Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Ultimate SEC expansion survey
Author Message
Fighting Muskie Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,663
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 135
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
My personal preference is 18-20 for both the Big Ten and SEC:

The SEC can have Texas, Texas Tech, Clemson, and Florida St

The Big Ten can take Kansas, Oklahoma, ND, and Pitt (unless the SEC wants to let us have Missouri)

I also really like a 20 team set up that would be those 5 plus Iowa St or Colorado
05-20-2020 12:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,074
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 273
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #42
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
Yeah no thanks on the little brother tagalong. SEC realignment slots are simply too valuable to go to “but my state rep would really like it if you got a slot for this other school the conference would never ever ever consider as a stand-alone add”

Just not the way realignment works anymore.
05-20-2020 12:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 24,075
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2423
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 12:02 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  My personal preference is 18-20 for both the Big Ten and SEC:

The SEC can have Texas, Texas Tech, Clemson, and Florida St

The Big Ten can take Kansas, Oklahoma, ND, and Pitt (unless the SEC wants to let us have Missouri)

I also really like a 20 team set up that would be those 5 plus Iowa St or Colorado

For that to happen the first move has to be that of the Big 10 in landing Pitt and N.D.. Only then will ESPN consider protecting Clemson and Florida State as an investment in the SEC as opposed to using them to anchor value in the ACC. This is not a scenario where the SEC has first strike capability since ESPN owns us both. Texas would be the value addition complimented by the content multiplication moves of Clemson and F.S.U. which wouldn't be adding value, but which would make the whole conference more compelling as a TV product so some value there. So Pitt or Virginia would have to be the 2nd school with Notre Dame and personally I think Virginia would be preferred since Penn State carries most of Pennsylvania.

If Missouri wanted to join Kansas in the Big 10 where is your slot left then for Oklahoma?

I'm not so sure that Notre Dame, Virginia and North Carolina wouldn't be the preferred grab of the Big 10. If so then does Kanas really deliver what they want as #4 or would that be Pitt / Georgia Tech or Duke? I know the Big 10 wants football umph but the ability to move into the Northern Mid Atlantic with 3 AAU's and Notre Dame might be hard for their presidents to pass up.

So at 18 perhaps you get just that: Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame and Virginia and do so more for market and political reasons than for sports reasons. Right now the Big 10 has a lot of representation in the House with regards to grant disbursement. With the Northern Midwest bleeding House seats acquisitions in North Carolina and Virginia re leverages representation in such a way as to keep the Big 10 in business on that angle as those representatives will be inclined to look after their own as much as is allowable and possible.

Should that happen the SEC would be in position to take Texas and Oklahoma and stop profitably at 16 or to protect their branding and add Clemson and Florida State to that mix locking other interested parties out of the Deep South by wrapping up the most appealing brands.

The Big 10 presidents get what they want and the SEC AD's get what profits them most.

That all said, what would be likeliest to happen should the Big 10 strike first taking those 4 is that ESPN would give pro rata to N.C. State and Virginia Tech to move to the SEC to cover the moves of those lost to FOX. They would then go after all of the rights in the Big 12 and would look to use Clemson and Florida State to boost the value of that conference.

Louisville, Georgia Tech, Miami, Clemson, Florida State with perhaps Pitt or B.Y.U. to head to the Big 12 creating two 16 team conferences:

The New Big 12 would set up like this:
Baylor, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech
Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Iowa State, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami

The SEC would set up like this:
Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M

The Big 10 would look like this:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

The PAC 12 would stay at 12.

That's 62 schools in an upper tier.

What's more is that Texas and Oklahoma are supplemented rather than forced to leave what they are comfortable with, and ESPN gets control of the Big 12 and SEC and the year end hot pairings of Florida/FSU, Georgia/Ga Tech, South Carolina/Clemson, and Kentucky/Louisville all remain in house with ESPN as year end rivalry games between the Big 12 and SEC and the renewal of Pitt/WVU in the Big 12. Missouri/Kansas and Texas/Texas A&M add two key games to that rivalry. The Sugar Bowl is then amplified as part of that rivalry. And it becomes a better watched bigger bonanza than any current ACC/SEC rivalry.
(This post was last modified: 05-20-2020 12:50 PM by JRsec.)
05-20-2020 12:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gamecock Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,370
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 150
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 09:11 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Kick out Vanderbilt and Mississippi State. Back to 12 so teams rotate through more often. Addition by subtraction.

