(04-09-2017 06:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  As far as additions from the Big 12 that add to the bottom line for the ACC and for the SEC:

SEC: Texas, Oklahoma

ACC: Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Texas, T.C.U., West Virginia

As far as additions that would add to the attendance mean of the ACC and SEC:

SEC: Texas, Oklahoma

ACC: Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, West Virginia

So as things appear to me if our two conferences are going to split the schools that add to our bottom line then the SEC taking Oklahoma is essential. Texas is a plus.

For the ACC your real options are much greater in number than you might have believed. You actually could take West Virginia, Iowa State and Kansas and increase your Mean Revenue. West Virginia and Iowa State increase your Mean Attendance. Then if the Irish come on board you are set.

If the SEC had to take Texas Tech and Oklahoma State to get Texas and Oklahoma we still increase our Mean Revenue, but our Mean attendance will go down.

BTW: Conference Mean Attendance 2016:

1. SEC: 77,565
2. B1G: 66,162
3. B12: 57,238
4. PAC: 50,112
5. ACC: 49,827

Conference Mean Revenue:

1. SEC: $121,240,504
2. B1G: $108,269,417
3. B12: $102,170,537
4. PAC: $ 89,239,736
5. ACC: $ 87,034,205


The Big 12:
1. Texas (8th in Attendance 97,881) (1st in Revenue $182,104,126) Bonus: AAU
2. Oklahoma (13th in Attendance 86,857) (4th in Revenue $150,371,578)
3. West Virginia (31st in Attendance 57,583) (39th in Revenue $91,412,352)
4. Oklahoma State (35th in Attendance 53,814) (42nd in Revenue $90,049,297)
5. Texas Tech (30th in Attendance 58,250) (61st in Revenue $72,750,020)
6. Iowa State (37th in Attendance 52,557) (55th in Revenue $78,355,500) Bonus: AAU
7. T.C.U. (49th in Attendance 45,168) (34th in Revenue $93,259,382)
8. Baylor (47th in Attendance 45,838) (41st in Revenue $90,769,041)
9. Kansas State (39th in Attendance 51,919) (56th in Revenue $77,936,660)
10. Kansas (81st in Attendance 25,828) (31st in Revenue $94,697,418) Bonus: AAU

Any further expansion will be about proper fit not money and not attendance. Your own commissioner has said as much.
MR. SEC said that Vanderbilt didn't "fit" the SEC. Nashville was too large for SEC towns and the SEC was not built on "privates". So that would take Texas off of your list because Austin is way bigger than Nashville. It would also remove Oklahoma (and Oklahoma State) off of the ACC's list as we have already said no to a deal that included Oklahoma.

(04-12-2017 12:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-09-2017 06:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  As far as additions from the Big 12 that add to the bottom line for the ACC and for the SEC:

SEC: Texas, Oklahoma

ACC: Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Texas, T.C.U., West Virginia

As far as additions that would add to the attendance mean of the ACC and SEC:

SEC: Texas, Oklahoma

ACC: Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, West Virginia

So as things appear to me if our two conferences are going to split the schools that add to our bottom line then the SEC taking Oklahoma is essential. Texas is a plus.

For the ACC your real options are much greater in number than you might have believed. You actually could take West Virginia, Iowa State and Kansas and increase your Mean Revenue. West Virginia and Iowa State increase your Mean Attendance. Then if the Irish come on board you are set.

If the SEC had to take Texas Tech and Oklahoma State to get Texas and Oklahoma we still increase our Mean Revenue, but our Mean attendance will go down.

BTW: Conference Mean Attendance 2016:

1. SEC: 77,565
2. B1G: 66,162
3. B12: 57,238
4. PAC: 50,112
5. ACC: 49,827

Conference Mean Revenue:

