Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Ultimate SEC expansion survey
Author Message
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 23,946
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2398
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #61
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 04:18 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  
(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.

The average Horn fan hates losing and despises the current state of the program and still believes that dominating their own conference is possible. But hating to lose is one thing I admire about Texas fans.

But I agree with you that if we have consolidation into 4 or fewer conferences that 3 losses would likely get you in a really good bowl if not the playoffs, especially if we ever move to all P games.
05-20-2020 04:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 23,946
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2398
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #62
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 04:37 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(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.
Bear espoused doing whatever it took to win. That's still relevant though it has morphed into different approaches than what transpired in the mid 60's. Dodd wanted limits on scholarships and at the time it was ahead of its day.

Bear's approach was the more successful and in this industry success is the most relevant thing of all. Nobody remembers or tunes in to losers.
(This post was last modified: 05-20-2020 04:47 PM by JRsec.)
05-20-2020 04:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 47,947
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 1483
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #63
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 04:41 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  14 is already too many.

Think adding more to play less instead of adding more to play more.
05-20-2020 04:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 23,946
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2398
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #64
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 04:59 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 04:41 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  14 is already too many.

Think adding more to play less instead of adding more to play more.
Yes what is really going on is the slow assembly of two conferences posing as divisions with the sharing of 1 overhead and the elimination of the other.
05-20-2020 05:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 40,523
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1366
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #65
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 04:11 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(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.

I don't think baseball has a good model. Does anybody outside the NE (or who came from there) care about the Yankees vs. Red Sox steady diet from the league?

NFL is a much more successful media model.
05-20-2020 05:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 40,523
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1366
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #66
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 04:41 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  14 is already too many.

Agreed.

I think the real wild card is pay for play and how the private schools react to that.
05-20-2020 05:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 47,947
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 1483
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #67
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 05:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  I don't think baseball has a good model. Does anybody outside the NE (or who came from there) care about the Yankees vs. Red Sox steady diet from the league?

NFL is a much more successful media model.


Ignore the fan side and look at the business and media side. MLB.tv is the intellectual property behind most of ESPN's streaming platform today.
05-20-2020 05:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 23,946
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2398
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #68
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 05:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 04:11 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(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.

I don't think baseball has a good model. Does anybody outside the NE (or who came from there) care about the Yankees vs. Red Sox steady diet from the league?

NFL is a much more successful media model.

Agree on the NFL being the better model (and I'm speaking structurally).

To GTS all I have to say is that it doesn't alter the Big 10 and SEC's view on realignment. Adding content is the adding of leverage and no matter who you negotiate with leverage will be needed and will carry its own perks. So adding content = adding leverage. You simply can't lose with that philosophy.

Before I came to this site I was posting in 2005-7 on a now defunct Georgia site decrying the philosophy of the market footprint model as being unsustainable and a lousy reason to add schools. Well that is no different from what you are saying now about the Network model. One was predicated upon the other and no ESPN hasn't fully learned how to transition.

Their bigger miscalculation was the "woke" crap. People who watch sports are tying to escape the insanity of the political and business worlds. They don't want to hear the same garbage being tossed out while trying to unwind and relax and enjoy themselves. That's the closest I've come to cord cutting, but didn't because the quality of streaming in our area stinks. I could not possibly care less about ESPN as an entity. But hey, I don't have to listen to Gary Danielson even though Beth Mowiins is almost as irritating.
(This post was last modified: 05-20-2020 06:54 PM by JRsec.)
05-20-2020 05:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,716
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 291
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #69
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 05:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 04:11 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(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.

I don't think baseball has a good model. Does anybody outside the NE (or who came from there) care about the Yankees vs. Red Sox steady diet from the league?

This is actually the reason I went from MLB being my favorite sport in childhood to quitting the sport completely. ESPN made baseball unwatchable for anyone not affiliated with those two teams. I left with zero regret.
05-20-2020 06:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,636
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 133
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #70
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
I think there will come a time when the conferences realize that they can cut out the middle man and make more money.