I like Vanderbilt. Great town and SC has won 10 or 11 straight
05-20-2020 01:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CitrusUCF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,255
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 156
I Root For: UCF
Location: NW Ark.
Post: #45
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 01:11 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 09:11 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Kick out Vanderbilt and Mississippi State. Back to 12 so teams rotate through more often. Addition by subtraction.

I like Vanderbilt. Great town and SC has won 10 or 11 straight

Yeah, I bet all the East teams and Ole Miss like their near guaranteed win. I'd rather have UGA, UF, & UT coming to Fayetteville regularly. I don't think UF will be here for over a decade between games. The one thing that getting rid of VU and MSU wouldn't do is solve the Missouri in the East issue, since Bama is not going to agree to Auburn getting moved to the East.
05-20-2020 01:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,663
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 135
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #46
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
I’m going to try to speak to all of your points JR.

First, I think the mega SEC and Big Ten moves will come in phases.

The ACC is going to be safe in the first round. I don’t see anyone daring to break the GOR almost a decade early, assuming 2024 is the big realignment year.

The Sooners are the kingmakers here. They are going to want the same type of tv money as Ohio St and Alabama. They will not be 2nd fiddle to another school in their conference.

I think that there is just enough bad blood there that Texas isn’t going to want to follow the Sooners. If the Sooners move to the Big Ten they can save face by going to the SEC and then claim that’s what they were wanting to do all along independent of their northern neighbor. If Oklahoma goes to the SEC Texas may see their window of opportunity closing and decide to go ahead and join or they might opt for independence.

I think we get the 2nd, much larger wave in the 2030s as the ACC GOR expires. If Clemson and Florida St are still competitive programs they are going to want to get out of ESPN’s girl on the side conference and get SEC dollars. If the SEC gets those 2 I think that triggers ND leaving too.

Missouri is a school I see as a footprint filler in the Big Ten and in addition to Oklahoma and Kansas and only if they decide to go to 20. I can see the SEC being willing to part with them in order to open a slot for another target. (I have a soft spot for Missouri because they gave me a grad school opportunity when others wouldn’t)

Now if the Big Ten loses the Oklahoma sweepstakes I think the Big Ten strategy changes entirely. I think they then set their sights on ACC AAU schools or a West Coast side project. The Big Ten would have to be careful though because they’d already be fighting from behind. Cracking the ACC could very likely send some of the very best football programs into the SEC.

I just don’t see the preemptive strike by the Big Ten happening before Oklahoma’s future hasn’t been settled unless some major back room deals have been made first that would guarantee homes for key ACC schools and the survival of the Big 12.
05-20-2020 01:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 24,075
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2423
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 01:46 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m going to try to speak to all of your points JR.

First, I think the mega SEC and Big Ten moves will come in phases.

The ACC is going to be safe in the first round. I don’t see anyone daring to break the GOR almost a decade early, assuming 2024 is the big realignment year.

The Sooners are the kingmakers here. They are going to want the same type of tv money as Ohio St and Alabama. They will not be 2nd fiddle to another school in their conference.

I think that there is just enough bad blood there that Texas isn’t going to want to follow the Sooners. If the Sooners move to the Big Ten they can save face by going to the SEC and then claim that’s what they were wanting to do all along independent of their northern neighbor. If Oklahoma goes to the SEC Texas may see their window of opportunity closing and decide to go ahead and join or they might opt for independence.

I think we get the 2nd, much larger wave in the 2030s as the ACC GOR expires. If Clemson and Florida St are still competitive programs they are going to want to get out of ESPN’s girl on the side conference and get SEC dollars. If the SEC gets those 2 I think that triggers ND leaving too.

Missouri is a school I see as a footprint filler in the Big Ten and in addition to Oklahoma and Kansas and only if they decide to go to 20. I can see the SEC being willing to part with them in order to open a slot for another target. (I have a soft spot for Missouri because they gave me a grad school opportunity when others wouldn’t)

Now if the Big Ten loses the Oklahoma sweepstakes I think the Big Ten strategy changes entirely. I think they then set their sights on ACC AAU schools or a West Coast side project. The Big Ten would have to be careful though because they’d already be fighting from behind. Cracking the ACC could very likely send some of the very best football programs into the SEC.

