The SEC already gets credit for KC and TX media markets. Whether it's the leverage of one school or the SEC and ESPN leveraging dominance in other markets as part of a package deal for all the footprint is irrelevant to that end result.

KU, KSU, Tech, BU, TCU, UH, Miami, Clemson, GT, UL, Memphis, Tulane, UCF, USF, SMU, and anyone else in these footprints would result in a duplication of markets they get credit for. Any expansion with these teams would have to provide value elsewhere in the footprint. Only national brands realistically have the cachet to push through for sure so unless it's Texas or FSU it's unlikely to overlap the existing footprint.

(07-14-2015 08:42 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 07:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 05:25 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 05:17 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 05:10 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Earlier in this very thread


Oh...its You claiming that SECN only gets full price in the Houston/East Texas.

And with no proof whatsoever backing up this claim!

We're done here.

[mike drop]

LMAO. You have not proven your point to be true. It's a huge question that nobody really knows the answer to. Until we see a statement that specifically addresses this we are all just guessing.

I simply have a hard time believing that adding aTm means that everything in the state including El Paso,Midland, DFW, Lubbock, and Amarillo are SEC country when in reality the SEC schools are not even close to being top brands in those areas.

You can deny it all you like but that doesn't make it true.

Every source out there says the same thing. That the SEC is charging every provider in the 11 state footprint who carries it $1.40 per household.

Every major (and many minor) providers in Texas carry SECN and therefore are being charged the full rate of $1.40.

But hey, show me ANYTHING at all that even hints that what you are saying is true and not just your own personal delusion.

Oh and JML's new sock is awful.

I mean really?

-Cowboy fans dont call themselves "OkieLite"
-Cowboy fans aren't constantly godding up their rival Texas Tech and claiming what a great add they would be
-Cowboy fans aren't constantly referencing West Texas as this great bastion that belongs exclusively to Tech

Try harder.

Read your own post. It says "rate card." That's kind of like sticker price on a car.

There's nothing that supports the SEC actually getting that full price everywhere. Now there's nothing that proves they don't, but Okielite's link indicates they were having trouble.

There were some who were doubters.

They didn't think ESPN could get SECN on every major network in the SEC footprint.

But they did.

If it makes you feel better to tell yourself that for some reason ESPN is not charging Comcast the full SEC price because it feeds into your ego stroking narrative about how A&M doesn't deliver Texas markets (despite all the ratings saying otherwise) then please, go right ahead, I expect nothing less from Big 12 fans. What you believe is irrelevant while we laugh all the way to the bank.

I don't have an opinion on whether they got the full rate. There's not much information either way. But you mindlessly read things in that aren't there.

(07-14-2015 08:24 PM)bluesox Wrote:  2 reason's the sec would take Ok state to get OU

1) its ou, huge brand.

2) probably bigger than 1 but it checks OU from going to the big 10 which would be a disaster for the SEC since it opens up the possibility of texas going to the big 10, which could be fatal to the SEC.

What does OU have to do with Texas going to the Big Ten? If Texas wanted to go the Big Ten they would be accepted with open arms regardless of what OU did.

If the big 10 added OU and KU, than the big 12 is done and texas would need a new home…so it would depend on what texas did post big 12 but having OU in the big 10 is a nice hook. IF texas agreed to join the big 10 as team 17, i think the big 10 could than rip apart every league and grow as big as it wanted.

(07-14-2015 05:25 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Oh and JML's new sock is awful.

I mean really?

-Cowboy fans dont call themselves "OkieLite"
-Cowboy fans aren't constantly godding up their rival Texas Tech and claiming what a great add they would be
-Cowboy fans aren't constantly referencing West Texas as this great bastion that belongs exclusively to Tech

Try harder.

Who is jml?

It's obvious the TCU fan doesn't want Texas Tech in the SEC even though the SEC mod has no problem with it.

(07-14-2015 10:51 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 05:25 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Oh and JML's new sock is awful.