1. SEC: $121,240,504
2. B1G: $108,269,417
3. B12: $102,170,537
4. PAC: $ 89,239,736
5. ACC: $ 87,034,205


The Big 12:
1. Texas (8th in Attendance 97,881) (1st in Revenue $182,104,126) Bonus: AAU
2. Oklahoma (13th in Attendance 86,857) (4th in Revenue $150,371,578)
3. West Virginia (31st in Attendance 57,583) (39th in Revenue $91,412,352)
4. Oklahoma State (35th in Attendance 53,814) (42nd in Revenue $90,049,297)
5. Texas Tech (30th in Attendance 58,250) (61st in Revenue $72,750,020)
6. Iowa State (37th in Attendance 52,557) (55th in Revenue $78,355,500) Bonus: AAU
7. T.C.U. (49th in Attendance 45,168) (34th in Revenue $93,259,382)
8. Baylor (47th in Attendance 45,838) (41st in Revenue $90,769,041)
9. Kansas State (39th in Attendance 51,919) (56th in Revenue $77,936,660)
10. Kansas (81st in Attendance 25,828) (31st in Revenue $94,697,418) Bonus: AAU

Any further expansion will be about proper fit not money and not attendance. Your own commissioner has said as much.
MR. SEC said that Vanderbilt didn't "fit" the SEC. Nashville was too large for SEC towns and the SEC was not built on "privates". So that would take Texas off of your list because Austin is way bigger than Nashville. It would also remove Oklahoma (and Oklahoma State) off of the ACC's list as we have already said no to a deal that included Oklahoma.

If you think for a minute that money won't be the primary motivation then you are either naive, or disingenuous. I know you know better than that. Fit will play a significant part of the selection process, but the money has to be right before any of it is discussed. Nobody in the SEC would turn down Texas. Obviously the fit has been considered acceptable for 3 decades because we have never given up on the talks.

(04-12-2017 12:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  Any further expansion will be about proper fit not money and not attendance. Your own commissioner has said as much.
MR. SEC said that Vanderbilt didn't "fit" the SEC. Nashville was too large for SEC towns and the SEC was not built on "privates". So that would take Texas off of your list because Austin is way bigger than Nashville. It would also remove Oklahoma (and Oklahoma State) off of the ACC's list as we have already said no to a deal that included Oklahoma.

Trade Vandy to the ACC in exchange for NC State.

(04-12-2017 12:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  Any further expansion will be about proper fit not money and not attendance. Your own commissioner has said as much.
MR. SEC said that Vanderbilt didn't "fit" the SEC. Nashville was too large for SEC towns and the SEC was not built on "privates". So that would take Texas off of your list because Austin is way bigger than Nashville. It would also remove Oklahoma (and Oklahoma State) off of the ACC's list as we have already said no to a deal that included Oklahoma.

Nashville has 1.8 million in its metro area. Austin has just over 2 million. They're really about the same although Austin is one of the fastest growing in the country.

I do agree that "fit" will matter, but money is a part of what makes a program fit or not. We won't be taking any Vandys, sure, but we'll certainly take Texas if they're on the table. What Mr. SEC was referring to was the criteria used to break down candidates. He never said a school in a large city would be disqualified. He ever said at one time the SEC might go after Pittsburgh...

(04-12-2017 01:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-12-2017 12:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-09-2017 06:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  As far as additions from the Big 12 that add to the bottom line for the ACC and for the SEC:

SEC: Texas, Oklahoma

ACC: Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Texas, T.C.U., West Virginia

As far as additions that would add to the attendance mean of the ACC and SEC:

SEC: Texas, Oklahoma

ACC: Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, West Virginia

So as things appear to me if our two conferences are going to split the schools that add to our bottom line then the SEC taking Oklahoma is essential. Texas is a plus.

For the ACC your real options are much greater in number than you might have believed. You actually could take West Virginia, Iowa State and Kansas and increase your Mean Revenue. West Virginia and Iowa State increase your Mean Attendance. Then if the Irish come on board you are set.

If the SEC had to take Texas Tech and Oklahoma State to get Texas and Oklahoma we still increase our Mean Revenue, but our Mean attendance will go down.