Imagine a world where some of the P5 decide to hold onto Tier 2 and Tier 3 rights which are exclusively available on their own streaming service along with tons of Olympic sports events.

Now imagine if some of those conferences bundle their content together—say the Big Ten and the SEC working in tandem. Now there’s a game changer.
05-20-2020 06:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,065
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #71
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 02:54 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  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.

03-lmfao
Why would we want to be in the B1G?
05-20-2020 06:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
schmolik Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 590
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation: 22
I Root For: UIUC, PSU, Nova
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Post: #72
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 06:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 02:54 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  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.

03-lmfao
Why would we want to be in the B1G?

$$$$$?
05-20-2020 07:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EvilVodka Offline
stuff

Posts: 3,585
Joined: Jan 2014
I Root For: FSU LSU
Location: Houston, TX
Post: #73
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
1. Texas will never join the SEC
2. Notre Dame will never join the Big 10
3. Oklahoma would be really stupid to make a move without Texas.
--- A. Oklahoma is not the hot shite everyone thinks they are. 10 years of mediocrity in the Big 10 or SEC would have them looking like Nebraska and Arkansas respectively
--- B. Why would OU want to attach themselves to Kansas? How does that serve the Sooners at all?
--- C. What is there to get excited about a Big 10 schedule concerning OU? Sooner fans don't care at all about games against Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. The only way Oklahoma goes to the Big 10 is if Texas goes with them.

Any expansion plan that can't recognize the truths above ^^^ is made out of fairy dust and unicorns
(This post was last modified: 05-20-2020 09:01 PM by EvilVodka.)
05-20-2020 09:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 23,946
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2398
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #74
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 09:00 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  1. Texas will never join the SEC
2. Notre Dame will never join the Big 10
3. Oklahoma would be really stupid to make a move without Texas.
--- A. Oklahoma is not the hot shite everyone thinks they are. 10 years of mediocrity in the Big 10 or SEC would have them looking like Nebraska and Arkansas respectively
--- B. Why would OU want to attach themselves to Kansas? How does that serve the Sooners at all?
--- C. What is there to get excited about a Big 10 schedule concerning OU? Sooner fans don't care at all about games against Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. The only way Oklahoma goes to the Big 10 is if Texas goes with them.

Any expansion plan that can't recognize the truths above ^^^ is made out of fairy dust and unicorns

And you base this on what facts, data, evidence, etc? Or is this another internet fan boy pronouncement based on your say so? College football is a business and operates like one more now than ever before. And I think the oldest adage in the book is money talks and B.S. walks. I read these on pronouncements on every internet talk site along with the myths about blackballing in state rivals and other such nonsense. Texas has been intalks with the SEC since '87. But they've also been in talks with the PAC and Big 10. As a business they will act in their self interest and if that self interest is playing local and making more money they will. Right now they'll explore trying to land some PAC schools, but it's doubtful that anything comes of that other than some concessions in the PAC12 among which might eventually be the dismissal of Larry Scott. Notre Dame has been intalks with the Big 10 before as well. And when media payouts hit 70 million range in the SEC and Big 10 those making between 29 and 35 are going to be looking long and hard at the difference. And if they don't their AD's need to be fired for incompetence.

But if you can prove from an official statement from Texas or Notre Dame that their officials have declared this to be policy, and policy for all time, then I'm all ears. And as for Oklahoma they were in the Big 8 without Texas for decades. It didn't hurt them then. But as conferences grow the concern over open dates for scheduling could be a reason they would prefer to stick with Texas. But then that's the same reason Florida and South Carolina sponsored F.S.U. and Clemson for SEC membership.

And anyone who proclaims what you have without any factual evidence and then calls anything fairy dust and unicorns is either a troll or an idiot. Which one is it?
(This post was last modified: 05-20-2020 09:16 PM by JRsec.)
05-20-2020 09:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EvilVodka Offline
stuff

Posts: 3,585
Joined: Jan 2014
I Root For: FSU LSU
Location: Houston, TX
Post: #75
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 06:40 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 05:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 04:11 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(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.

