(01-05-2021 04:58 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 03:12 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 12:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 12:03 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Something along the lines of state flagship equivalent in a big Southern state that the SEC isn't in, big city (accessible), a bit more football focused than UNC, and more attainable for the SEC than UNC.

Actually the only way N.C. State adds to the bottom line of the SEC is by replacing the last place school in our economic pecking order, and that would be Vanderbilt. Replace them with a school that brings new markets (Vanderbilt doesn't for the SEC) and which annually competes at a higher level than Vanderbilt (and N.C.State does, and the conference enhances its status in competition quality, markets, and slightly in revenue.

That's about the only allure.

There's just no way that NC State, a flagship-equivalent school in a large state with four large media markets (#21, #27, parts of #38, #49) is worth less than Ole Miss or Mississippi State.

Oh yes there is. In 2010-2 the payout models were based on the number of households in a state that purchased cable for T1 and T2 rights and conference networks were paid by subscription as well. So adding new demographics of size was more relevant. With the advent o smart TV that has shifted. Now the game is based on how many actually watch an event, not just the number of people who pay for a cable subscription that includes ESPN / FS1 etc.

What the SEC absolutely wins hands down is the percentage of actual viewers to the number of potential viewers and nobody else is even close in this metric. It is why the future payouts will slightly favor the SEC over the Big 10. Advertisers now base their rates with the networks on actual viewers and they no longer pay for potential viewers. Thank you smart TV's.

So the question is not whether the Mississippi schools reach markets that #27, 21, 38, and 49 in number of possible viewers but rather how many in Mississippi actually watch Mississippi State and Ole Miss football. The ACC and PAC 12 are by far the least viewed conferences and by a significant margin as they seem to battle each other for last each year. So the real issue is in those four top 50 markets how many people actually watch N.C. State football? In 2018 Miss State had 22 million viewers total in nationally televised games. Ole Miss had 12 million and N.C. State had 9 million. There is the new pay model difference. In the old days nobody actually knew the total numbers outside of the state of Mississippi, or even in it for that matter.

Now what that means really is that the Mississippi schools played big games against monster brands like A&M, L.S.U., Alabama and Auburn (all top 15 nationally). N.C. State may have had a game against F.S.U.

So the point is the conference itself has synergy for eyeballs. The ACC doesn't generate the interest in football as a whole as the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 do. Basketball is a different matter, but basketball is only 20% of most media contract revenue.

So there's your answer. Advertisers pay for actual eyeballs today rather than potential eyeballs. They want national draw games which the ACC doesn't produce nearly as many of as the SEC or Big 10, and about the only place market size still matters is in the conference Network money which is just a fraction of the T1&T2 revenue and even that now is based on actual viewers in terms of how much each school gets for each subscription. The SEC at its peak averaged .74 cents per sub and the Big 10 .57 per sub and the PAC 12 .11 cents per sub. Nice for about 6 or 7 million for the SEC at its peak, but hardly a game changer now.

But by your own admission, you don't know what NC State vs Alabama/LSU/Florida/Georgia would generate versus Ole Miss/Miss State. It is almost certainly higher when North Carolina dwarfs Mississippi as a state, even if the engagement rate in Mississippi is higher. The national interest is a ceteris paribus, because no one outside of Mississippi gives a flying f--- about either of those schools unless they're playing an actual national brand, so NC State would draw the same national interest in playing an SEC national brand and would add additional eyeballs in NC, which would be greater than the Mississippi schools.

You don't know that they would watch in North Carolina. They don't watch them now in sufficient number. Sure you would have those interested in the national brands that the SEC schedule would provide, but if they don't watch N.C. State play their rivals why would they be interested in seeing them not playing their rivals? If they mediocre to poor I doubt they would have any more eyeballs in N.C. than they do now. That said if they seriously invested in football with their new SEC media revenue and they got competitive then maybe it would produce a positive result. But, you have to ask the question of whether N.C. State would add enough overall revenue to the SEC to cover the projected 64.2 million per school payout and still earn the other conference members more revenue.

Now to particulars, Vanderbilt is the school that they could replace and give the SEC a boost, but that's in a swap for which there is no precedent and isn't very likely. But in that case their revenue generation would be higher than Vanderbilt's and still paying 14 schools the SEC might see a minor bump in per school revenue from the difference. But even that amount would hardly be worth the swap unless it was wholly congenial.