BTW: Conference Mean Attendance 2016:

1. SEC: 77,565
2. B1G: 66,162
3. B12: 57,238
4. PAC: 50,112
5. ACC: 49,827

Conference Mean Revenue:

1. SEC: $121,240,504
2. B1G: $108,269,417
3. B12: $102,170,537
4. PAC: $ 89,239,736
5. ACC: $ 87,034,205


The Big 12:
1. Texas (8th in Attendance 97,881) (1st in Revenue $182,104,126) Bonus: AAU
2. Oklahoma (13th in Attendance 86,857) (4th in Revenue $150,371,578)
3. West Virginia (31st in Attendance 57,583) (39th in Revenue $91,412,352)
4. Oklahoma State (35th in Attendance 53,814) (42nd in Revenue $90,049,297)
5. Texas Tech (30th in Attendance 58,250) (61st in Revenue $72,750,020)
6. Iowa State (37th in Attendance 52,557) (55th in Revenue $78,355,500) Bonus: AAU
7. T.C.U. (49th in Attendance 45,168) (34th in Revenue $93,259,382)
8. Baylor (47th in Attendance 45,838) (41st in Revenue $90,769,041)
9. Kansas State (39th in Attendance 51,919) (56th in Revenue $77,936,660)
10. Kansas (81st in Attendance 25,828) (31st in Revenue $94,697,418) Bonus: AAU

Any further expansion will be about proper fit not money and not attendance. Your own commissioner has said as much.
MR. SEC said that Vanderbilt didn't "fit" the SEC. Nashville was too large for SEC towns and the SEC was not built on "privates". So that would take Texas off of your list because Austin is way bigger than Nashville. It would also remove Oklahoma (and Oklahoma State) off of the ACC's list as we have already said no to a deal that included Oklahoma.

If you think for a minute that money won't be the primary motivation then you are either naive, or disingenuous. I know you know better than that. Fit will play a significant part of the selection process, but the money has to be right before any of it is discussed. Nobody in the SEC would turn down Texas. Obviously the fit has been considered acceptable for 3 decades because we have never given up on the talks.

Money or the lack of it is a part of "fit".
It is not likely that Wake Forest or Georgia Tech would ever join the SEC. They just couldn't afford to compete. Even with an additional $15 million per year it would only get those schools up to Vanderbilt's level. And we know that Vandy hasn't sniffed a SEC football championship.....ever!
There is no guarantee that SEC membership will boost a teams gross revenue to a level that would allow them to be competitive with the Alabama's and LSU's.
AS attendance drops in all conferences except the SEC and the ACC the prospect for higher and higher gross revenue becomes more dependent on sources outside of ticket sales.
Kansas with revenues of $94 million blows the mind knowing that they can generate that much revenue in a small state and football attendance that only averages 25,000. How much do they charge for a Coke?

(04-14-2017 10:34 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-12-2017 01:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-12-2017 12:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-09-2017 06:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  As far as additions from the Big 12 that add to the bottom line for the ACC and for the SEC:

SEC: Texas, Oklahoma

ACC: Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Texas, T.C.U., West Virginia

As far as additions that would add to the attendance mean of the ACC and SEC:

SEC: Texas, Oklahoma

ACC: Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, West Virginia

So as things appear to me if our two conferences are going to split the schools that add to our bottom line then the SEC taking Oklahoma is essential. Texas is a plus.

For the ACC your real options are much greater in number than you might have believed. You actually could take West Virginia, Iowa State and Kansas and increase your Mean Revenue. West Virginia and Iowa State increase your Mean Attendance. Then if the Irish come on board you are set.

If the SEC had to take Texas Tech and Oklahoma State to get Texas and Oklahoma we still increase our Mean Revenue, but our Mean attendance will go down.

BTW: Conference Mean Attendance 2016:

1. SEC: 77,565
2. B1G: 66,162
3. B12: 57,238
4. PAC: 50,112
5. ACC: 49,827

Conference Mean Revenue:

1. SEC: $121,240,504
2. B1G: $108,269,417
3. B12: $102,170,537
4. PAC: $ 89,239,736
5. ACC: $ 87,034,205


The Big 12:
1. Texas (8th in Attendance 97,881) (1st in Revenue $182,104,126) Bonus: AAU
2. Oklahoma (13th in Attendance 86,857) (4th in Revenue $150,371,578)
3. West Virginia (31st in Attendance 57,583) (39th in Revenue $91,412,352)
4. Oklahoma State (35th in Attendance 53,814) (42nd in Revenue $90,049,297)
5. Texas Tech (30th in Attendance 58,250) (61st in Revenue $72,750,020)
6. Iowa State (37th in Attendance 52,557) (55th in Revenue $78,355,500) Bonus: AAU
7. T.C.U. (49th in Attendance 45,168) (34th in Revenue $93,259,382)
8. Baylor (47th in Attendance 45,838) (41st in Revenue $90,769,041)
9. Kansas State (39th in Attendance 51,919) (56th in Revenue $77,936,660)
10. Kansas (81st in Attendance 25,828) (31st in Revenue $94,697,418) Bonus: AAU

