http://www.sportsvideo.org/2017/04/13/es...totalplay/


I just wonder what happens when Juan from Guadalajara calls Paul and demands to speak to Laura?

(04-20-2017 10:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  http://www.sportsvideo.org/2017/04/13/es...totalplay/


I just wonder what happens when Juan from Guadalajara calls Paul and demands to speak to Laura?

Conferencia Sudeste!

Does anyone besides me find it particularly interesting that the SECN is on air in Mexico? Is it more competition for the LHN? Is it one more reason to merge the LHN into another network? Does it make it more likely we pick up a second Texas school? It just seems to me that the most natural source of interest to Mexico is Texas. I'm not sure what it means, but it somehow feels right for our future. It certainly feels right for a Texa-homa type deal or more. We'll see?

(04-21-2017 01:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 10:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  http://www.sportsvideo.org/2017/04/13/es...totalplay/


I just wonder what happens when Juan from Guadalajara calls Paul and demands to speak to Laura?

Conferencia Sudeste!

Does anyone besides me find it particularly interesting that the SECN is on air in Mexico? Is it more competition for the LHN? Is it one more reason to merge the LHN into another network? Does it make it more likely we pick up a second Texas school? It just seems to me that the most natural source of interest to Mexico is Texas. I'm not sure what it means, but it somehow feels right for our future. It certainly feels right for a Texa-homa type deal or more. We'll see?

Driving back roads in Texas you can listen to TCU, Texas or A&M games in Spanish on am stations

New Mexico & San Diego State to the SEC? JK

Between 2000-2010 the Hispanic & Latino population was the fastest growing demographic in the US.

SEC Mexican American 2010 population:
Alabama 122,911 2.6%
Arkansas 138,194 4.7%
Florida 629,718 3.3%
Georgia 519,502 5.4%
Kentucky 82,110 1.9%
Louisiana 78,643 1.7%
Mississippi 52,459 1.8%
Missouri 147,254 2.5%
South Carolina 138,350 3.0%
Tennessee 186,615 2.9%
Texas 7,951,193 31.6%

(That's a population just under 2.1 million before you even count Texas.)

Others:
Oklahoma 267,016 7.1%
Kansas 247,297 8.7%
Iowa 117,090 3.8%
West Virginia 9,704 0.5%
Arizona 1,657,668 25.9%
California 11,423,146 30.7%
New Mexico 590,890 28.7%
New York 457,288 2.4%
North Carolina 486,960 5.1%

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...population

(04-21-2017 01:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 10:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  http://www.sportsvideo.org/2017/04/13/es...totalplay/


I just wonder what happens when Juan from Guadalajara calls Paul and demands to speak to Laura?

Conferencia Sudeste!

Does anyone besides me find it particularly interesting that the SECN is on air in Mexico? Is it more competition for the LHN? Is it one more reason to merge the LHN into another network? Does it make it more likely we pick up a second Texas school? It just seems to me that the most natural source of interest to Mexico is Texas. I'm not sure what it means, but it somehow feels right for our future. It certainly feels right for a Texa-homa type deal or more. We'll see?

I think it's an incredible business decision. My hope is that the Spanish version is also available in the US, not sure what the plans are on that.

I was also thinking that a move like this should aid the decision for Texas. ESPN is currently the only American media company that's created a significant crossover profile in Latin America. In the future a growing percentage of UT's fans will likely be of Latino descent and be familiar with the Spanish language.

(04-21-2017 09:54 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 01:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 10:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  http://www.sportsvideo.org/2017/04/13/es...totalplay/


I just wonder what happens when Juan from Guadalajara calls Paul and demands to speak to Laura?

Conferencia Sudeste!

Does anyone besides me find it particularly interesting that the SECN is on air in Mexico? Is it more competition for the LHN? Is it one more reason to merge the LHN into another network? Does it make it more likely we pick up a second Texas school? It just seems to me that the most natural source of interest to Mexico is Texas. I'm not sure what it means, but it somehow feels right for our future. It certainly feels right for a Texa-homa type deal or more. We'll see?

I think it's an incredible business decision. My hope is that the Spanish version is also available in the US, not sure what the plans are on that.

I was also thinking that a move like this should aid the decision for Texas. ESPN is currently the only American media company that's created a significant crossover profile in Latin America. In the future a growing percentage of UT's fans will likely be of Latino descent and be familiar with the Spanish language.

This business deal could be a tell in the direction things go for the SEC. The move itself would seem to indicate that the SEC will be seeking a larger stake in the state of Texas. How do we seek that stake? When I said some form of Texa-homa the obvious move would be a play for Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. Since such a move would also be one that cumulatively would still meet our metrics I'd say that's the first angle we'll play. But should Texas have other ideas, Texas Tech along with T.C.U. essentially nail the entire state down as an SEC state. So include Oklahoma and if necessary Oklahoma State in that mix and the same transition of Texas to a solidly SEC state occurs. I think Texas knows this and won't want to see this happen. The SEC won't want to take all 4 current Texas Big 12 schools either. So in this case an interesting variation of Texa-homa could be unveiled. Texas, Baylor, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State. If Texas feels that there is a high degree of likelihood that T.C.U. and Tech could land a spot in the PAC, they may choose to see those schools in a P conference, but not in one where a good percentage of their income was the same as their own. The SEC gets the same impact from this and Baylor's revenue is better than Tech's and they are an easier trip for SEC fans. It wouldn't be my choice, but it's possible. So then should Tech and T.C.U. head to the PAC and ESPN desired to end the Big 12 the ACC could take Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, and West Virginia and build a wall under the Big 10. The could complete this wall by adding Cincinnati and Connecticut to move to 20 and pick up the markets for their new networks. Notre Dame stays independent and all 10 Big 12 properties are accounted for.

Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville
(All are basketball schools, but KState and Louisville would be solid in football)

Connecticut, Boston College, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
(All are basetball schools, but Pitt, Syracuse and West Virginia emerge stronger for football)

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech
(Four are basketball schools but all improve in football to compete with Va Tech)


Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest
(Four good to stellar football programs)

The SEC:
Arkansas, Baylor, Missouri, Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Alabama, Auburn, L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

ESPN uses the SEC to cover Texas and land Oklahoma. ESPN uses the ACC to move into Big 10 territory. Indiana, Ohio, Iowa, and Illinois are now penetrated with the product in the Northern Midwest. New England shifts even more toward the ACC and the New York market is incrementally moved more in the ACC's direction. This creates a nice buffer for the ACC as a whole.

(04-21-2017 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 09:54 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 01:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-20-2017 10:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  http://www.sportsvideo.org/2017/04/13/es...totalplay/


I just wonder what happens when Juan from Guadalajara calls Paul and demands to speak to Laura?

Conferencia Sudeste!

Does anyone besides me find it particularly interesting that the SECN is on air in Mexico? Is it more competition for the LHN? Is it one more reason to merge the LHN into another network? Does it make it more likely we pick up a second Texas school? It just seems to me that the most natural source of interest to Mexico is Texas. I'm not sure what it means, but it somehow feels right for our future. It certainly feels right for a Texa-homa type deal or more. We'll see?

I think it's an incredible business decision. My hope is that the Spanish version is also available in the US, not sure what the plans are on that.

I was also thinking that a move like this should aid the decision for Texas. ESPN is currently the only American media company that's created a significant crossover profile in Latin America. In the future a growing percentage of UT's fans will likely be of Latino descent and be familiar with the Spanish language.

This business deal could be a tell in the direction things go for the SEC. The move itself would seem to indicate that the SEC will be seeking a larger stake in the state of Texas. How do we seek that stake? When I said some form of Texa-homa the obvious move would be a play for Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. Since such a move would also be one that cumulatively would still meet our metrics I'd say that's the first angle we'll play. But should Texas have other ideas, Texas Tech along with T.C.U. essentially nail the entire state down as an SEC state. So include Oklahoma and if necessary Oklahoma State in that mix and the same transition of Texas to a solidly SEC state occurs. I think Texas knows this and won't want to see this happen. The SEC won't want to take all 4 current Texas Big 12 schools either. So in this case an interesting variation of Texa-homa could be unveiled. Texas, Baylor, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State. If Texas feels that there is a high degree of likelihood that T.C.U. and Tech could land a spot in the PAC, they may choose to see those schools in a P conference, but not in one where a good percentage of their income was the same as their own. The SEC gets the same impact from this and Baylor's revenue is better than Tech's and they are an easier trip for SEC fans. It wouldn't be my choice, but it's possible. So then should Tech and T.C.U. head to the PAC and ESPN desired to end the Big 12 the ACC could take Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, and West Virginia and build a wall under the Big 10. The could complete this wall by adding Cincinnati and Connecticut to move to 20 and pick up the markets for their new networks. Notre Dame stays independent and all 10 Big 12 properties are accounted for.

Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville
(All are basketball schools, but KState and Louisville would be solid in football)

Connecticut, Boston College, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
(All are basetball schools, but Pitt, Syracuse and West Virginia emerge stronger for football)

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech
(Four are basketball schools but all improve in football to compete with Va Tech)


Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest
(Four good to stellar football programs)

The SEC:
Arkansas, Baylor, Missouri, Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Alabama, Auburn, L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

ESPN uses the SEC to cover Texas and land Oklahoma. ESPN uses the ACC to move into Big 10 territory. Indiana, Ohio, Iowa, and Illinois are now penetrated with the product in the Northern Midwest. New England shifts even more toward the ACC and the New York market is incrementally moved more in the ACC's direction. This creates a nice buffer for the ACC as a whole.

Or Texas, TT, TCU & WV to the ACC with the SEC taking Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas & Iowa State. UCONN & Cincinnati would then be a possibility for 20 if desired.

There's just isn't anything there for the ACC to take in Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, and West Virginia. No markets or brands. Those 4-6 would only destabilize the conference & open the door for the B1G. I don't see it achieving the stated goal.

Latino and Spanish speaking audiences can not be ignored.

http://worldsoccertalk.com/2017/01/14/un...g-ratings/

Liga MX, the top soccer league in Mexico, is starting to or has surpassed NHL ratings in the US market. the US' MLS is still well behind MX in ratings mostly due to the lower salary cap restrictions.