To your point there is a souffle effect to be a member of the SEC as the cast of characters elevates everyone's numbers, even in attendance as well as TV ratings. You are living in Arkansas right now. How good would the Hogs numbers these past 6 years be if they weren't in the SEC? It's easy to pick on the Mississippi schools but they do play competitive football most years, not championship, but competitive.

The conference is what it is. You could argue that UCF would earn more potentially for the SEC than N.C. State and given the region of Florida the school is in that's quite possible. But would they pay their way into the conference, all other criteria aside? No. Right now just on metrics there isn't a program in the ACC that adds to the SEC's value in a way sufficient to merit inclusion at 64.2 million a year. Notre Dame, Oklahoma and Texas outside of 3 Big 10 schools are the only ones that can.

(01-05-2021 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 03:12 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 12:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 12:03 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 11:33 AM)Otacon Wrote:  Can someone tell me the affinity for NC State? I guess I know nothing about them, because they don't really seem to be great in anything I'm aware of...

Something along the lines of state flagship equivalent in a big Southern state that the SEC isn't in, big city (accessible), a bit more football focused than UNC, and more attainable for the SEC than UNC.

Actually the only way N.C. State adds to the bottom line of the SEC is by replacing the last place school in our economic pecking order, and that would be Vanderbilt. Replace them with a school that brings new markets (Vanderbilt doesn't for the SEC) and which annually competes at a higher level than Vanderbilt (and N.C.State does, and the conference enhances its status in competition quality, markets, and slightly in revenue.

That's about the only allure.

There's just no way that NC State, a flagship-equivalent school in a large state with four large media markets (#21, #27, parts of #38, #49) is worth less than Ole Miss or Mississippi State.

Oh yes there is. In 2010-2 the payout models were based on the number of households in a state that purchased cable for T1 and T2 rights and conference networks were paid by subscription as well. So adding new demographics of size was more relevant. With the advent o smart TV that has shifted. Now the game is based on how many actually watch an event, not just the number of people who pay for a cable subscription that includes ESPN / FS1 etc.

What the SEC absolutely wins hands down is the percentage of actual viewers to the number of potential viewers and nobody else is even close in this metric. It is why the future payouts will slightly favor the SEC over the Big 10. Advertisers now base their rates with the networks on actual viewers and they no longer pay for potential viewers. Thank you smart TV's.

So the question is not whether the Mississippi schools reach markets that #27, 21, 38, and 49 in number of possible viewers but rather how many in Mississippi actually watch Mississippi State and Ole Miss football. The ACC and PAC 12 are by far the least viewed conferences and by a significant margin as they seem to battle each other for last each year. So the real issue is in those four top 50 markets how many people actually watch N.C. State football? In 2018 Miss State had 22 million viewers total in nationally televised games. Ole Miss had 12 million and N.C. State had 9 million. There is the new pay model difference. In the old days nobody actually knew the total numbers outside of the state of Mississippi, or even in it for that matter.

Now what that means really is that the Mississippi schools played big games against monster brands like A&M, L.S.U., Alabama and Auburn (all top 15 nationally). N.C. State may have had a game against F.S.U.

So the point is the conference itself has synergy for eyeballs. The ACC doesn't generate the interest in football as a whole as the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 do. Basketball is a different matter, but basketball is only 20% of most media contract revenue.

So there's your answer. Advertisers pay for actual eyeballs today rather than potential eyeballs. They want national draw games which the ACC doesn't produce nearly as many of as the SEC or Big 10, and about the only place market size still matters is in the conference Network money which is just a fraction of the T1&T2 revenue and even that now is based on actual viewers in terms of how much each school gets for each subscription. The SEC at its peak averaged .74 cents per sub and the Big 10 .57 per sub and the PAC 12 .11 cents per sub. Nice for about 6 or 7 million for the SEC at its peak, but hardly a game changer now.

