(11-07-2025 05:55 PM)OneSockUp Wrote: (11-07-2025 01:35 PM)JRsec Wrote: ESPN has had a handle on the moves since they discovered the power of their own valuations of the product. The essentially have assembled the ACC and added to the SEC to get what they wanted for nearly the last 30 years.
The SEC is not run by ESPN.
The SEC will not make a generations-long decision because of its current media partner.
The SEC will do what is in the best interest of its member institutions.
That may coincide with the best interests of ESPN -- as it did with Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas, and Oklahoma. But if there is a situation where ESPN wants the SEC to bring in a school that wouldn't benefit the league, the league will stand firm.
It's a matter of supply and demand: There is only one SEC, but there are plenty of networks and services begging for live content, and the SEC has proven itself time and again to be king in that realm.
(The ACC has never had that luxury. They could be bullied because they needed the ACC Network, and they needed to keep the league together -- so they needed to cow-tow to the Mouse.)
What a textbook case of winning a straw man fight.
The SEC and ESPN interests have aligned. They've been willing partners in as much as their objectives have been aligned.
Because of that all of the decisions made have been beneficial for the SEC long term and will continue to be. And they have been beneficial for their members. We don't by far earn the most total revenue without good reason. We kept it regional, maximized the fervor for sports in the region, and will continue to do so, and have grown a national audience that leads the nation without having to have members from outside the Old South or Southwest. In 1990-1 the presidents made a pick list after examining all regional schools and schools in Texas which they saw as the best possible market additions. We've acquired 4 of the original 6, and their secondary list existed if and when the stability of the ACC was threatened. North Carolina was then a priority and has remained one. Virginia at that time wouldn't be considered unless North Carolina joined. The two together were seen as a completion of the SEC's targeted market reach and as academic prizes.
Therefore, the SEC hasn't had to knuckle under to ESPN on anything. And if North Carolina and Virginia wind up in the SEC it will be because the SEC wanted them as secondary targets in 1991. That's why the SEC was interested in Clemson and Arkansas. Arkansas was a bridge to Texas, Texas A&M and through them Oklahoma. Clemson, which inquired, was to be a bridge to North Carolina and when Clemson withdrew interest in 1991 South Carolina took their place. Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, and Kentucky in a less direct way were all seen as the lures for North Carolina and from there possibly into Virginia.
To date the SEC's desired objectives and those of ESPN have lined up. Missouri happened because David Boren the president at Oklahoma was insistent that the SEC take Oklahoma State. A&M had already announced their intent to join and the SEC had to fulfill the two new markets clause for a contract renegotiation. ESPN allegedly suggested Missouri, their president knew and called Machen, and here they are.
ESPN does have a revenue model to protect. North Carolina and Virginia as largish markets are very much a part of that (21 million combined). Neither of those is alien to the long-range plans of the SEC. A second Florida school had been an SEC priority since before 2011. Every conference member wanted to play games in the state of Florida for recruiting purposes. UF couldn't handle all of the requests and was certainly limited by divisional play. FSU delivers the necessary control over that market for both ESPN and the SEC.
So, 3 of the now proposed targets aren't in conflict between SEC desires and a possible ESPN need to keep them secured. Say what you want to about ESPN, but they have been a much more cooperative media partner for the SEC than CBS, which didn't try to cooperate at all, and have apparently taken those same habits to the Big Ten. They haven't pushed anyone on us we didn't want. And there's a reason for that. We gave them the list of potential members we would like to have. They to date have managed most of them. There is no reason to believe that won't continue.
All that's left to carry on about is Duke. Slive was receptive to them as a travel partner with UNC in 2011. But UNC made it clear it was only something they would desire to do if the ACC lost more schools than Maryland. They didn't.
The operative question now is will they still be the desired companion and would the SEC want them. Contrary to recent rumblings on this site, I think the presidents would be interested in having their association. We'll find out soon enough. ESPN has not bullied the SEC ever. CBS refused to work with us on a simple matter and they got the boot.
The ACC worked willingly with ESPN because ESPN helped them raid the Big East before the Big East raided them. ESPN helped them land Miami. And perhaps they have even helped to cover the exit of a few which want to leave with the additions of California, Stanford and S.M.U.. They did help secure the Notre Dame deal which strengthened the football profile a little bit too.