Reaching out to an untapped market that is right in your backyard is natural choice; expanding the channel into adjacent markets can work if done right. It should work, here in Houston, there are tons of NFL fans that are latino. If the right environment is nurtured, the SECN should be able to add some more fans and support for their programs.

I think it's likely that whatever network gets fully developed...either an ACC Network or an LHN repurposed as a Big 12 Network...will end up being broadcast in Mexico as well.

All things considered, with the market potential of Latin America added to the pot, I think it becomes ever more stark that reworking the ACC/Big 12 relationship would be best.

Do it something like this...


SEC adds Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Georgia Tech, and TCU

Big 12 adds Houston, Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Louisville, Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Notre Dame


Stay with me now...

The SEC gets the core of the old ACC along with access to DFW. The Big 12 gets most of the football quality from the ACC and a ton of new markets for the network.

This way, both leagues are well positioned to take advantage of market dynamics in both the US and Latin America. They both have a significant share of states where the Hispanic population is large and influential. They both have a great deal of content that could appeal to a wide variety of audiences. There's a significant level of balance here.

SEC

West: Texas A&M, TCU, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri

South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia Tech

East: Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky

North: Virginia, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, South Carolina

Play 4 division games, 1 permanent rival from each division, 1 rotating match-up from each division = 10 games

---------------------------------------------------
Big 12/ACC conglomeration

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, Houston, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Central: Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Louisville, West Virginia, Pittsburgh

East: Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Notre Dame, Syracuse

(04-21-2017 02:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I think it's likely that whatever network gets fully developed...either an ACC Network or an LHN repurposed as a Big 12 Network...will end up being broadcast in Mexico as well.

All things considered, with the market potential of Latin America added to the pot, I think it becomes ever more stark that reworking the ACC/Big 12 relationship would be best.

Do it something like this...


SEC adds Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Georgia Tech, and TCU

Big 12 adds Houston, Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Louisville, Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Notre Dame


Stay with me now...

The SEC gets the core of the old ACC along with access to DFW. The Big 12 gets most of the football quality from the ACC and a ton of new markets for the network.

This way, both leagues are well positioned to take advantage of market dynamics in both the US and Latin America. They both have a significant share of states where the Hispanic population is large and influential. They both have a great deal of content that could appeal to a wide variety of audiences. There's a significant level of balance here.

SEC

West: Texas A&M, TCU, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri

South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia Tech

East: Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky

North: Virginia, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, South Carolina

Play 4 division games, 1 permanent rival from each division, 1 rotating match-up from each division = 10 games

---------------------------------------------------
Big 12/ACC conglomeration

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, Houston, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Central: Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Louisville, West Virginia, Pittsburgh

East: Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Notre Dame, Syracuse

That might be good for the Mexican market but I think that the SEC & ACC would create greater overall value by divvying up the Big 12 between them.

(04-21-2017 03:30 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 02:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I think it's likely that whatever network gets fully developed...either an ACC Network or an LHN repurposed as a Big 12 Network...will end up being broadcast in Mexico as well.

All things considered, with the market potential of Latin America added to the pot, I think it becomes ever more stark that reworking the ACC/Big 12 relationship would be best.

Do it something like this...


SEC adds Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Georgia Tech, and TCU

Big 12 adds Houston, Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Louisville, Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Notre Dame


Stay with me now...

The SEC gets the core of the old ACC along with access to DFW. The Big 12 gets most of the football quality from the ACC and a ton of new markets for the network.

This way, both leagues are well positioned to take advantage of market dynamics in both the US and Latin America. They both have a significant share of states where the Hispanic population is large and influential. They both have a great deal of content that could appeal to a wide variety of audiences. There's a significant level of balance here.

SEC

West: Texas A&M, TCU, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri

South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia Tech

East: Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky

North: Virginia, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, South Carolina

Play 4 division games, 1 permanent rival from each division, 1 rotating match-up from each division = 10 games

---------------------------------------------------
Big 12/ACC conglomeration

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, Houston, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Central: Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Louisville, West Virginia, Pittsburgh

East: Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Notre Dame, Syracuse

That might be good for the Mexican market but I think that the SEC & ACC would create greater overall value by divvying up the Big 12 between them.

What I was getting at though is there aren't enough brands in the Big 12 to go around. Somebody wins that alignment and somebody loses.

That and the ACCN is going to be hard to market in the long term because of the decreasing market model. I was just saying that the expansion into Mexico makes that distinction even clearer. We're going to have to adapt more to demographics and a focus on content rather than our traditional way of looking at it.

I think the 2 leagues I outlined above would be more profitable than the SEC and ACC simply splitting the Big 12.

(04-21-2017 03:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 03:30 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 02:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I think it's likely that whatever network gets fully developed...either an ACC Network or an LHN repurposed as a Big 12 Network...will end up being broadcast in Mexico as well.

All things considered, with the market potential of Latin America added to the pot, I think it becomes ever more stark that reworking the ACC/Big 12 relationship would be best.

Do it something like this...


SEC adds Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Georgia Tech, and TCU

Big 12 adds Houston, Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Louisville, Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Notre Dame


Stay with me now...

The SEC gets the core of the old ACC along with access to DFW. The Big 12 gets most of the football quality from the ACC and a ton of new markets for the network.