We're comparing values based on current conditions and not considering the circumstances would be different. The Mississippi schools are more valuable than NC State but as you said they "played big games against monster brands like A&M, L.S.U., Alabama and Auburn (all top 15 nationally)." while "N.C. State may have had a game against F.S.U." If NC State's in the SEC and say Mississippi State isn't (I'm assuming the ACC wouldn't want them), then NC State's playing the monster games (I assume they would be playing Georgia and Florida instead of the SEC West teams but it would still be a step up than the current ACC schedule). If Mississippi or Mississippi State's in the ACC or Big 12, what's their TV ratings when Alabama and Auburn aren't coming to town? NC State's value would certainly be higher if they were in the SEC than if they aren't and either Mississippi school's value would be lower if they weren't. One advantage the Mississippi schools have is they neighbor Alabama, the king of the SEC. NC State doesn't (although they border Georgia which arguably is the 2nd best SEC school). There would also be an adjustment period for them to get used to SEC teams as opposed to ACC teams. You have to get them to get excited about Georgia and Florida the same way they do now about North Carolina and Clemson. That won't happen overnight. But could NC State have the ratings/viewership in the SEC that Mississippi State has now once they get used to the SEC? I can't answer that question but I wouldn't dismiss it. And if the SEC traded Mississippi State for NC State, they would expand their footprint to North Carolina without sacrificing Mississippi (assuming Mississippi is even relevant or worthwhile).

You think Vanderbilt's the deadweight of the SEC. I think Mississippi State's the deadweight. Vanderbilt's in Nashville. Mississippi State's in Starkville. You can say you don't need Vanderbilt or Nashville because of Tennessee. I'd say the same about Mississippi State if you have Mississippi. At least Nashville is a big city. If you're going to have 2 schools in the same state, wouldn't you rather the more populous state? And if academics are important, Vanderbilt's the top academic school in the USN&WR rankings and Mississippi State's the bottom school. Do you feel people outside of the SEC look down upon their academics? If so, would you rather boot the top member which would lower the SEC's academic profile or their bottom member which would raise their profile?

I get that I'm not from the SEC and SEC fans think differently about Mississippi State and Mississippi than outsiders do. On the other hand, you have to look at other people's views and values. People aren't going to value schools the same way SEC fans do.

(01-05-2021 05:30 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 03:12 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 12:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 12:03 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Something along the lines of state flagship equivalent in a big Southern state that the SEC isn't in, big city (accessible), a bit more football focused than UNC, and more attainable for the SEC than UNC.

Actually the only way N.C. State adds to the bottom line of the SEC is by replacing the last place school in our economic pecking order, and that would be Vanderbilt. Replace them with a school that brings new markets (Vanderbilt doesn't for the SEC) and which annually competes at a higher level than Vanderbilt (and N.C.State does, and the conference enhances its status in competition quality, markets, and slightly in revenue.

That's about the only allure.

There's just no way that NC State, a flagship-equivalent school in a large state with four large media markets (#21, #27, parts of #38, #49) is worth less than Ole Miss or Mississippi State.

Oh yes there is. In 2010-2 the payout models were based on the number of households in a state that purchased cable for T1 and T2 rights and conference networks were paid by subscription as well. So adding new demographics of size was more relevant. With the advent o smart TV that has shifted. Now the game is based on how many actually watch an event, not just the number of people who pay for a cable subscription that includes ESPN / FS1 etc.

What the SEC absolutely wins hands down is the percentage of actual viewers to the number of potential viewers and nobody else is even close in this metric. It is why the future payouts will slightly favor the SEC over the Big 10. Advertisers now base their rates with the networks on actual viewers and they no longer pay for potential viewers. Thank you smart TV's.

So the question is not whether the Mississippi schools reach markets that #27, 21, 38, and 49 in number of possible viewers but rather how many in Mississippi actually watch Mississippi State and Ole Miss football. The ACC and PAC 12 are by far the least viewed conferences and by a significant margin as they seem to battle each other for last each year. So the real issue is in those four top 50 markets how many people actually watch N.C. State football? In 2018 Miss State had 22 million viewers total in nationally televised games. Ole Miss had 12 million and N.C. State had 9 million. There is the new pay model difference. In the old days nobody actually knew the total numbers outside of the state of Mississippi, or even in it for that matter.

Now what that means really is that the Mississippi schools played big games against monster brands like A&M, L.S.U., Alabama and Auburn (all top 15 nationally). N.C. State may have had a game against F.S.U.

So the point is the conference itself has synergy for eyeballs. The ACC doesn't generate the interest in football as a whole as the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 do. Basketball is a different matter, but basketball is only 20% of most media contract revenue.

So there's your answer. Advertisers pay for actual eyeballs today rather than potential eyeballs. They want national draw games which the ACC doesn't produce nearly as many of as the SEC or Big 10, and about the only place market size still matters is in the conference Network money which is just a fraction of the T1&T2 revenue and even that now is based on actual viewers in terms of how much each school gets for each subscription. The SEC at its peak averaged .74 cents per sub and the Big 10 .57 per sub and the PAC 12 .11 cents per sub. Nice for about 6 or 7 million for the SEC at its peak, but hardly a game changer now.