I mean really?

-Cowboy fans dont call themselves "OkieLite"
-Cowboy fans aren't constantly godding up their rival Texas Tech and claiming what a great add they would be
-Cowboy fans aren't constantly referencing West Texas as this great bastion that belongs exclusively to Tech

Try harder.

Who is jml?

A Tech fan who got banned because he derailed every other thread getting into it with UH fans.

(07-14-2015 11:28 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 10:51 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 05:25 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Oh and JML's new sock is awful.

I mean really?

-Cowboy fans dont call themselves "OkieLite"
-Cowboy fans aren't constantly godding up their rival Texas Tech and claiming what a great add they would be
-Cowboy fans aren't constantly referencing West Texas as this great bastion that belongs exclusively to Tech

Try harder.

Who is jml?

A Tech fan who got banned because he derailed every other thread getting into it with UH fans.

Hmmm-- thanks for the insight.

(07-14-2015 05:10 PM)Okielite Wrote:  Parts of the negotiation between DirecTV and the SEC Network have become contentious because, as York said, the SEC Network wants to claim all of Texas as being in the "inner market" because of Texas A&M. York said it is an "absurd consumer proposition" that football fans in Austin should be considered in the "inner market" when Austin is the home of the University of Texas.

Suddenlink is in the eastern Texas area of Houston and in western Texas as well. ESPN forced Suddenlink to take both SECN and Longhorns Network. ESPN claimed that Texas Longhorns are in SEC country.

(07-14-2015 08:24 PM)bluesox Wrote:  2 reason's the sec would take Ok state to get OU

1) its ou, huge brand.

2) probably bigger than 1 but it checks OU from going to the big 10 which would be a disaster for the SEC since it opens up the possibility of texas going to the big 10, which could be fatal to the SEC.

Umm, no. The SEC isn't going to take an inferior school to get another. The SEC can just about take any P5 they want.

(07-14-2015 09:07 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  The SEC already gets credit for KC and TX media markets. Whether it's the leverage of one school or the SEC and ESPN leveraging dominance in other markets as part of a package deal for all the footprint is irrelevant to that end result.

KU, KSU, Tech, BU, TCU, UH, Miami, Clemson, GT, UL, Memphis, Tulane, UCF, USF, SMU, and anyone else in these footprints would result in a duplication of markets they get credit for. Any expansion with these teams would have to provide value elsewhere in the footprint. Only national brands realistically have the cachet to push through for sure so unless it's Texas or FSU it's unlikely to overlap the existing footprint.

Yep

(07-14-2015 08:24 PM)bluesox Wrote:  2 reason's the sec would take Ok state to get OU

1) its ou, huge brand.

2) probably bigger than 1 but it checks OU from going to the big 10 which would be a disaster for the SEC since it opens up the possibility of texas going to the big 10, which could be fatal to the SEC.

An asteroid hitting the United States would be fatal to the SEC. Texas moving to the Big 10 would be fatal to..........Texas. What's more is that they know that too.

The sec would be foolish to think a big 10 couldn't be a huge threat to them with texas in the fold. IF the big 10 grabs KU and OU, the big 12 is dead and texas will need to find a new home. Depending on what they do will have huge ripple effects. Let's say they go to the big 10 as team 17, my guess would be missouri would be team 18. Maybe they are content at 18 but i could see the big 10 keep growing and adjust their structure to the new members with new rules like divisions can have hoop tournaments.

What i would do right off the bat is invite 10 pac 12 school's, everybody but wash state and oreg state to get to 28 members, 4 pods of 7. Than you turn your focus to the ACC to rip apart. Not hard to see UVa and UNC want to become part of the a big 10 eastern lineup. I'm sure they sec could live well with the leftovers. Or the big 10 could just try to bring everybody in the fold, which wouldn't be bad for the school's invited to the party. If the end is a 60 team big 10 with 6 divisions of 10, does it really matter for the school's included? I mean under that concept alabama, UGA, etc would be in the big 10, basically the sec division of the big 10.