This way, both leagues are well positioned to take advantage of market dynamics in both the US and Latin America. They both have a significant share of states where the Hispanic population is large and influential. They both have a great deal of content that could appeal to a wide variety of audiences. There's a significant level of balance here.

SEC

West: Texas A&M, TCU, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri

South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia Tech

East: Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky

North: Virginia, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, South Carolina

Play 4 division games, 1 permanent rival from each division, 1 rotating match-up from each division = 10 games

---------------------------------------------------
Big 12/ACC conglomeration

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, Houston, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Central: Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Louisville, West Virginia, Pittsburgh

East: Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Notre Dame, Syracuse

That might be good for the Mexican market but I think that the SEC & ACC would create greater overall value by divvying up the Big 12 between them.

What I was getting at though is there aren't enough brands in the Big 12 to go around. Somebody wins that alignment and somebody loses.

That and the ACCN is going to be hard to market in the long term because of the decreasing market model. I was just saying that the expansion into Mexico makes that distinction even clearer. We're going to have to adapt more to demographics and a focus on content rather than our traditional way of looking at it.

I think the 2 leagues I outlined above would be more profitable than the SEC and ACC simply splitting the Big 12.

I think ESPN just stated its objectives. I think it wants the SEC to have a greater presence in Texas. And if we are going after the Mexican market then adding Texas and Oklahoma would be huge. If we have to take OSU and another Texas school to get it then fine.

Then if ESPN at some future point wants to shelter its best brands from the ACC in another property to which it owns the majority of rights there are 6 slots left in the SEC to take it to 24. So North Carolina and Duke, Florida State, Clemson, Virginia and Virginia Tech could join and ESPN would have it's top branding together in a conference with super cable coverage and huge content value. You would have 4 divisions of 6, semifinals for the playoff and the winner would be in the NCG. And more importantly all of the revenue stays in house. That means no OOC games in football. For that kind of conference it is absolutely the most profitable way to go.

(04-21-2017 04:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 03:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 03:30 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 02:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I think it's likely that whatever network gets fully developed...either an ACC Network or an LHN repurposed as a Big 12 Network...will end up being broadcast in Mexico as well.

All things considered, with the market potential of Latin America added to the pot, I think it becomes ever more stark that reworking the ACC/Big 12 relationship would be best.

Do it something like this...


SEC adds Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Georgia Tech, and TCU

Big 12 adds Houston, Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Louisville, Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Notre Dame


Stay with me now...

The SEC gets the core of the old ACC along with access to DFW. The Big 12 gets most of the football quality from the ACC and a ton of new markets for the network.

This way, both leagues are well positioned to take advantage of market dynamics in both the US and Latin America. They both have a significant share of states where the Hispanic population is large and influential. They both have a great deal of content that could appeal to a wide variety of audiences. There's a significant level of balance here.

SEC

West: Texas A&M, TCU, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri

South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia Tech

East: Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky

North: Virginia, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, South Carolina

Play 4 division games, 1 permanent rival from each division, 1 rotating match-up from each division = 10 games

---------------------------------------------------
Big 12/ACC conglomeration

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, Houston, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Central: Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Louisville, West Virginia, Pittsburgh

East: Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Notre Dame, Syracuse

That might be good for the Mexican market but I think that the SEC & ACC would create greater overall value by divvying up the Big 12 between them.

What I was getting at though is there aren't enough brands in the Big 12 to go around. Somebody wins that alignment and somebody loses.

That and the ACCN is going to be hard to market in the long term because of the decreasing market model. I was just saying that the expansion into Mexico makes that distinction even clearer. We're going to have to adapt more to demographics and a focus on content rather than our traditional way of looking at it.

I think the 2 leagues I outlined above would be more profitable than the SEC and ACC simply splitting the Big 12.

I think ESPN just stated its objectives. I think it wants the SEC to have a greater presence in Texas. And if we are going after the Mexican market then adding Texas and Oklahoma would be huge. If we have to take OSU and another Texas school to get it then fine.

The if ESPN at some future point wants to shelter its best brands from the ACC in another property to which it owns the majority of rights there are 6 slots left in the SEC to take it to 24. So North Carolina and Duke, Florida State and Clemson, one of the Virginia's and another could join and ESPN would have it's top branding together in conference with super cable coverage and huge content value. You would have 4 divisions of 6, semifinals for the playoff and the winner would be in the NCG. And more importantly all of the revenue stays in house.

You're probably right, but the question is whether or not Texas and ESPN are on the same page.

Will the ACC Network get the same treatment as ESPNU and the SECN? If so then it does make sense that ESPN would want the ACC in those markets as well.

(04-21-2017 04:39 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 04:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 03:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 03:30 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 02:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I think it's likely that whatever network gets fully developed...either an ACC Network or an LHN repurposed as a Big 12 Network...will end up being broadcast in Mexico as well.

All things considered, with the market potential of Latin America added to the pot, I think it becomes ever more stark that reworking the ACC/Big 12 relationship would be best.

Do it something like this...


SEC adds Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Georgia Tech, and TCU

Big 12 adds Houston, Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Louisville, Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Notre Dame


Stay with me now...

The SEC gets the core of the old ACC along with access to DFW. The Big 12 gets most of the football quality from the ACC and a ton of new markets for the network.