We're comparing values based on current conditions and not considering the circumstances would be different. The Mississippi schools are more valuable than NC State but as you said they "played big games against monster brands like A&M, L.S.U., Alabama and Auburn (all top 15 nationally)." while "N.C. State may have had a game against F.S.U." If NC State's in the SEC and say Mississippi State isn't (I'm assuming the ACC wouldn't want them), then NC State's playing the monster games (I assume they would be playing Georgia and Florida instead of the SEC West teams but it would still be a step up than the current ACC schedule). If Mississippi or Mississippi State's in the ACC or Big 12, what's their TV ratings when Alabama and Auburn aren't coming to town? NC State's value would certainly be higher if they were in the SEC than if they aren't and either Mississippi school's value would be lower if they weren't. One advantage the Mississippi schools have is they neighbor Alabama, the king of the SEC. NC State doesn't (although they border Georgia which arguably is the 2nd best SEC school). There would also be an adjustment period for them to get used to SEC teams as opposed to ACC teams. You have to get them to get excited about Georgia and Florida the same way they do now about North Carolina and Clemson. That won't happen overnight. But could NC State have the ratings/viewership in the SEC that Mississippi State has now once they get used to the SEC? I can't answer that question but I wouldn't dismiss it. And if the SEC traded Mississippi State for NC State, they would expand their footprint to North Carolina without sacrificing Mississippi (assuming Mississippi is even relevant or worthwhile).

You think Vanderbilt's the deadweight of the SEC. I think Mississippi State's the deadweight. Vanderbilt's in Nashville. Mississippi State's in Starkville. You can say you don't need Vanderbilt or Nashville because of Tennessee. I'd say the same about Mississippi State if you have Mississippi. At least Nashville is a big city. If you're going to have 2 schools in the same state, wouldn't you rather the more populous state? And if academics are important, Vanderbilt's the top academic school in the USN&WR rankings and Mississippi State's the bottom school. Do you feel people outside of the SEC look down upon their academics? If so, would you rather boot the top member which would lower the SEC's academic profile or their bottom member which would raise their profile?

I get that I'm not from the SEC and SEC fans think differently about Mississippi State and Mississippi than outsiders do. On the other hand, you have to look at other people's views and values. People aren't going to value schools the same way SEC fans do.

No I don't. It is what it is and no amount of bitching about it is going to change the reality of it. Other people's metrics are for other people. There's nothing that can be done about it, but Florida, Texas A&M and Missouri aren't suffering because Mississippi State's disciplines are mandated by the State Legislature of Mississippi. They are much in the same boat with West Virginia in that regard. That's Mississippi's business and not the SEC's. And we'll see when the representation balance is in the Southern schools' favor how that affects grants and how that impacts the "academic status" which really is a bureaucratic reality and not one that indicates the productivity of graduates. It's all a certification paper chase and having graded the papers of many graduates of the Big 10, ACC, SEC, Big 12, and even some Ivy graduates I can tell you none of them teach writing, grammar, or communication skills all of which are necessary for success in the business world. Higher Education is largely now a function governed by, certified by, and congratulated by higher education. Sure a degree from a good school gets an applicant a look, but job performance is what matters in life. We have oodles of graduates of solid academic institutions who can't think their way out of paper bag, can't perform on the job, and find their way back into the only institution that would have them, higher education.

(01-05-2021 05:30 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 03:12 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 12:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 12:03 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  Something along the lines of state flagship equivalent in a big Southern state that the SEC isn't in, big city (accessible), a bit more football focused than UNC, and more attainable for the SEC than UNC.

Actually the only way N.C. State adds to the bottom line of the SEC is by replacing the last place school in our economic pecking order, and that would be Vanderbilt. Replace them with a school that brings new markets (Vanderbilt doesn't for the SEC) and which annually competes at a higher level than Vanderbilt (and N.C.State does, and the conference enhances its status in competition quality, markets, and slightly in revenue.

That's about the only allure.

There's just no way that NC State, a flagship-equivalent school in a large state with four large media markets (#21, #27, parts of #38, #49) is worth less than Ole Miss or Mississippi State.

Oh yes there is. In 2010-2 the payout models were based on the number of households in a state that purchased cable for T1 and T2 rights and conference networks were paid by subscription as well. So adding new demographics of size was more relevant. With the advent o smart TV that has shifted. Now the game is based on how many actually watch an event, not just the number of people who pay for a cable subscription that includes ESPN / FS1 etc.