I just don’t see the preemptive strike by the Big Ten happening before Oklahoma’s future hasn’t been settled unless some major back room deals have been made first that would guarantee homes for key ACC schools and the survival of the Big 12.

I don't disagree with your logic, I just think it is one of several scenarios that could transpire. The real wild card that has been tossed into the picture is the COVID19 matter and the losses universities are taking already. It may be that the prospect of nearly double the media revenue for sports will trigger some conferences who otherwise would be content with their status quo to make some quick decisions. Do we drop x number of non revenue sports or do we keep those intact and join a much better paying conference? Losses in the 50 to 100 million range are what most people call a crisis and a crisis calls for unprecedented responses. Would the ACC schools standing to be doubled by neighbors in media revenue rethink their positions? I can't think of circumstances more compelling than these. Especially when they ponder that over the next 13 years (thinking in terms of 2024) that they will lose close to 400 million in revenue they might have earned in the SEC or B1G if they had moved in 2024.

The enormity of that needs to sink in for everyone.

I still believe the best possible move for the Big 10 is to convince N.D. to finally come in (more than double their media revenue) and to bring Oklahoma with them. The SEC could add Texas and Kansas and we are both much better off at 16 than we would be at 18 or 20. Oklahoma and Notre Dame are worth Big 10 money plus some and Texas and Kansas together would be worth it for the SEC.

Then you let ESPN rebuild the ACC:
Boston College, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia (OBE Division)
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech (Tobacco Road Division)
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech (Chisholm Trail Division)
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, T.C.U. (Pigskin Division)
*Wake forest as a partial.

This way the Networks don't go broke paying a pile of teams money they don't have to pay them. The Big 10 and SEC remain highly profitable without having to take schools that under somebody else's TV contract might not be worth having, and those most deserving of the big bump up get it.

PAC 12 stays the same.

Now the Networks have 4 conferences of the same 65 schools but Wake makes more sense as a partial than does N.D. in terms of content value.

The new ACC has a huge market and if they are paid in the 40 million dollar range everybody makes more.
05-20-2020 02:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,076
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
No conference will ever risk going over 16, but some of the earlier ideas have some merit.
If Notre Dame would go to the B1G, the first move would be to swap Pitt for Maryland, followed by Kentucky joining the ACC with West Virginia. This gives the ACC 16: Boston College, Syracuse, Maryland, West Virginia, Kentucky, Louisville, VT. UVa, Wake, Carolina, Duke, State, Clemson, GT, FSU and Miami.

The B1G becomes: Rutgers, PSU, Pitt, OSU, Michigan, MSU, Notre Dame, Purdue, Indiana, Ill.NW, Wisky, Minn, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri

The SEC: Vanderbilt (got to have that private), Tenn, Ga, South Carolina, Fla, Auburn, Alabama, Miss. St., Ole Miss, LSU, Arkansas, Oklahoma, OSU, TT, Texas, A&M.

The PAC: BYU (football only), Iowa State, Kansas, KSU, Colorado, Utah, Ariz, ASU, USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Wash, WSU, Oregon, OSU.

Baylor and TCU to the AAC.
05-20-2020 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,780
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 301
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #49
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 01:11 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 09:11 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Kick out Vanderbilt and Mississippi State. Back to 12 so teams rotate through more often. Addition by subtraction.

I like Vanderbilt. Great town and SC has won 10 or 11 straight

Right. I don’t think anyone with a vote wants to kick out Vanderbilt or MSU. Those two schools are more likely to be among the deciders of who to kick out than actually getting kicked out.
05-20-2020 02:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,663
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 135
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
If some combination of AAU ACC members got nervous enough about revenues in the post-COVID climate they could conspire to break up their conference in a manner that would land themselves in the Big Ten while sending most of their conference mates to the Big 12.
05-20-2020 02:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 48,015
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 1496
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #51
Ultimate SEC expansion survey
The next round of realignment will be about costs, geography, and the gate. Playing all this forward on TV money and markets alone is like drawing up war plans for WWII using landships, trenches, and mustard gas.