This way, both leagues are well positioned to take advantage of market dynamics in both the US and Latin America. They both have a significant share of states where the Hispanic population is large and influential. They both have a great deal of content that could appeal to a wide variety of audiences. There's a significant level of balance here.

SEC

West: Texas A&M, TCU, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri

South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia Tech

East: Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky

North: Virginia, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, South Carolina

Play 4 division games, 1 permanent rival from each division, 1 rotating match-up from each division = 10 games

---------------------------------------------------
Big 12/ACC conglomeration

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, Houston, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Central: Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Louisville, West Virginia, Pittsburgh

East: Florida State, Miami, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Notre Dame, Syracuse

That might be good for the Mexican market but I think that the SEC & ACC would create greater overall value by divvying up the Big 12 between them.

What I was getting at though is there aren't enough brands in the Big 12 to go around. Somebody wins that alignment and somebody loses.

That and the ACCN is going to be hard to market in the long term because of the decreasing market model. I was just saying that the expansion into Mexico makes that distinction even clearer. We're going to have to adapt more to demographics and a focus on content rather than our traditional way of looking at it.

I think the 2 leagues I outlined above would be more profitable than the SEC and ACC simply splitting the Big 12.

I think ESPN just stated its objectives. I think it wants the SEC to have a greater presence in Texas. And if we are going after the Mexican market then adding Texas and Oklahoma would be huge. If we have to take OSU and another Texas school to get it then fine.

The if ESPN at some future point wants to shelter its best brands from the ACC in another property to which it owns the majority of rights there are 6 slots left in the SEC to take it to 24. So North Carolina and Duke, Florida State and Clemson, one of the Virginia's and another could join and ESPN would have it's top branding together in conference with super cable coverage and huge content value. You would have 4 divisions of 6, semifinals for the playoff and the winner would be in the NCG. And more importantly all of the revenue stays in house.

You're probably right, but the question is whether or not Texas and ESPN are on the same page.

Will the ACC Network get the same treatment as ESPNU and the SECN? If so then it does make sense that ESPN would want the ACC in those markets as well.

I don't think so. You don't double down in overhead on an experiment. The SECN is the most successful conference network by 3 times the value over the Big 10N. The ACCN will be a completely untested entity. If the SECN can't make money in Mexico there is no way any other cable network will. We would have had the most interesting product to Mexico, and the best inventory for them, so if we can't make nobody will.

The ACC is an impractical reach for Texas and one other school. Everything minor must flyover to play. I seriously doubt Texas is hankering for that arrangement. Most folks in the know realize that Texas is faced with three options: Big 10, SEC, do nothing. The SEC has decided geographical advantages and has the old rivals. If Texas does anything those are the only two conferences that can monetarily make it worthwhile. Texa-homa gives them the minimum requirement they made of the PAC in 2011, and it puts all of the state school rivals back on each other's schedules.

I think they cave for that. Add exposure in Mexico to the deal, which helps Texas schools the most, and it's a reasonable enough reason to go for it. Our present 40.1 million could easily turn into close to 50. Furthermore it surreptitiously leaves the Big 10 needing to take from the ACC in order to expand which passively serves our needs down the road.

In my way of looking at things if ESPN accommodates Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC then they have made their statement about the ACC. For one reason Notre Dame would find more value elsewhere and a Big 10 PAC merger would likely be in the offing.

It would be fine with me at that point if the SEC moved to 32. Both Virginia schools Duke, North Carolina, and N.C. State, Florida State and Miami, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Louisville the other two Texas schools, and the two Kansas schools would put us at 32.

Now if the Big 10 takes Notre Dame and just one of Pitt, B.C., and Syracuse it's all over for both the ACC and Big 12.

(04-21-2017 05:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 04:39 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 04:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 03:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 03:30 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  That might be good for the Mexican market but I think that the SEC & ACC would create greater overall value by divvying up the Big 12 between them.

What I was getting at though is there aren't enough brands in the Big 12 to go around. Somebody wins that alignment and somebody loses.

That and the ACCN is going to be hard to market in the long term because of the decreasing market model. I was just saying that the expansion into Mexico makes that distinction even clearer. We're going to have to adapt more to demographics and a focus on content rather than our traditional way of looking at it.

I think the 2 leagues I outlined above would be more profitable than the SEC and ACC simply splitting the Big 12.

I think ESPN just stated its objectives. I think it wants the SEC to have a greater presence in Texas. And if we are going after the Mexican market then adding Texas and Oklahoma would be huge. If we have to take OSU and another Texas school to get it then fine.

The if ESPN at some future point wants to shelter its best brands from the ACC in another property to which it owns the majority of rights there are 6 slots left in the SEC to take it to 24. So North Carolina and Duke, Florida State and Clemson, one of the Virginia's and another could join and ESPN would have it's top branding together in conference with super cable coverage and huge content value. You would have 4 divisions of 6, semifinals for the playoff and the winner would be in the NCG. And more importantly all of the revenue stays in house.

You're probably right, but the question is whether or not Texas and ESPN are on the same page.

Will the ACC Network get the same treatment as ESPNU and the SECN? If so then it does make sense that ESPN would want the ACC in those markets as well.