What the SEC absolutely wins hands down is the percentage of actual viewers to the number of potential viewers and nobody else is even close in this metric. It is why the future payouts will slightly favor the SEC over the Big 10. Advertisers now base their rates with the networks on actual viewers and they no longer pay for potential viewers. Thank you smart TV's.

So the question is not whether the Mississippi schools reach markets that #27, 21, 38, and 49 in number of possible viewers but rather how many in Mississippi actually watch Mississippi State and Ole Miss football. The ACC and PAC 12 are by far the least viewed conferences and by a significant margin as they seem to battle each other for last each year. So the real issue is in those four top 50 markets how many people actually watch N.C. State football? In 2018 Miss State had 22 million viewers total in nationally televised games. Ole Miss had 12 million and N.C. State had 9 million. There is the new pay model difference. In the old days nobody actually knew the total numbers outside of the state of Mississippi, or even in it for that matter.

Now what that means really is that the Mississippi schools played big games against monster brands like A&M, L.S.U., Alabama and Auburn (all top 15 nationally). N.C. State may have had a game against F.S.U.

So the point is the conference itself has synergy for eyeballs. The ACC doesn't generate the interest in football as a whole as the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 do. Basketball is a different matter, but basketball is only 20% of most media contract revenue.

So there's your answer. Advertisers pay for actual eyeballs today rather than potential eyeballs. They want national draw games which the ACC doesn't produce nearly as many of as the SEC or Big 10, and about the only place market size still matters is in the conference Network money which is just a fraction of the T1&T2 revenue and even that now is based on actual viewers in terms of how much each school gets for each subscription. The SEC at its peak averaged .74 cents per sub and the Big 10 .57 per sub and the PAC 12 .11 cents per sub. Nice for about 6 or 7 million for the SEC at its peak, but hardly a game changer now.

We're comparing values based on current conditions and not considering the circumstances would be different. The Mississippi schools are more valuable than NC State but as you said they "played big games against monster brands like A&M, L.S.U., Alabama and Auburn (all top 15 nationally)." while "N.C. State may have had a game against F.S.U." If NC State's in the SEC and say Mississippi State isn't (I'm assuming the ACC wouldn't want them), then NC State's playing the monster games (I assume they would be playing Georgia and Florida instead of the SEC West teams but it would still be a step up than the current ACC schedule). If Mississippi or Mississippi State's in the ACC or Big 12, what's their TV ratings when Alabama and Auburn aren't coming to town? NC State's value would certainly be higher if they were in the SEC than if they aren't and either Mississippi school's value would be lower if they weren't. One advantage the Mississippi schools have is they neighbor Alabama, the king of the SEC. NC State doesn't (although they border Georgia which arguably is the 2nd best SEC school). There would also be an adjustment period for them to get used to SEC teams as opposed to ACC teams. You have to get them to get excited about Georgia and Florida the same way they do now about North Carolina and Clemson. That won't happen overnight. But could NC State have the ratings/viewership in the SEC that Mississippi State has now once they get used to the SEC? I can't answer that question but I wouldn't dismiss it. And if the SEC traded Mississippi State for NC State, they would expand their footprint to North Carolina without sacrificing Mississippi (assuming Mississippi is even relevant or worthwhile).

You think Vanderbilt's the deadweight of the SEC. I think Mississippi State's the deadweight. Vanderbilt's in Nashville. Mississippi State's in Starkville. You can say you don't need Vanderbilt or Nashville because of Tennessee. I'd say the same about Mississippi State if you have Mississippi. At least Nashville is a big city. If you're going to have 2 schools in the same state, wouldn't you rather the more populous state? And if academics are important, Vanderbilt's the top academic school in the USN&WR rankings and Mississippi State's the bottom school. Do you feel people outside of the SEC look down upon their academics? If so, would you rather boot the top member which would lower the SEC's academic profile or their bottom member which would raise their profile?

I get that I'm not from the SEC and SEC fans think differently about Mississippi State and Mississippi than outsiders do. On the other hand, you have to look at other people's views and values. People aren't going to value schools the same way SEC fans do.

And by that logic, Penn State is a drain on the Big Ten. I've been to State College, not much there.

Truth is; Ole Miss, Mississippi State, and Vanderbilt are all below the value of the average SEC school. Athletically speaking, they are all in the doldrums when it comes to national relevance. The only real difference is that Ole Miss and MSU will attempt to compete. Vanderbilt hasn't invested a great deal of money.