Sent from my ZTE A2017U using CSNbbs mobile app
05-20-2020 03:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 24,075
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2423
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #52
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 03:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The next round of realignment will be about costs, geography, and the gate. Playing all this forward on TV money and markets alone is like drawing up war plans for WWII using landships, trenches, and mustard gas.

Sent from my ZTE A2017U using CSNbbs mobile app

No sir! The overreaction mentality is not going to change what is profitable for those who survive well. When programs focus locally because they are worried about gate, 5 to 7 million a game for 7 home games depending upon opponent, they are screwed already and probably shouldn't remain in the P5. The money is in the match ups for TV. and when the payouts are hitting at 70 million that's where your priority is. Even if a school loses half its gate, which none will once the virus scare is behind us, the future of the sport is going to be corporate investment, due to Boomer die off (last generation to hit retirement without NET debt), and the national interest in televised games worth seeing isn't going away. Large states (think Florida and Texas) will have extremely strong interest in regional games. So big national draw and strong regional draw are still the one two punch of revenue.

I challenge you to find a sports conference as strong and as compact as the SEC is already. That footprint is much better than the spaghetti string down the Eastern Seaboard and doesn't stretch from New Jersey to Nebraska. The Big 12 is more compact (WVU excluded) but not as economically strong as the SEC and 65% of it's total value resides in 2 schools.

I don't see the SEC reacting to include schools that bring down its numbers. I do see us being interested in UT and OU. Content will always have value. Nothing else is guaranteed.

I'm pretty sure the Big 10's feelings will be along the same lines and when you consider the two divisions in each conference the driving distance isn't really that far, Missouri being the oddest placement.

So GTS, I'm sure the PAC and ACC will have to think more along the lines you raise, but the SEC and Big 10 don't and won't.
(This post was last modified: 05-20-2020 03:40 PM by JRsec.)
05-20-2020 03:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
schmolik Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 603
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation: 22
I Root For: UIUC, PSU, Nova
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Post: #53
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 02:40 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 01:11 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 09:11 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Kick out Vanderbilt and Mississippi State. Back to 12 so teams rotate through more often. Addition by subtraction.

I like Vanderbilt. Great town and SC has won 10 or 11 straight

Right. I don’t think anyone with a vote wants to kick out Vanderbilt or MSU. Those two schools are more likely to be among the deciders of who to kick out than actually getting kicked out.

Agree with Vanderbilt but if Mississippi State isn't first on the list of SEC schools to kick out who would be? They're the second choice school in the least populous state in the SEC footprint (unless you think they're the first choice and then you get rid of Mississippi). Vanderbilt at least has the academics and city on their side. One of the Mississippi schools would no doubt be my first choice if I had to cut an SEC school. The second one would be tougher. Vanderbilt has its plusses and its minuses. There would probably still be a strong SEC fanbase in Nashville if Vandy weren't there and it wouldn't be like the SEC wouldn't be in Tennessee. If Vanderbilt stays you're going to have to cut an SEC state out completely unless you really want to cut Auburn (yeah right!) so I'd probably say you cut both Mississippi schools.
05-20-2020 03:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 48,015
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 1496
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #54
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 03:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 03:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The next round of realignment will be about costs, geography, and the gate. Playing all this forward on TV money and markets alone is like drawing up war plans for WWII using landships, trenches, and mustard gas.

Sent from my ZTE A2017U using CSNbbs mobile app

No sir! The overreaction mentality is not going to change what is profitable for those who survive well. When programs focus locally because they are worried about gate, 5 to 7 million a game for 7 home games depending upon opponent, they are screwed already and probably shouldn't remain in the P5. The money is in the match ups for TV. and when the payouts are hitting at 70 million that's where your priority is. Even if a school loses half its gate, which none will once the virus scare is behind us, the future of the sport is going to be corporate investment, due to Boomer die off (last generation to hit retirement without NET debt), and the national interest in televised games worth seeing isn't going away. Large states (think Florida and Texas) will have extremely strong interest in regional games. So big national draw and strong regional draw are still the one two punch of revenue.