I don't think baseball has a good model. Does anybody outside the NE (or who came from there) care about the Yankees vs. Red Sox steady diet from the league?

This is actually the reason I went from MLB being my favorite sport in childhood to quitting the sport completely. ESPN made baseball unwatchable for anyone not affiliated with those two teams. I left with zero regret.

Completely agree with the two above statements; I could give two ***** about the Yankees and Red Sox.

The MLB could be run so much better
05-20-2020 09:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EvilVodka Offline
stuff

Posts: 3,585
Joined: Jan 2014
I Root For: FSU LSU
Location: Houston, TX
Post: #76
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 09:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 09:00 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  1. Texas will never join the SEC
2. Notre Dame will never join the Big 10
3. Oklahoma would be really stupid to make a move without Texas.
--- A. Oklahoma is not the hot shite everyone thinks they are. 10 years of mediocrity in the Big 10 or SEC would have them looking like Nebraska and Arkansas respectively
--- B. Why would OU want to attach themselves to Kansas? How does that serve the Sooners at all?
--- C. What is there to get excited about a Big 10 schedule concerning OU? Sooner fans don't care at all about games against Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. The only way Oklahoma goes to the Big 10 is if Texas goes with them.

Any expansion plan that can't recognize the truths above ^^^ is made out of fairy dust and unicorns

And you base this on what facts, data, evidence, etc? Or is this another internet fan boy pronouncement based on your say so?

Well, if Texas and Notre Dame wanted in, they would already be in

It makes more logical sense than the rehashed crap that an Auburn Boomer always posts 03-lmfao

What evidence exists that disproves those statements?
05-20-2020 09:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 47,947
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 1483
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #77
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 09:05 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 06:40 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 05:13 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 04:11 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 03:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  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.

I don't think baseball has a good model. Does anybody outside the NE (or who came from there) care about the Yankees vs. Red Sox steady diet from the league?

This is actually the reason I went from MLB being my favorite sport in childhood to quitting the sport completely. ESPN made baseball unwatchable for anyone not affiliated with those two teams. I left with zero regret.

Completely agree with the two above statements; I could give two ***** about the Yankees and Red Sox.

The MLB could be run so much better


The complaints are literally centered around the one piece of the media puzzle MLB keeps on traditional media outlets which they do purely due to demand and dollars. Your gripes could sound an awful lot like those of most CFB fans who don't want to see yet another Michigan/Ohio State/Alabama/LSU/Texas/ND game as the big dangly bit of meat on the TV schedule, but we'll pass that on for now. From the standpoint of going direct to the customer with your product no matter where they are and providing it in a compelling format at a reasonable cost all things considered .... nobody comes close to MLB. The NFL media distribution model is the most schizo right now because they're taking the most cash grabs. I can pay one fee to MLB and watch every single game with every single team provided I'm out of market. If you're handy with a VPN service well there is no such thing as market restrictions then. To get the same from the NFL you're going to need a dizzying array of access methods: CBS, FOX, NBC, ABC via OTA or subscription, ESPN via ESPN+ or subscription, Amazon Prime Subscription ... they still doing games on Twitter and Facebook too? And mind you the NFL is increasingly hostile to CFB in case you haven't noticed by ESPN vacating the Thursday night CFB broadcast space.
(This post was last modified: 05-20-2020 09:24 PM by georgia_tech_swagger.)
05-20-2020 09:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 23,946
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2398
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #78
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 09:11 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 09:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-20-2020 09:00 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  1. Texas will never join the SEC
2. Notre Dame will never join the Big 10
3. Oklahoma would be really stupid to make a move without Texas.
--- A. Oklahoma is not the hot shite everyone thinks they are. 10 years of mediocrity in the Big 10 or SEC would have them looking like Nebraska and Arkansas respectively
--- B. Why would OU want to attach themselves to Kansas? How does that serve the Sooners at all?
--- C. What is there to get excited about a Big 10 schedule concerning OU? Sooner fans don't care at all about games against Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. The only way Oklahoma goes to the Big 10 is if Texas goes with them.