(07-15-2015 08:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 08:24 PM)bluesox Wrote:  2 reason's the sec would take Ok state to get OU

1) its ou, huge brand.

2) probably bigger than 1 but it checks OU from going to the big 10 which would be a disaster for the SEC since it opens up the possibility of texas going to the big 10, which could be fatal to the SEC.

An asteroid hitting the United States would be fatal to the SEC. Texas moving to the Big 10 would be fatal to..........Texas. What's more is that they know that too.

You're starting to get it. A strong Big 12 is the best place for Texas.

Independence probably doesn't even make sense in the long run for Notre Dame, let alone Texas or anyone else. Flying over 3 states to join a conference that really cares about basketball doesn't make any sense. Flying the women's softball team all over the Midwest with a bunch of similar universities in a dissimilar region doesn't make sense. Flying the women's softball team across the country to the left coast in a conference further in distance than the Big 10 doesn't make any sense. Joining a conference that's geographically sound but one that you have never wanted to join and in a match that would be detrimental to both sides doesn't make sense. The Big 12 does make sense.

(07-14-2015 09:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 08:42 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 07:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 05:25 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 05:17 PM)Okielite Wrote:  LMAO. You have not proven your point to be true. It's a huge question that nobody really knows the answer to. Until we see a statement that specifically addresses this we are all just guessing.

I simply have a hard time believing that adding aTm means that everything in the state including El Paso,Midland, DFW, Lubbock, and Amarillo are SEC country when in reality the SEC schools are not even close to being top brands in those areas.

You can deny it all you like but that doesn't make it true.

Every source out there says the same thing. That the SEC is charging every provider in the 11 state footprint who carries it $1.40 per household.

Every major (and many minor) providers in Texas carry SECN and therefore are being charged the full rate of $1.40.

But hey, show me ANYTHING at all that even hints that what you are saying is true and not just your own personal delusion.

Oh and JML's new sock is awful.

I mean really?

-Cowboy fans dont call themselves "OkieLite"
-Cowboy fans aren't constantly godding up their rival Texas Tech and claiming what a great add they would be
-Cowboy fans aren't constantly referencing West Texas as this great bastion that belongs exclusively to Tech

Try harder.

Read your own post. It says "rate card." That's kind of like sticker price on a car.

There's nothing that supports the SEC actually getting that full price everywhere. Now there's nothing that proves they don't, but Okielite's link indicates they were having trouble.

There were some who were doubters.

They didn't think ESPN could get SECN on every major network in the SEC footprint.

But they did.

If it makes you feel better to tell yourself that for some reason ESPN is not charging Comcast the full SEC price because it feeds into your ego stroking narrative about how A&M doesn't deliver Texas markets (despite all the ratings saying otherwise) then please, go right ahead, I expect nothing less from Big 12 fans. What you believe is irrelevant while we laugh all the way to the bank.

I don't have an opinion on whether they got the full rate. There's not much information either way. But you mindlessly read things in that aren't there.

My take as well.

The best league for texas was the original big 12 but texas got greedy and ran off great programs…that greed never made sense to me considering they were already making the most $, better to keep the neighborhood up. Right now i think the best move for texas would involve rule changes, than hook up with another league. Those rule changes would result in a regional division under the banner of another league with football title crossover. For instance, a pac 20, a merger with the 27 team ACC and 3 divisions, an 18 team SEC or a large big 10.

(07-15-2015 09:00 AM)bluesox Wrote:  The sec would be foolish to think a big 10 couldn't be a huge threat to them with texas in the fold. IF the big 10 grabs KU and OU, the big 12 is dead and texas will need to find a new home. Depending on what they do will have huge ripple effects. Let's say they go to the big 10 as team 17, my guess would be missouri would be team 18. Maybe they are content at 18 but i could see the big 10 keep growing and adjust their structure to the new members with new rules like divisions can have hoop tournaments.