I challenge you to find a sports conference as strong and as compact as the SEC is already. That footprint is much better than the spaghetti string down the Eastern Seaboard and doesn't stretch from New Jersey to Nebraska. The Big 12 is more compact (WVU excluded) but not as economically strong as the SEC and 65% of it's total value resides in 2 schools.

I don't see the SEC reacting to include schools that bring down its numbers. I do see us being interested in UT and OU. Content will always have value. Nothing else is guaranteed.

I'm pretty sure the Big 10's feelings will be along the same lines and when you consider the two divisions in each conference the driving distance isn't really that far, Missouri being the oddest placement.

So GTS, I'm sure the PAC and ACC will have to think more along the lines you raise, but the SEC and Big 10 don't and won't.


COVID is only part of it. What does NCAAF lack that every other major sports organization have? Direct to consumer content without a middle man. There's still lots of traditional TV money to be made for sure and that will slowly fade away. We may have already seen the most the SECN will ever make. Fuhrer Mickey via ESPN acts as a facilitator with lots of leverage in TV negotiations. But ESPN is an old and fading model. They only make more money despite declining TV subscription rates because they charge more per house at a rate higher than they lose subscribers. But that is the very definition of an unsustainable business model: charge fewer and fewer customers more and more money. The great fundamental to casually watch ESPN doesn't exist anymore: scores and highlights. I can find those for my specific team in 30 seconds on the internet instead of an hour on SportsCenter just to be disappointed they didn't cover it. The politicization of ESPN is just a clumsy way to attempt to provide value add (their "woke" perspectives) to the highlights package because the only people watching that are people old enough to not know they can get it better quicker online. The future of CFB media distribution is going to look a LOT like MLB does right now. Digital direct to consumer for out of market, OTA in market and regionally syndicated and nationally syndicated. While there is the ability for somebody like a Netflix or Amazon to provide an additional layer of tiered rights I think that's all just short term cash grabs from cash cows and noise in the long term picture. This is all a very much keep-what-you-kill atmosphere unless regulatory regimes (luxury tax, salary cap, facilities cap, staff cap, etc) step in or are created. Oh and leaving Disney in the dust means double the theoretical media money for everybody. So there's that.
05-20-2020 04:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 24,075
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2423
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #55
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 03:54 PM)schmolik Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 02:40 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 01:11 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 09:11 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Kick out Vanderbilt and Mississippi State. Back to 12 so teams rotate through more often. Addition by subtraction.

I like Vanderbilt. Great town and SC has won 10 or 11 straight

Right. I don’t think anyone with a vote wants to kick out Vanderbilt or MSU. Those two schools are more likely to be among the deciders of who to kick out than actually getting kicked out.

Agree with Vanderbilt but if Mississippi State isn't first on the list of SEC schools to kick out who would be? They're the second choice school in the least populous state in the SEC footprint (unless you think they're the first choice and then you get rid of Mississippi). Vanderbilt at least has the academics and city on their side. One of the Mississippi schools would no doubt be my first choice if I had to cut an SEC school. The second one would be tougher. Vanderbilt has its plusses and its minuses. There would probably still be a strong SEC fanbase in Nashville if Vandy weren't there and it wouldn't be like the SEC wouldn't be in Tennessee. If Vanderbilt stays you're going to have to cut an SEC state out completely unless you really want to cut Auburn (yeah right!) so I'd probably say you cut both Mississippi schools.

When you don't know the history of something it is best to remain quiet. Mississippi State is in zero danger of being kicked out. The SEC has no GOR among themselves though ESPN wanted one for product cohesion for contract purposes.

The SEC has never compelled anyone to stay, and has never asked anyone to leave. We don't make schools buy in and we don't hit them with an exit fee when they depart. So why haven't we lost anyone since 1966? I guess they all like being here. And we aren't about to start making schools buy in, or charge them exit fees, or ask them to leave. MSU is a founding member, 90 miles from Tuscaloosa, and their fans are well received everywhere they go. Nobody in the SEC wants them to leave. They are more like family and attending baseball in Starkville is treat unto itself.

Vanderbilt has issues but nobody is going to ask them to leave either. They haven't renovated facilities or kept up to conference standards and doesn't offer the requisite sports (no softball). But the issue is little investment in sports. If they decided to use the space taken up by the football facility for research they could likely petition to successfully become the first partial member of the SEC. And while that might be best for both parties nobody is going to ask them to do it as it will have to be their decision.