Any expansion plan that can't recognize the truths above ^^^ is made out of fairy dust and unicorns

And you base this on what facts, data, evidence, etc? Or is this another internet fan boy pronouncement based on your say so?

Well, if Texas and Notre Dame wanted in, they would already be in

It makes more logical sense than the rehashed crap that an Auburn Boomer always posts 03-lmfao

What evidence exists that disproves those statements?

Texas's talks with the SEC are documented as are Notre Dames with the Big 10.

No administration at any college campus would slam a door by making a public pronouncement that they would "never" do this or that.

It's internet hooey.

These are businesses and will act as such. And when the revenue hits 70 million or thereabouts in the SEC and Big 10 any AD whose program is only making 29 to 35 million should be fired for not making inquiries. That's their job to find out as much as they can and relate it to the trustees and president.

But you've never posted anything that shows any knowledge of how presidents search committees work, how schools are voted on, what the protocol is for working out legal matters prior to a move, or spouted anything but drive by remarks.

The things I raised as I stated are well documented. You have no documentation so your resort to an ad hominem and as usual a drive by dismissal of what others are talking about. Bye.
05-20-2020 09:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ClairtonPanther Offline
people need to wake up
*

Posts: 24,167
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 648
I Root For: Pitt/Navy
Location: Pittsburgh PA

Donators
Post: #79
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
I think GTS made a great point about the media platform that MLB uses as a platform that CFB conferences should be looking to use. Platforms like Youtube Red, Amazon, Netflix will be the future distributors of sports in general. Cable TV is on it's way out and fast. I wouldn't be surprised if schools like Texas follows the ND path and goes independent. I think the future will be smaller conferences and not larger.
05-20-2020 09:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 23,946
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2398
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #80
RE: Ultimate SEC expansion survey
(05-20-2020 09:51 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  I think GTS made a great point about the media platform that MLB uses as a platform that CFB conferences should be looking to use. Platforms like Youtube Red, Amazon, Netflix will be the future distributors of sports in general. Cable TV is on it's way out and fast. I wouldn't be surprised if schools like Texas follows the ND path and goes independent. I think the future will be smaller conferences and not larger.

But it won't be smaller conferences if the top brands all choose an independent path. And if that happens it won't last long. Scheduling becomes an issue, and leverage for better rates becomes a huge issue.

United individual schools stand to make much more than they do as individuals and that point has been proven over and over in life. It's why unions once made a difference, then as all workers were granted the rights they helped to bring about they faded, and now individual workers have less rights to redress their reviews than ever. It translates into why schools band together. Most have a common interest in the same sports and have an easier time in negotiations as a unit. Is it not the strength of the unit that gives the Big 10 and SEC the revenue they have? Is it not the special deal with N.D. and the special deal for the LHN that prevent the same kind of positive synergy in the ACC and Big 12?

If anything Panther I think they will get larger so that the overhead of being in a conference is split more ways reducing the expense to each school. It's why I think we see conferences of 16 to 20 before we see wide spread independence.

And whether dealing with ESPN or Fox or Netflix or Amazon the strength is in numbers because they bring regions instead of individual fan bases and the synergy between brands who play one another only increases the desirability of the product.

The SEC and Big 10 make the most and are about to make a lot more because they have the most brands that play each other. The PAC and the ACC make the least because they have the fewest dominant brands playing one another. The Big 10 and SEC consequently draw more viewers than the PAC and ACC because their collective fan bases are energized and engaged in most conference games and because there are so many solid match ups. That's not true for the other 3 although Texas and Oklahoma have much more national prominence and that is why they earn more than the PAC or ACC.

Who carries the games is irrelevant to the process. There's strength in numbers and great strength in numbers that have the most universally recognized schools.
05-20-2020 10:05 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.