The additions of North Carolina and Virginia not only secures a larger market for the SEC, adds to the basketball profile, adds two schools near a Michigan level of AAU standing to the SEC, but also puts them in position to work on grants with other SEC schools like Texas, Florida, Vanderbilt, A&M and Missouri, and that brings in far more grants revenue than football brings into the athletic department. Duke in that regard is massive in ways which will never touch grass or pine. And if the SEC has the athletic chops to cover Duke, and it does easily, what an association with Duke could add for SEC institutions would be huge.
So out of North Carolina, Virginia, Florida State and Duke the only one which arguably would be a drag on SEC football is Duke. Well using that logic if the SEC stands at 20 the ratio of athletic powers to weaker academically minded institutions will remain exactly the same. We had 9 solid schools athletically when Vandy was the only laggard. The SEC wasn't dragged through the mud for that anymore than the 10 team Big Ten was for having Northwestern.
All that's changed since 1967 is that Purdue isn't playing at a top level, Vandy has stepped it up, and the SEC presidents would now gladly make room for Duke. And none of it is an overall drag on the best sports conference in the United States. ESPN has been a partner, not a bully. We've both prospered unbelievably and have done so by following Harvey Schiller and Roy Kramer's roadmap and vision.
You don't hear any of the original 10 SEC complaining about what has transpired and that goes for Alabama as well. We all know we have it better now than we've ever had it.
I've got nothing against Clemson, I do like Kansas's fit with the new West in the conference, but once the move to 20 has settled in, once the CFP is format is hammered out, and once basketball is more fully monetized, and it won't be by just a little bit, then perhaps we'll find out if we are to grow larger than 20. If so I'd be happy to see Clemson in the mix with Kansas.
And while I am assuming 20 due to who it is that has been doing the talking and who it was that did the suing, 18 is still a possibility with the right two teams. But looking at what seems to be the possibilities based upon who initiated conversations, it looks a lot more like 20 to me.
Add to that the added inventory of games the SEC will have to sell, and you might learn later about ESPN possibly subleasing them to Netflix or others in the future. Twenty schools playing 9 or 10 conference games will yield, no bye weeks accounted for, 180 to 200 conference football games and some OOC games. FSU boosts the value of the Football schedule, and UNC and Duke do the same for hoops. That's 360 conference basketball games not counting the SEC tournament. More inventory = more revenue for all sports, even baseball.
Brighter minds than any on this board, self included, are working on this in Birmingham and Storrs. Don't be surprised if the SEC lands all 3 of the hoops darlings of the ACC and FSU. ESPN keeps what they have. The SEC gets 3 of what they want with the 4th highly palatable to the presidents, and ESPN gets to add football brands and new states to the ACC.
The whole point of this argument has been that I firmly believe the SEC sees the value in two markets they have wanted, a school that puts the market control of Florida squarely in their hands for when ESPN is one day gone, and is willing to benefit from an association with an academic brand. And that they already know what kind of money they will make from it.
But this board has members who swallowed football only hook line and sinker, can't see the value in Virginia and Duke, and balk at the notion.
Meanwhile Sankey's stated position has been to dominate in all revenue sports.
I have more confidence in our Conference leadership and ESPN than I do in the posters here. Frank the Tank does a great job of explaining Big Ten positions. I would think he likely has more confidence in the Big Ten leadership than in posters here too.
But that's going to happen when you have precious little information from which to form an opinion and those sources are beat writers who are the last to know anything unless they learn to hold their tongues until they are greenlighted, or bloggers who are usually supplementing their incomes from their basements.
And if there is one thing I know well it is the protocol for how this all happens. There is nothing but a business mentality by the presidents. The numbers and angles are laid out by the Commissioner or his staff, questions are entertained, discussion is lively, but at the end they vote. The vote is binding and they go home trusting the procedure. If there is a learning curve it is for the new institutions' presidents who are usually pleasantly surprised by the decorum and civility exercised in the decisions. In short they don't act like fans. They act like presidents of large state schools and important private institutions.
When other is suggested, stated, or insisted upon, I will continue to call it hooey.
/
Where is the upside to SEC expansion?