In spite of what people believe the SEC is really not a very contentious conference. Alabama really isn't the elephant in the room, pun intended, but they are politically powerful in the conference but can't control a vote like Texas and North Carolina. They are more like Ohio State than any other team to conference comparison I can think of.

You are talking about the most successful sports conference in college athletics. Suwanee left because they couldn't afford to keep up in football as a small private. Tulane left because they thought they could do better as an independent. That's really worked well for them hasn't it? Bobby Dodd at Georgia Tech and Bear got into it over a legitimate cheap shot on the Tech QB and a few years later Dodd led them out of the SEC and out of prominence in football, except for the fleeting moment of fame Bobby Ross led them to in '90.

Times have probably passed Vanderbilt by, but that's not anyone's concern outside of the SEC and inside the SEC we all know that it is a concern that only Vanderbilt can address. Until then they are at least a breather on the conference schedule (baseball excluded). Besides, somebody has to be the smart kid right?

But in the Big 10 it's Purdue that the conference had to get after about facilities and Northwestern that's the smart kid. At least our laggard is rolled up in one school, not two, or three now that Rutgers is in the mix. And to be fair to Purdue they have at least shown as much pulse in football as Indiana.

So where I come from we say fix your own problems before you start messing with mine. And we all know what happens to those who poke their noses in where they don't belong.
(This post was last modified: 05-20-2020 04:24 PM by JRsec.)
05-20-2020 04:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Thiefery Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 198
Joined: Feb 2020
Reputation: 7
I Root For: TEXAS
Location:
Post: #56
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 09:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 08:34 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  A question I have is what does it mean to have a school add to the value of the conference (SEC or other). I can look at the numbers provided and see that a school is above or below the conference median. That being said, how can we know for if a school would bring in that same amount if in the SEC? Would Virginia Tech bring more to the bottom line as an SEC school rather than an ACC school? Would Texas bring as much to the bottom line in the SEC without the LHN? Do those potential numbers matter?

Well the best answer I can give you is this. Whenever a conference and a prospect get hot for one another it is usually the Network, or now an outside firm to avoid tortuous interference suits, that does an in depth evaluation of how much revenue that the school and conference could anticipate by the move.

A lot of the that information that is used is available to us by annual reports which I list here annually. Generally speaking a school which is below a conferences average for attendance (a sign of alumni support and donation since most schools require donations for tickets) and Gross Total Revenue (a more accurate picture of donations and not really about media money) give you a good idea if the applying school adds to the bottom line. The WSJ numbers give you an idea of what the school is worth to its surrounding area in terms of business generated which is also a strong indication of support and interest..

When the average SEC school generates over 700,000,000 in ancillary business and Virginia Tech generates less than 250 million in ancillary business and the Va Tech averages 10 thousand less in attendance and their Gross Total Revenue isn't top 25 then they aren't going to add to the bottom line.

In 2010 cable subscription pay models were based on the potential number of subscribers within a state and the schools were paid accordingly. Virginia a state of 9 million was appealing and N.C. State or UNC in a state of 11 million was as well.

Innovation in technology via streaming, and smart TV's from which information about viewing habits is actually quantifiable permit a more accurate picture of who watches. Because of that a state like Alabama of 5 million plus might actually have 4 million who watch college football and a state like Virginia with 9 million might only have 3 million who watch college football and of those even less that watch Virginia Tech. Therefore in this new era the actual number of viewers is what attracts advertising's higher rates, not population.

This is why the Big 10 and SEC have now outpaced the ACC and PAC where actual viewing numbers are paltry.

It is also why so much interest is shown in the Big 12 for expansion targets. The Big 12 actually has roughly the same % of homes viewing as the Big 10, it's just that they have much fewer homes. But with Texas and Oklahoma you have two schools who draw strong national numbers due to a spread of alumni but more importantly brand identification with the sport of college football. That's something that Virginia Tech, N.C. State, North Carolina and Louisville don't have, and Georgia Tech hasn't had in the modern TV era. Florida State has it, but their numbers in all other areas are just on par with the SEC therefore it safe to assume they would be about break even in the SEC.

