) The ACC was used by ESPN to house content that they didn't otherwise want to lose. The BC President(could have been the AD, can't remember) basically admitted as much. While this was expedient, it wasn't super profitable.
3) There are probably a handful of current ACC schools that would rather be in the SEC anyway.
4) While the old core of ACC schools are heartily committed to their league, the question is can these schools compete long term financially.
5) While it is reasonable to assume that the goal of the networks is to produce a Power 4 and something akin to a "champs only" playoff, one has to wonder if the networks wouldn't be better off with more leagues and a bigger CFP.
6) The question for conferences like the SEC and B1G though is whether or not they can gain additional access to the CFP if they expand further and perhaps if they also expand the size of the CFP itself.
7) Another question for the leagues is can they increase revenue over time by increasing the size of the leagues dramatically? Creating scarcity in the market should drive up the prices for rights fees even though the networks obviously wouldn't like this. Perhaps this is what Slive was referring to when he said the next move would be to "very, very large conferences." And perhaps that is why we haven't heard a great deal of specific information at this time...because the networks aren't driving the bus as much as they normally would be?
8) One way or the other, the Big 12 is going to die. The question is who reaps the reward?
I would like to explore though how likely or unlikely this prospect is. Below are a few points to consider in this discussion:
1) I was a little surprised when the ACC Network was made official. It seemed that ESPN had been dragging their feet on the project and perhaps looking for an out. Perhaps the main reason for that was the weakening market for new linear channels. That had to be part of the consideration and I still can't believe that ESPN is completely thrilled that they're having to start a new one in this climate.
If for no other reason, when streaming becomes mainstream then these designations between linear channels are going to fade. You can market product any way you like online, but you don't need new infrastructure for that. The same is especially true for the LHN.
2) The ACC was used by ESPN to house content that they didn't otherwise want to lose. The BC President(could have been the AD, can't remember) basically admitted as much. While this was expedient, it wasn't super profitable.
3) There are probably a handful of current ACC schools that would rather be in the SEC anyway.
4) While the old core of ACC schools are heartily committed to their league, the question is can these schools compete long term financially.
5) While it is reasonable to assume that the goal of the networks is to produce a Power 4 and something akin to a "champs only" playoff, one has to wonder if the networks wouldn't be better off with more leagues and a bigger CFP.
6) The question for conferences like the SEC and B1G though is whether or not they can gain additional access to the CFP if they expand further and perhaps if they also expand the size of the CFP itself.
7) Another question for the leagues is can they increase revenue over time by increasing the size of the leagues dramatically? Creating scarcity in the market should drive up the prices for rights fees even though the networks obviously wouldn't like this. Perhaps this is what Slive was referring to when he said the next move would be to "very, very large conferences." And perhaps that is why we haven't heard a great deal of specific information at this time...because the networks aren't driving the bus as much as they normally would be?
8) One way or the other, the Big 12 is going to die. The question is who reaps the reward?