Any further expansion will be about proper fit not money and not attendance. Your own commissioner has said as much.
MR. SEC said that Vanderbilt didn't "fit" the SEC. Nashville was too large for SEC towns and the SEC was not built on "privates". So that would take Texas off of your list because Austin is way bigger than Nashville. It would also remove Oklahoma (and Oklahoma State) off of the ACC's list as we have already said no to a deal that included Oklahoma.

If you think for a minute that money won't be the primary motivation then you are either naive, or disingenuous. I know you know better than that. Fit will play a significant part of the selection process, but the money has to be right before any of it is discussed. Nobody in the SEC would turn down Texas. Obviously the fit has been considered acceptable for 3 decades because we have never given up on the talks.

Money or the lack of it is a part of "fit".
It is not likely that Wake Forest or Georgia Tech would ever join the SEC. They just couldn't afford to compete. Even with an additional $15 million per year it would only get those schools up to Vanderbilt's level. And we know that Vandy hasn't sniffed a SEC football championship.....ever!
There is no guarantee that SEC membership will boost a teams gross revenue to a level that would allow them to be competitive with the Alabama's and LSU's.
AS attendance drops in all conferences except the SEC and the ACC the prospect for higher and higher gross revenue becomes more dependent on sources outside of ticket sales.
Kansas with revenues of $94 million blows the mind knowing that they can generate that much revenue in a small state and football attendance that only averages 25,000. How much do they charge for a Coke?

Maybe, unlike at Coastal Carolina, their cheerleaders work for the Athletic Department.

(04-14-2017 10:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 10:34 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-12-2017 01:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-12-2017 12:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-09-2017 06:01 PM)JRsec Wrote:  As far as additions from the Big 12 that add to the bottom line for the ACC and for the SEC:

SEC: Texas, Oklahoma

ACC: Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Texas, T.C.U., West Virginia

As far as additions that would add to the attendance mean of the ACC and SEC:

SEC: Texas, Oklahoma

ACC: Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, West Virginia

So as things appear to me if our two conferences are going to split the schools that add to our bottom line then the SEC taking Oklahoma is essential. Texas is a plus.

For the ACC your real options are much greater in number than you might have believed. You actually could take West Virginia, Iowa State and Kansas and increase your Mean Revenue. West Virginia and Iowa State increase your Mean Attendance. Then if the Irish come on board you are set.

If the SEC had to take Texas Tech and Oklahoma State to get Texas and Oklahoma we still increase our Mean Revenue, but our Mean attendance will go down.

BTW: Conference Mean Attendance 2016:

1. SEC: 77,565
2. B1G: 66,162
3. B12: 57,238
4. PAC: 50,112
5. ACC: 49,827

Conference Mean Revenue:

1. SEC: $121,240,504
2. B1G: $108,269,417
3. B12: $102,170,537
4. PAC: $ 89,239,736
5. ACC: $ 87,034,205


The Big 12:
1. Texas (8th in Attendance 97,881) (1st in Revenue $182,104,126) Bonus: AAU
2. Oklahoma (13th in Attendance 86,857) (4th in Revenue $150,371,578)
3. West Virginia (31st in Attendance 57,583) (39th in Revenue $91,412,352)
4. Oklahoma State (35th in Attendance 53,814) (42nd in Revenue $90,049,297)
5. Texas Tech (30th in Attendance 58,250) (61st in Revenue $72,750,020)
6. Iowa State (37th in Attendance 52,557) (55th in Revenue $78,355,500) Bonus: AAU
7. T.C.U. (49th in Attendance 45,168) (34th in Revenue $93,259,382)
8. Baylor (47th in Attendance 45,838) (41st in Revenue $90,769,041)
9. Kansas State (39th in Attendance 51,919) (56th in Revenue $77,936,660)
10. Kansas (81st in Attendance 25,828) (31st in Revenue $94,697,418) Bonus: AAU

Any further expansion will be about proper fit not money and not attendance. Your own commissioner has said as much.
MR. SEC said that Vanderbilt didn't "fit" the SEC. Nashville was too large for SEC towns and the SEC was not built on "privates". So that would take Texas off of your list because Austin is way bigger than Nashville. It would also remove Oklahoma (and Oklahoma State) off of the ACC's list as we have already said no to a deal that included Oklahoma.