Clemson is strong recently, but historically their numbers probably don't put them on par, but they are growing a national brand so might be worth the risk. Remember against week in and week out competition in the SEC they might not be as viable. It only takes 2 losses a year to diminish where they are now.

When you consider all of this there are 3 schools that add to the SEC's bottom line and the Big 10's bottom line:
1. Texas
2. Notre Dame
3. Oklahoma

All three are top 12 revenue producers (UT #1, OU #7, ND #12), all three average more than 74,000 in attendance, Texas right at 100k, OU at 85k, and ND at around 75K, and all three draw extremely well nationally. There is no area of measurement where these programs fail to add.

I strongly suspect they would already be in the SEC or Big 10 where they would exponentially increase their revenue and that of the conference were it not for wanting to remain relevant competitively. With the added money I believe they would, but face it the likelihood that OU, UT or ND would suffer more 2 loss seasons in the SEC or Big 10 is fairly high. I think they fear a loss of national prominence with such moves.

The thing is however that is where the money is going to be at a time when enhanced revenue streams are going to be tough to find. The eventual need to increase revenue will bring about these moves. When they do there is no mutual interest between N.D. and the SEC, so the fight will be over Texas and Oklahoma and it will be between the Big 10 and SEC. The Big 10 has the academic advantage and that's the angle they sell, and the SEC has the geographic, recruiting, and competition advantage and that is the angle we sell.

Time, technology, and opportunity to catch up have passed the PAC and the ACC by. If they get into the Big 10 or SEC it will be at network expense in an effort to protect a product (likely basketball) reach for a niche time of the year (think Winter/Spring).

Edit: I missed your question on the LHN. I would assume that the SEC would benefit subscription wise from rolling the ESPN shared LHN into the ESPN shared SECN. T3 is so little of the total revenue and the SEC's big new contract figures are based on actual viewers for T1 and T2 content that I doubt the LHN would be a significant negative factor for either the SEC or Texas. It would be a benefit for ESPN which I'm sure would share the buyout of the LHN with the SEC where it would be handled by a 1 million reduction per school in annual payouts which will be going up massively by 2024 (sooner if ESPN buys out the CBS contract) and that way the LHN which expires in 2031 could be bought out over 4 years time without anyone missing the reduced money which would more than be made up for long term by UT's inclusion.

Fear?? Haven't you seen the last decade of UT football? They avg 4 losses, yet the money and attention keeps coming in. And if this realignment scenario comes into fruition, teams with 2 possibly 3 losses would likely still make the playoff.
05-20-2020 04:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 48,015
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 1496
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #57
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 04:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You are talking about the most successful sports conference in college athletics. Suwanee left because they couldn't afford to keep up in football as a small private. Tulane left because they thought they could do better as an independent. That's really worked well for them hasn't it? Bobby Dodd at Georgia Tech and Bear got into it over a legitimate cheap shot on the Tech QB and a few years later Dodd let them out of the SEC and out of prominence in football, with the fleeting moment of fame Bobby Ross led them to in '90.

And scholarships. Back then SEC teams would sign hundreds of players in total. You'd have huge classes come in and whoever didn't hack it hard enough from the previous classes? Sorry, no scholarship next year, have a nice life. Dodd wanted to make sure that if you offered a scholarship you had to honor it for all four years. That's partially a player ethics issue and partially a competitive one: GT had no interest in signing literally hundreds of players. The interest from some SEC programs was not just to churn through a larger pile of hay to find more needles but to preclude other teams from having decent assets as well. It's just not healthy for the game. And Bear promised Bama would vote for that rule change and Bear didn't show for the vote and Bama voted against it and that was the deciding vote. From there Dodd gave the middle finger and left the SEC and the SEC showed they too could be childish by then restaging the scholarship vote and making it unanimously against the change. Only for the change to later become the law of the land in football nationally within a decade.