I don't think so. You don't double down in overhead on an experiment. The SECN is the most successful conference network by 3 times the value over the Big 10N. The ACCN will be a completely untested entity. If the SECN can't make money in Mexico there is no way any other cable network will. We would have had the most interesting product to Mexico, and the best inventory for them, so if we can't make nobody will.

The ACC is an impractical reach for Texas and one other school. Everything minor must flyover to play. I seriously doubt Texas is hankering for that arrangement. Most folks in the know realize that Texas is faced with three options: Big 10, SEC, do nothing. The SEC has decided geographical advantages and has the old rivals. If Texas does anything those are the only two conferences that can monetarily make it worthwhile. Texa-homa gives them the minimum requirement they made of the PAC in 2011, and it puts all of the state school rivals back on each other's schedules.

I think they cave for that. Add exposure in Mexico to the deal, which helps Texas schools the most, and it's a reasonable enough reason to go for it. Our present 40.1 million could easily turn into close to 50. Furthermore it surreptitiously leaves the Big 10 needing to take from the ACC in order to expand which passively serves our needs down the road.

In my way of looking at things if ESPN accommodates Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC then they have made their statement about the ACC. For one reason Notre Dame would find more value elsewhere and a Big 10 PAC merger would likely be in the offing.

It would be fine with me at that point if the SEC moved to 32. Both Virginia schools Duke, North Carolina, and N.C. State, Florida State and Miami, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Louisville the other two Texas schools, and the two Kansas schools would put us at 32.

Now if the Big 10 takes Notre Dame and just one of Pitt, B.C., and Syracuse it's all over for both the ACC and Big 12.

It would be very beneficial to everyone. I'm just wondering if that is what Texas is angling for.

If everything is resolved by 2019 and we took Texahoma then have we successfully challenged the GOR? Or have we made a deal to split the Big 12?

The ACC Network could still use some additional punch. If they took TCU, Baylor, Kansas, and West Virginia then the deal is done. Traveling from the heart of TX and KS to the ACC locales would be about like traveling out West to PAC locales. I think the schools would go for it. The question would be whether or not the ACC feels the need to do it.

(04-21-2017 05:53 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 05:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 04:39 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 04:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 03:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  What I was getting at though is there aren't enough brands in the Big 12 to go around. Somebody wins that alignment and somebody loses.

That and the ACCN is going to be hard to market in the long term because of the decreasing market model. I was just saying that the expansion into Mexico makes that distinction even clearer. We're going to have to adapt more to demographics and a focus on content rather than our traditional way of looking at it.

I think the 2 leagues I outlined above would be more profitable than the SEC and ACC simply splitting the Big 12.

I think ESPN just stated its objectives. I think it wants the SEC to have a greater presence in Texas. And if we are going after the Mexican market then adding Texas and Oklahoma would be huge. If we have to take OSU and another Texas school to get it then fine.

The if ESPN at some future point wants to shelter its best brands from the ACC in another property to which it owns the majority of rights there are 6 slots left in the SEC to take it to 24. So North Carolina and Duke, Florida State and Clemson, one of the Virginia's and another could join and ESPN would have it's top branding together in conference with super cable coverage and huge content value. You would have 4 divisions of 6, semifinals for the playoff and the winner would be in the NCG. And more importantly all of the revenue stays in house.

You're probably right, but the question is whether or not Texas and ESPN are on the same page.

Will the ACC Network get the same treatment as ESPNU and the SECN? If so then it does make sense that ESPN would want the ACC in those markets as well.

I don't think so. You don't double down in overhead on an experiment. The SECN is the most successful conference network by 3 times the value over the Big 10N. The ACCN will be a completely untested entity. If the SECN can't make money in Mexico there is no way any other cable network will. We would have had the most interesting product to Mexico, and the best inventory for them, so if we can't make nobody will.

The ACC is an impractical reach for Texas and one other school. Everything minor must flyover to play. I seriously doubt Texas is hankering for that arrangement. Most folks in the know realize that Texas is faced with three options: Big 10, SEC, do nothing. The SEC has decided geographical advantages and has the old rivals. If Texas does anything those are the only two conferences that can monetarily make it worthwhile. Texa-homa gives them the minimum requirement they made of the PAC in 2011, and it puts all of the state school rivals back on each other's schedules.

I think they cave for that. Add exposure in Mexico to the deal, which helps Texas schools the most, and it's a reasonable enough reason to go for it. Our present 40.1 million could easily turn into close to 50. Furthermore it surreptitiously leaves the Big 10 needing to take from the ACC in order to expand which passively serves our needs down the road.

In my way of looking at things if ESPN accommodates Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC then they have made their statement about the ACC. For one reason Notre Dame would find more value elsewhere and a Big 10 PAC merger would likely be in the offing.

It would be fine with me at that point if the SEC moved to 32. Both Virginia schools Duke, North Carolina, and N.C. State, Florida State and Miami, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Louisville the other two Texas schools, and the two Kansas schools would put us at 32.

Now if the Big 10 takes Notre Dame and just one of Pitt, B.C., and Syracuse it's all over for both the ACC and Big 12.

It would be very beneficial to everyone. I'm just wondering if that is what Texas is angling for.

If everything is resolved by 2019 and we took Texahoma then have we successfully challenged the GOR? Or have we made a deal to split the Big 12?