If you think for a minute that money won't be the primary motivation then you are either naive, or disingenuous. I know you know better than that. Fit will play a significant part of the selection process, but the money has to be right before any of it is discussed. Nobody in the SEC would turn down Texas. Obviously the fit has been considered acceptable for 3 decades because we have never given up on the talks.

Money or the lack of it is a part of "fit".
It is not likely that Wake Forest or Georgia Tech would ever join the SEC. They just couldn't afford to compete. Even with an additional $15 million per year it would only get those schools up to Vanderbilt's level. And we know that Vandy hasn't sniffed a SEC football championship.....ever!
There is no guarantee that SEC membership will boost a teams gross revenue to a level that would allow them to be competitive with the Alabama's and LSU's.
AS attendance drops in all conferences except the SEC and the ACC the prospect for higher and higher gross revenue becomes more dependent on sources outside of ticket sales.
Kansas with revenues of $94 million blows the mind knowing that they can generate that much revenue in a small state and football attendance that only averages 25,000. How much do they charge for a Coke?

Maybe, unlike at Coastal Carolina, their cheerleaders work for the Athletic Department.

Low blow, literally.

I believe it was in an article that reviewed the Aggie book 100 year decision, which quoted a KU AD or athletic person saying that the SEC didn't express a ton of interest in KU when KU sent out feelers. I still feel KU's best shot at a SEC spot is if the conference adds another A&M type school and is looking to round out the numbers.

(04-14-2017 01:47 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 10:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 10:34 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-12-2017 01:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-12-2017 12:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  Any further expansion will be about proper fit not money and not attendance. Your own commissioner has said as much.
MR. SEC said that Vanderbilt didn't "fit" the SEC. Nashville was too large for SEC towns and the SEC was not built on "privates". So that would take Texas off of your list because Austin is way bigger than Nashville. It would also remove Oklahoma (and Oklahoma State) off of the ACC's list as we have already said no to a deal that included Oklahoma.

If you think for a minute that money won't be the primary motivation then you are either naive, or disingenuous. I know you know better than that. Fit will play a significant part of the selection process, but the money has to be right before any of it is discussed. Nobody in the SEC would turn down Texas. Obviously the fit has been considered acceptable for 3 decades because we have never given up on the talks.

Money or the lack of it is a part of "fit".
It is not likely that Wake Forest or Georgia Tech would ever join the SEC. They just couldn't afford to compete. Even with an additional $15 million per year it would only get those schools up to Vanderbilt's level. And we know that Vandy hasn't sniffed a SEC football championship.....ever!
There is no guarantee that SEC membership will boost a teams gross revenue to a level that would allow them to be competitive with the Alabama's and LSU's.
AS attendance drops in all conferences except the SEC and the ACC the prospect for higher and higher gross revenue becomes more dependent on sources outside of ticket sales.
Kansas with revenues of $94 million blows the mind knowing that they can generate that much revenue in a small state and football attendance that only averages 25,000. How much do they charge for a Coke?

Maybe, unlike at Coastal Carolina, their cheerleaders work for the Athletic Department.

Low blow, literally.

I believe it was in an article that reviewed the Aggie book 100 year decision, which quoted a KU AD or athletic person saying that the SEC didn't express a ton of interest in KU when KU sent out feelers. I still feel KU's best shot at a SEC spot is if the conference adds another A&M type school and is looking to round out the numbers.

Yes. If Oklahoma came on board and didn't have to bring OSU then Kansas could get a look. But we would make more money off of West Virginia and you know that I don't see them as a great fit either.

(04-14-2017 02:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 01:47 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 10:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 10:34 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-12-2017 01:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  If you think for a minute that money won't be the primary motivation then you are either naive, or disingenuous. I know you know better than that. Fit will play a significant part of the selection process, but the money has to be right before any of it is discussed. Nobody in the SEC would turn down Texas. Obviously the fit has been considered acceptable for 3 decades because we have never given up on the talks.