And if you're going to pigeon hole GT Athletics after leaving the SEC at least be accurate about it. They were relevant for a decade as an independent before they started losing and then bleeding fans and then bleeding money. Enter the Atlanta Falcons into the Atlanta market at this time. GT slowly fades as an independent before Homer Rice takes over as AD and rights the ship in short order: Join the ACC, go on a facilities spree keystoned around the Edge Center, hire Bobby Cremins, Bobby Ross, George O'Leary, Bruce Heppler (still there today), Danny Hall (still there today). From the departure of Rice it's been a backwards slide in leadership at President and AD until the last 5 years. Oh look, a new Edge Center is being built and the George O'Leary coaching tree is back on campus a third time. It's almost like they understand how it works and dusted off the working playbook and started using it again. Now if only that had happened one or two ADs ago.
05-20-2020 04:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 24,075
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2423
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #58
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 04:23 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 04:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  You are talking about the most successful sports conference in college athletics. Suwanee left because they couldn't afford to keep up in football as a small private. Tulane left because they thought they could do better as an independent. That's really worked well for them hasn't it? Bobby Dodd at Georgia Tech and Bear got into it over a legitimate cheap shot on the Tech QB and a few years later Dodd let them out of the SEC and out of prominence in football, with the fleeting moment of fame Bobby Ross led them to in '90.

And scholarships. Back then SEC teams would sign hundreds of players in total. You'd have huge classes come in and whoever didn't hack it hard enough from the previous classes? Sorry, no scholarship next year, have a nice life. Dodd wanted to make sure that if you offered a scholarship you had to honor it for all four years. That's partially a player ethics issue and partially a competitive one: GT had no interest in signing literally hundreds of players. The interest from some SEC programs was not just to churn through a larger pile of hay to find more needles but to preclude other teams from having decent assets as well. It's just not healthy for the game. And Bear promised Bama would vote for that rule change and Bear didn't show for the vote and Bama voted against it and that was the deciding vote. From there Dodd gave the middle finger and left the SEC and the SEC showed they too could be childish by then restaging the scholarship vote and making it unanimously against the change. Only for the change to later become the law of the land in football nationally within a decade.

And if you're going to pigeon hole GT Athletics after leaving the SEC at least be accurate about it. They were relevant for a decade as an independent before they started losing and then bleeding fans and then bleeding money. Enter the Atlanta Falcons into the Atlanta market at this time. GT slowly fades as an independent before Homer Rice takes over as AD and rights the ship in short order: Join the ACC, go on a facilities spree keystoned around the Edge Center, hire Bobby Cremins, Bobby Ross, George O'Leary, Bruce Heppler (still there today), Danny Hall (still there today). From the departure of Rice it's been a backwards slide in leadership at President and AD until the last 5 years. Oh look, a new Edge Center is being built and the George O'Leary coaching tree is back on campus a third time. It's almost like they understand how it works and dusted off the working playbook and started using it again. Now if only that had happened one or two ADs ago.

Well let's give the whole history. It started with the break up of the Southern Conference over the importance of athletics. Dodd's mentality was ahead of the time but to the old line SEC coaches he sounded and looked like the basketball first schools that formed the ACC.

No doubt Bear was in the wrong on the cheap shot, and he did love warehousing better talent than many schools fielded, but who was he competing against for National Championships? Notre Dame, U.S.C., Oklahoma, and Nebraska. He wasn't taking it out on Bobby Dodd as much as he was doing what he felt he had to do to compete with the other schools doing the same thing he was doing.

So Dodd proved visionary about where things would head. Bear proved practical about what it would take to keep winning. Now for the big question, which one's view proved more relevant? It sure as hell wasn't Dodd's.

Alabama kept winning and while right about the direction of things Dodd didn't. And I would submit that had more to do with the eventual fading of Tech's program than the Falcons arrival. Well that and the fact that Dooley kept it rolling at UGa who did a bit of stockpiling themselves until it wasn't legal and then they concentrated on getting the best players. I think this is truly of case of Bobby Dodd being so right so early that he was wrong.
(This post was last modified: 05-20-2020 04:37 PM by JRsec.)
05-20-2020 04:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 48,015
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 1496
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #59
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 04:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So Dodd proved visionary about where things would head. Bear proved practical about what it would take to keep winning. Now for the big question, which one's view proved more relevant? It sure as hell wasn't Dodd's.


More relevant in what way? Both espoused views ultimately alien to today's game.
05-20-2020 04:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Big Frog II Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,214
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 53
I Root For: TCU
Location:
Post: #60
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
14 is already too many.
05-20-2020 04:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.