What i would do right off the bat is invite 10 pac 12 school's, everybody but wash state and oreg state to get to 28 members, 4 pods of 7. Than you turn your focus to the ACC to rip apart. Not hard to see UVa and UNC want to become part of the a big 10 eastern lineup. I'm sure they sec could live well with the leftovers. Or the big 10 could just try to bring everybody in the fold, which wouldn't be bad for the school's invited to the party. If the end is a 60 team big 10 with 6 divisions of 10, does it really matter for the school's included? I mean under that concept alabama, UGA, etc would be in the big 10, basically the sec division of the big 10.

Um....source? Nobody at UNC wants to be in the Big 10, bud.

(07-15-2015 09:39 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-15-2015 09:00 AM)bluesox Wrote:  The sec would be foolish to think a big 10 couldn't be a huge threat to them with texas in the fold. IF the big 10 grabs KU and OU, the big 12 is dead and texas will need to find a new home. Depending on what they do will have huge ripple effects. Let's say they go to the big 10 as team 17, my guess would be missouri would be team 18. Maybe they are content at 18 but i could see the big 10 keep growing and adjust their structure to the new members with new rules like divisions can have hoop tournaments.

What i would do right off the bat is invite 10 pac 12 school's, everybody but wash state and oreg state to get to 28 members, 4 pods of 7. Than you turn your focus to the ACC to rip apart. Not hard to see UVa and UNC want to become part of the a big 10 eastern lineup. I'm sure they sec could live well with the leftovers. Or the big 10 could just try to bring everybody in the fold, which wouldn't be bad for the school's invited to the party. If the end is a 60 team big 10 with 6 divisions of 10, does it really matter for the school's included? I mean under that concept alabama, UGA, etc would be in the big 10, basically the sec division of the big 10.

Um....source? Nobody at UNC wants to be in the Big 10, bud.

Yeah, I've always heard they were SEC contenders. I'm sure B10 would go after them as they fit the profile.

(07-14-2015 09:07 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  The SEC already gets credit for KC and TX media markets. Whether it's the leverage of one school or the SEC and ESPN leveraging dominance in other markets as part of a package deal for all the footprint is irrelevant to that end result.

KU, KSU, Tech, BU, TCU, UH, Miami, Clemson, GT, UL, Memphis, Tulane, UCF, USF, SMU, and anyone else in these footprints would result in a duplication of markets they get credit for. Any expansion with these teams would have to provide value elsewhere in the footprint. Only national brands realistically have the cachet to push through for sure so unless it's Texas or FSU it's unlikely to overlap the existing footprint.

Hey look. Someone gets it.

(07-15-2015 10:22 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(07-14-2015 09:07 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  The SEC already gets credit for KC and TX media markets. Whether it's the leverage of one school or the SEC and ESPN leveraging dominance in other markets as part of a package deal for all the footprint is irrelevant to that end result.

KU, KSU, Tech, BU, TCU, UH, Miami, Clemson, GT, UL, Memphis, Tulane, UCF, USF, SMU, and anyone else in these footprints would result in a duplication of markets they get credit for. Any expansion with these teams would have to provide value elsewhere in the footprint. Only national brands realistically have the cachet to push through for sure so unless it's Texas or FSU it's unlikely to overlap the existing footprint.

Hey look. Someone gets it.

Actually it's yet another opinion. Just like yours and mine. None are based of any actual evidence other than extremely vague statements about the "SEC footprint" that do not address any specifics to the state of Texas.

There is no proof either way. Nobody really knows if people in ElPaso or Amarillo are paying full price for SECN. I'm not saying it's impossible. I just find it hard to believe that any 1 school can bring the entire state of Texas.

Until we get some specific information that addresses this I don't think anybody can claim to be right on this one. But don't let that stop you from being the Bucaineer of the SEC. Keep up the fine work. In the meantime you might want to study up on the difference between an opinion and a fact. You seem to struggle with that one for some reason.