The ACC Network could still use some additional punch. If they took TCU, Baylor, Kansas, and West Virginia then the deal is done. Traveling from the heart of TX and KS to the ACC locales would be about like traveling out West to PAC locales. I think the schools would go for it. The question would be whether or not the ACC feels the need to do it.

I don't think that the ACC would feel the need for those 4 schools. I don't see the old guard ACC even remotely being interested in that. It would take a substantial network increase for that to even be considered & I don't see that happening.

(04-21-2017 06:41 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 05:53 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 05:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 04:39 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 04:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think ESPN just stated its objectives. I think it wants the SEC to have a greater presence in Texas. And if we are going after the Mexican market then adding Texas and Oklahoma would be huge. If we have to take OSU and another Texas school to get it then fine.

The if ESPN at some future point wants to shelter its best brands from the ACC in another property to which it owns the majority of rights there are 6 slots left in the SEC to take it to 24. So North Carolina and Duke, Florida State and Clemson, one of the Virginia's and another could join and ESPN would have it's top branding together in conference with super cable coverage and huge content value. You would have 4 divisions of 6, semifinals for the playoff and the winner would be in the NCG. And more importantly all of the revenue stays in house.

You're probably right, but the question is whether or not Texas and ESPN are on the same page.

Will the ACC Network get the same treatment as ESPNU and the SECN? If so then it does make sense that ESPN would want the ACC in those markets as well.

I don't think so. You don't double down in overhead on an experiment. The SECN is the most successful conference network by 3 times the value over the Big 10N. The ACCN will be a completely untested entity. If the SECN can't make money in Mexico there is no way any other cable network will. We would have had the most interesting product to Mexico, and the best inventory for them, so if we can't make nobody will.

The ACC is an impractical reach for Texas and one other school. Everything minor must flyover to play. I seriously doubt Texas is hankering for that arrangement. Most folks in the know realize that Texas is faced with three options: Big 10, SEC, do nothing. The SEC has decided geographical advantages and has the old rivals. If Texas does anything those are the only two conferences that can monetarily make it worthwhile. Texa-homa gives them the minimum requirement they made of the PAC in 2011, and it puts all of the state school rivals back on each other's schedules.

I think they cave for that. Add exposure in Mexico to the deal, which helps Texas schools the most, and it's a reasonable enough reason to go for it. Our present 40.1 million could easily turn into close to 50. Furthermore it surreptitiously leaves the Big 10 needing to take from the ACC in order to expand which passively serves our needs down the road.

In my way of looking at things if ESPN accommodates Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC then they have made their statement about the ACC. For one reason Notre Dame would find more value elsewhere and a Big 10 PAC merger would likely be in the offing.

It would be fine with me at that point if the SEC moved to 32. Both Virginia schools Duke, North Carolina, and N.C. State, Florida State and Miami, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Louisville the other two Texas schools, and the two Kansas schools would put us at 32.

Now if the Big 10 takes Notre Dame and just one of Pitt, B.C., and Syracuse it's all over for both the ACC and Big 12.

It would be very beneficial to everyone. I'm just wondering if that is what Texas is angling for.

If everything is resolved by 2019 and we took Texahoma then have we successfully challenged the GOR? Or have we made a deal to split the Big 12?

The ACC Network could still use some additional punch. If they took TCU, Baylor, Kansas, and West Virginia then the deal is done. Traveling from the heart of TX and KS to the ACC locales would be about like traveling out West to PAC locales. I think the schools would go for it. The question would be whether or not the ACC feels the need to do it.

I don't think that the ACC would feel the need for those 4 schools. I don't see the old guard ACC even remotely being interested in that. It would take a substantial network increase for that to even be considered & I don't see that happening.

I don't think the ACC would bite either. Besides they would just look for the network and wait to see what happens. If the PAC bit and took T.C.U. and Texas Tech then they might take Kansas and Iowa State. That's two AAU schools and chunk of Texas all in the central time zone. Then it's a done deal and the ACC might consider West Virginia.

(04-21-2017 05:53 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 05:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 04:39 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 04:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-21-2017 03:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  What I was getting at though is there aren't enough brands in the Big 12 to go around. Somebody wins that alignment and somebody loses.

That and the ACCN is going to be hard to market in the long term because of the decreasing market model. I was just saying that the expansion into Mexico makes that distinction even clearer. We're going to have to adapt more to demographics and a focus on content rather than our traditional way of looking at it.

I think the 2 leagues I outlined above would be more profitable than the SEC and ACC simply splitting the Big 12.

I think ESPN just stated its objectives. I think it wants the SEC to have a greater presence in Texas. And if we are going after the Mexican market then adding Texas and Oklahoma would be huge. If we have to take OSU and another Texas school to get it then fine.

The if ESPN at some future point wants to shelter its best brands from the ACC in another property to which it owns the majority of rights there are 6 slots left in the SEC to take it to 24. So North Carolina and Duke, Florida State and Clemson, one of the Virginia's and another could join and ESPN would have it's top branding together in conference with super cable coverage and huge content value. You would have 4 divisions of 6, semifinals for the playoff and the winner would be in the NCG. And more importantly all of the revenue stays in house.