The academic question is a different one, but not totally relevant. It always looks good to administrators to be "associated" with AAU schools or others of high reputation. It doesn't actually do squat for anyone though. There is no practical value in playing football against a quality school. If that were the case then Tulane, Rice, and a few others would have been snapped up by the P5 a long time ago.

Actually, NC State would be of greater academic value than Vanderbilt anyway. It is a major state school in a new market. That would help our influence in Congress, as it would grow our potential constituency. Vanderbilt is a good school, but they're not a flagship and no one in DC is going to help the rest of us out simply because Vandy is in the fold. Very few private schools would carry that distinction and I think the ones that do are probably all in the Ivy League.

(01-05-2021 06:04 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 05:30 PM)schmolik Wrote:  You think Vanderbilt's the deadweight of the SEC. I think Mississippi State's the deadweight. Vanderbilt's in Nashville. Mississippi State's in Starkville. You can say you don't need Vanderbilt or Nashville because of Tennessee. I'd say the same about Mississippi State if you have Mississippi. At least Nashville is a big city. If you're going to have 2 schools in the same state, wouldn't you rather the more populous state?

And by that logic, Penn State is a drain on the Big Ten. I've been to State College, not much there.

I'm a Penn State grad. I know well about State College. The difference is State College is a small speck in a populous state. Same with Urbana, Illinois. The physical location is in the middle of nowhere but the students are from Philly, Pittsburgh, maybe even New York and DC, bigger cities. A large # of Illinois students are from the Chicago area. Mississippi and Mississippi State are small specks in small states. They're not the same.

(01-05-2021 03:57 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Oh yes there is. In 2010-2 the payout models were based on the number of households in a state that purchased cable for T1 and T2 rights and conference networks were paid by subscription as well. So adding new demographics of size was more relevant. With the advent o smart TV that has shifted. Now the game is based on how many actually watch an event, not just the number of people who pay for a cable subscription that includes ESPN / FS1 etc.

What the SEC absolutely wins hands down is the percentage of actual viewers to the number of potential viewers and nobody else is even close in this metric. It is why the future payouts will slightly favor the SEC over the Big 10. Advertisers now base their rates with the networks on actual viewers and they no longer pay for potential viewers. Thank you smart TV's.

So the question is not whether the Mississippi schools reach markets that #27, 21, 38, and 49 in number of possible viewers but rather how many in Mississippi actually watch Mississippi State and Ole Miss football. The ACC and PAC 12 are by far the least viewed conferences and by a significant margin as they seem to battle each other for last each year. So the real issue is in those four top 50 markets how many people actually watch N.C. State football? In 2018 Miss State had 22 million viewers total in nationally televised games. Ole Miss had 12 million and N.C. State had 9 million. There is the new pay model difference. In the old days nobody actually knew the total numbers outside of the state of Mississippi, or even in it for that matter.

Now what that means really is that the Mississippi schools played big games against monster brands like A&M, L.S.U., Alabama and Auburn (all top 15 nationally). N.C. State may have had a game against F.S.U.

So the point is the conference itself has synergy for eyeballs. The ACC doesn't generate the interest in football as a whole as the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 do. Basketball is a different matter, but basketball is only 20% of most media contract revenue.

So there's your answer. Advertisers pay for actual eyeballs today rather than potential eyeballs. They want national draw games which the ACC doesn't produce nearly as many of as the SEC or Big 10, and about the only place market size still matters is in the conference Network money which is just a fraction of the T1&T2 revenue and even that now is based on actual viewers in terms of how much each school gets for each subscription. The SEC at its peak averaged .74 cents per sub and the Big 10 .57 per sub and the PAC 12 .11 cents per sub. Nice for about 6 or 7 million for the SEC at its peak, but hardly a game changer now.

Is there a website where that information is already tabulated? If so, what is it? Or did you figure it out for every school you're talking about?

(01-05-2021 06:45 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 06:04 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 05:30 PM)schmolik Wrote:  You think Vanderbilt's the deadweight of the SEC. I think Mississippi State's the deadweight. Vanderbilt's in Nashville. Mississippi State's in Starkville. You can say you don't need Vanderbilt or Nashville because of Tennessee. I'd say the same about Mississippi State if you have Mississippi. At least Nashville is a big city. If you're going to have 2 schools in the same state, wouldn't you rather the more populous state?

And by that logic, Penn State is a drain on the Big Ten. I've been to State College, not much there.