Money or the lack of it is a part of "fit".
It is not likely that Wake Forest or Georgia Tech would ever join the SEC. They just couldn't afford to compete. Even with an additional $15 million per year it would only get those schools up to Vanderbilt's level. And we know that Vandy hasn't sniffed a SEC football championship.....ever!
There is no guarantee that SEC membership will boost a teams gross revenue to a level that would allow them to be competitive with the Alabama's and LSU's.
AS attendance drops in all conferences except the SEC and the ACC the prospect for higher and higher gross revenue becomes more dependent on sources outside of ticket sales.
Kansas with revenues of $94 million blows the mind knowing that they can generate that much revenue in a small state and football attendance that only averages 25,000. How much do they charge for a Coke?

Maybe, unlike at Coastal Carolina, their cheerleaders work for the Athletic Department.

Low blow, literally.

I believe it was in an article that reviewed the Aggie book 100 year decision, which quoted a KU AD or athletic person saying that the SEC didn't express a ton of interest in KU when KU sent out feelers. I still feel KU's best shot at a SEC spot is if the conference adds another A&M type school and is looking to round out the numbers.

Yes. If Oklahoma came on board and didn't have to bring OSU then Kansas could get a look. But we would make more money off of West Virginia and you know that I don't see them as a great fit either.

Now JR,
You know that eventually you will end up with 16.

Ole Miss, Miss. State, Arkansas, LSU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, A&M and TexasTech/Baylor in the west and
Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, South Carolina and Florida in the east.

Missouri and Kansas go to the B1G
TCU and West Virginia to the ACC as well as Texas as a partial.

(04-14-2017 02:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 01:47 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 10:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 10:34 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-12-2017 01:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  If you think for a minute that money won't be the primary motivation then you are either naive, or disingenuous. I know you know better than that. Fit will play a significant part of the selection process, but the money has to be right before any of it is discussed. Nobody in the SEC would turn down Texas. Obviously the fit has been considered acceptable for 3 decades because we have never given up on the talks.

Money or the lack of it is a part of "fit".
It is not likely that Wake Forest or Georgia Tech would ever join the SEC. They just couldn't afford to compete. Even with an additional $15 million per year it would only get those schools up to Vanderbilt's level. And we know that Vandy hasn't sniffed a SEC football championship.....ever!
There is no guarantee that SEC membership will boost a teams gross revenue to a level that would allow them to be competitive with the Alabama's and LSU's.
AS attendance drops in all conferences except the SEC and the ACC the prospect for higher and higher gross revenue becomes more dependent on sources outside of ticket sales.
Kansas with revenues of $94 million blows the mind knowing that they can generate that much revenue in a small state and football attendance that only averages 25,000. How much do they charge for a Coke?

Maybe, unlike at Coastal Carolina, their cheerleaders work for the Athletic Department.

Low blow, literally.

I believe it was in an article that reviewed the Aggie book 100 year decision, which quoted a KU AD or athletic person saying that the SEC didn't express a ton of interest in KU when KU sent out feelers. I still feel KU's best shot at a SEC spot is if the conference adds another A&M type school and is looking to round out the numbers.

Yes. If Oklahoma came on board and didn't have to bring OSU then Kansas could get a look. But we would make more money off of West Virginia and you know that I don't see them as a great fit either.

WVU today is a much better pick than they were 5-7 years ago. Their Olympic sports facilities are built and now meet P5 standards, airport improvements, and better fan behavior should drastically improve their stock.

(04-14-2017 05:07 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 02:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Yes. If Oklahoma came on board and didn't have to bring OSU then Kansas could get a look. But we would make more money off of West Virginia and you know that I don't see them as a great fit either.

WVU today is a much better pick than they were 5-7 years ago. Their Olympic sports facilities are built and now meet P5 standards, airport improvements, and better fan behavior should drastically improve their stock.

I would agree with that. The Big 12 has been good for them. They've had extra revenue and exposure to pick up their game.

I really don't think they're a bad fit for the SEC. I think the question is who do we NEED to take to make the numbers work.