You're probably right, but the question is whether or not Texas and ESPN are on the same page.

Will the ACC Network get the same treatment as ESPNU and the SECN? If so then it does make sense that ESPN would want the ACC in those markets as well.

I don't think so. You don't double down in overhead on an experiment. The SECN is the most successful conference network by 3 times the value over the Big 10N. The ACCN will be a completely untested entity. If the SECN can't make money in Mexico there is no way any other cable network will. We would have had the most interesting product to Mexico, and the best inventory for them, so if we can't make nobody will.

The ACC is an impractical reach for Texas and one other school. Everything minor must flyover to play. I seriously doubt Texas is hankering for that arrangement. Most folks in the know realize that Texas is faced with three options: Big 10, SEC, do nothing. The SEC has decided geographical advantages and has the old rivals. If Texas does anything those are the only two conferences that can monetarily make it worthwhile. Texa-homa gives them the minimum requirement they made of the PAC in 2011, and it puts all of the state school rivals back on each other's schedules.

I think they cave for that. Add exposure in Mexico to the deal, which helps Texas schools the most, and it's a reasonable enough reason to go for it. Our present 40.1 million could easily turn into close to 50. Furthermore it surreptitiously leaves the Big 10 needing to take from the ACC in order to expand which passively serves our needs down the road.

In my way of looking at things if ESPN accommodates Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC then they have made their statement about the ACC. For one reason Notre Dame would find more value elsewhere and a Big 10 PAC merger would likely be in the offing.

It would be fine with me at that point if the SEC moved to 32. Both Virginia schools Duke, North Carolina, and N.C. State, Florida State and Miami, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Louisville the other two Texas schools, and the two Kansas schools would put us at 32.

Now if the Big 10 takes Notre Dame and just one of Pitt, B.C., and Syracuse it's all over for both the ACC and Big 12.

It would be very beneficial to everyone. I'm just wondering if that is what Texas is angling for.

If everything is resolved by 2019 and we took Texahoma then have we successfully challenged the GOR? Or have we made a deal to split the Big 12?

The ACC Network could still use some additional punch. If they took TCU, Baylor, Kansas, and West Virginia then the deal is done. Traveling from the heart of TX and KS to the ACC locales would be about like traveling out West to PAC locales. I think the schools would go for it. The question would be whether or not the ACC feels the need to do it.

If a Texa-homa type deal to the SEC is what Texas is angling for, and I see that as a compromise position for them with regards to ESPN, they will want it to appear to be anyone's idea but theirs. That's okay and it can be easily done. If Texas Tech and T.C.U. are viable to the PAC then I look for Baylor to be that other school to go with the two Oklahoma's. Either way, Tech or Baylor, I think it would be a go. It wrap up the #1 and #7 brands in the nation and adds two athletic programs to go with them that have a gross revenue of 90 million plus if Baylor, and 70 million & 90 million if Tech. If there was absolutely no expectation of ever gaining ACC properties then maybe on a long shot we would go for Kansas and either Iowa State or West Virginia because if the PAC was interested in Tech and T.C.U. as a means of getting into to Texas taking two more is enough to dissolve the Big 12.

As to the ACC network ever being distributed in Mexico it would depend on the success of that network first.

As far as breaking the Big 12 GOR goes if Texa-homa is all that is interested in moving then we take them but in 2022 or 3 and not prior to then. If 4 more schools can be placed we could take them now. So no, I don't see it as a breaking of the GOR until there are enough votes to dissolve.

To have a successful conference network in Mexico I think you will need a quality soccer & baseball product first & foremost. Both the SEC & the ACC being strong in both of these sports I think would bold well for their networks as both conferences reach into strong Hispanic/Latino populations here in America, south Florida for the ACC & Texas for the SEC, for recruiting.

(If the ACCN is a success.)

(04-22-2017 10:11 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  To have a successful conference network in Mexico I think you will need a quality soccer & baseball product first & foremost. Both the SEC & the ACC being strong in both of these sports I think would bold well for their networks as both conferences reach into strong Hispanic/Latino populations here in America, south Florida for the ACC & Texas for the SEC, for recruiting.

(If the ACCN is a success.)

I don't know how women's soccer will pan out in a macho society. As far as baseball is concerned the SEC is much deeper and has the much longer history of being so. Until Virginia won the title a couple of years ago it had been since the 50's that the ACC even had a title in the sport. And again, since we are discussing Mexico I'm sure their interest would be in Texas schools since many of those programs have Hispanics on the teams. Miami would be, perhaps, the best draw for the ACC, but then Cubans and Mexicans don't always mesh. The two cultures, and even the Spanish spoken, varies to a large degree between the two.

But Lenville, lacrosse aside, the SEC and ACC do share many of the same interests and more of the same history and culture than either of us do with another conference. So if the ACCN is successful then a blending of the two for future involvement in Mexico might be in the offing.

My main point about Texas schools in the ACC is that it has never made business or geographical sense. Some of X's wacky trade us "South Carolina" posts make more sense. Also the ACC adding West Virginia makes more sense than taking a Texas school. Your natural additions are West Virginia, Connecticut, Cincinnati, and of course Notre Dame but only because of their East Coast ties. Geographically they are Great Lakes.