I'm a Penn State grad. I know well about State College. The difference is State College is a small speck in a populous state. Same with Urbana, Illinois. The physical location is in the middle of nowhere but the students are from Philly, Pittsburgh, maybe even New York and DC, bigger cities. A large # of Illinois students are from the Chicago area. Mississippi and Mississippi State are small specks in small states. They're not the same.

The point is physical location isn't necessarily relevant. Absolutely, Mississippi is a small state, but Vanderbilt is a very small school. Their location in Nashville is basically immaterial. They have a small fan base and don't attract casual fans from their local market...as nice as Nashville might be.

I'm not campaigning to get Vanderbilt out, but they don't provide any more value than either of the MS schools.

(01-04-2021 12:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-04-2021 12:54 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-04-2021 12:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Actually Ken D the post was mostly an attempt at humor. But, I did pick that particular swap scenario because it had some merits for both conferences. In that respect only I would suggest that Vanderbilt has much less need of the revenue due to campus priorities than does N.C. State. Remaining in a viable P conference might be enough for them and being in a conference where it is easier to compete might improve their overall athletic department.

That said I think your argument about competitiveness is accurate. The question there is would doubling their athletic revenue allow them to greatly improve? It's possible but certainly no guarantee. It would depend upon AD priorities and how well they recruited not only North Carolina but South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana.

As to the FOIA matters which I readily admit is something I've heard often enough to believe our Central Florida friend above casts some doubt upon that which sounds much more plausible than having conferences keep their records at the private school's campus, or other such stories. The SEC would certainly be fine without Vanderbilt athletically, but they are family. I snipe at them because they have been absolute obstructionists to conference guidelines for capacity and updating of facilities and because it seems they are perfectly happy, in spite of lip service to the contrary, to remain a whipping boy with little investment in athletics yet deriving full shares.

And of course logically there is the age old logic of why would the SEC trade with the SEC when the economic disparity could simply allow them to take what they wished provided the party they take truly wanted to leave the ACC. For such moves 2037 is not that far away though it is quite possibly beyond my scope of remaining years. In institutional life a decade is nothing to wait out.

Vanderbilt would lose some money moving to the ACC as their 16th, however, they wouldn't have to increase their investment very much to improve their results in most sports.

The problem with investing in order to compete at the SEC level is they would likely have to spend a higher percentage of their conference share in order to make it worthwhile. Why spend the money then if you're not going to attain elite athletic status? Just bank it and keep coasting...

Or they could reduce their intake by moving to the ACC, bump up their investment more modestly and probably accomplish more in the sphere of attracting attention. It's not like they're going to get the top TV timeslots with the SEC anyway unless they really broke the bank and tried to be Northwestern.

They would definitely get more exposure for their buck in the ACC and they would also have more peers (AAU privates or highly ranked privates).

I would love to see a simple sweep of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to the SEC. That's 45% of the total worth of the Big 12 in 3 schools with a Vanderbilt departure making it possible. What was it Gordon Gekko said in Wall Street? Greed is good! It's definitely a greedy move but one no doubt that ESPN might like to make. Anytime you can pay 3 schools to get 45% of the value of a conference it's a big win.

Who was the guy that always claimed that the SEC had to have a private school in that conference so that "secret" deals could be conducted without public scrutiny?

ACC would benefit the most, simply from the addition of Auburn. If Clemson left tomorrow, ACC football is no better than the MAC. Overnight, the ACC would have two respectable football teams.

(01-06-2021 10:51 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  ACC would benefit the most, simply from the addition of Auburn. If Clemson left tomorrow, ACC football is no better than the MAC. Overnight, the ACC would have two respectable football teams.

NC State is worth more to the SEC and B10 than the ACC. Flagship/Large State school/Big State population.

But who would care in the B10 or SEC - in the B10 it would be Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State, and MD - NC State has enough past relations and faculty cross pollination to matter. In the SEC those schools would be South Carolina and Kentucky.

Vandy to the ACC is probably the best trade but it could be made with Wake Forest and you would get a school more committed to sports. Vandy to the ACC is not going to make Vandy spend more money on sports.

Flipping Florida for FSU or FSU for Auburn might make some sense, but Auburn's identity is the anti-Alabama. NC State has the same problem with UNC.

I see 11 schools that could change conferences and might do better and might make more money for all they are Syracuse, Michigan State, Purdue, PSU, Pitt,. MD, VT, NC State, WF, Vandy, Kentucky, and Mizzou.

The driving force behind such shifts would be to accommodate Texas, TT, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Iowa State into a 15, 16 or 18 school ACC/SEC/B10. The financial impetus is not there for the B10 and SEC as it might be for the ACC, but the B10 and SEC have their own internal structural issues that might be addressed.

(01-04-2021 08:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  Not that your proposal makes any sense, but I'm curious as to your motivation for splitting the SEC up?

Don't call it a split, call it a merger.


SoCon 2.0
Atlantic Division: Virginia, Virginia Tech, Kentucky, Louisville, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest

Southeast Division: Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, Auburn, Tennessee

Plains Division: Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, OK State, Arkansas, TCU

Texarkana Division: Texas Tech, Texas, Baylor/Houston/SMU, Texas A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, Alabama






What's that? You can't hear the money yet? Okay, let me turn it up.

100% monopoly of P5 coverage from the Ohio and Potomac River to the Colorado River.

Football schedule: Divisional round robin (7) + Permanent crossover rival (1) + Rotating (3) = 11 games. You get ONE out of conference game, it may not be FCS. You get two pre-season games which do not count in the standings which are FCS eligible. There is no spring game. The pre-season games of course are sold as part of the season ticket package. No more Missouri vs South Carolina. No more not playing Texas-TAMU. No more not playing Kansas-Missouri. No more not playing Georgia Tech-Florida State. And so on. And so on.

Basketball schedule: Divisional home and home round robin (14). Every AD in the Atlantic Division just creamed their pants thinking of the revenue from that alone. + Permanent crossover rival home-and-home (2) + Rotating two home-and-home (4) = 20 games. You still fill up on cupcakes early as normal. Cut a deal with the B1G, Pac-12, Big East, A-10, MWC, and Big West to leave the NCAA tournament and form your own tournament keeping all the money for yourselves.

Baseball schedule: 3-game series round robin with your division (7x3=21) + 3-game series with permanent crossover rival (3) + 3-game series with 3 rotating opponents (3x3=9) = 33 games. This is normal scheduling as done now. Just with more of who you actually want to play on the schedule.

Longhorn Network + SEC Network + SEC Network Alternate + ACC Network = 4 channels. For four divisions. Well isn't that convenient. Packer and Durham in the morning, Phyllis from Mulga and PAWWWWWL in the evening. Maybe Matthew McConaughey doing a late show.

Forget the ACC-B1G Challenge ... you can square these divisions at each other for all kinds of made-for-tv-and-profit fun.

This unifies the Disney properties and eliminates the inefficiencies all three conferences suffer from as a result of existing as non-overlapping entities within an overlapping parent company who is pulling the financial strings.

Your silence is interpreted as silent endorsement. :)

(01-07-2021 12:18 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-04-2021 08:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  Not that your proposal makes any sense, but I'm curious as to your motivation for splitting the SEC up?

Don't call it a split, call it a merger.


SoCon 2.0
Atlantic Division: Virginia, Virginia Tech, Kentucky, Louisville, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest

Southeast Division: Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, Auburn, Tennessee

Plains Division: Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, OK State, Arkansas, TCU

Texarkana Division: Texas Tech, Texas, Baylor/Houston/SMU, Texas A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, Alabama






What's that? You can't hear the money yet? Okay, let me turn it up.

100% monopoly of P5 coverage from the Ohio and Potomac River to the Colorado River.

Football schedule: Divisional round robin (7) + Permanent crossover rival (1) + Rotating (3) = 11 games. You get ONE out of conference game, it may not be FCS. You get two pre-season games which do not count in the standings which are FCS eligible. There is no spring game. The pre-season games of course are sold as part of the season ticket package. No more Missouri vs South Carolina. No more not playing Texas-TAMU. No more not playing Kansas-Missouri. No more not playing Georgia Tech-Florida State. And so on. And so on.

Basketball schedule: Divisional home and home round robin (14). Every AD in the Atlantic Division just creamed their pants thinking of the revenue from that alone. + Permanent crossover rival home-and-home (2) + Rotating two home-and-home (4) = 20 games. You still fill up on cupcakes early as normal. Cut a deal with the B1G, Pac-12, Big East, A-10, MWC, and Big West to leave the NCAA tournament and form your own tournament keeping all the money for yourselves.

Baseball schedule: 3-game series round robin with your division (7x3=21) + 3-game series with permanent crossover rival (3) + 3-game series with 3 rotating opponents (3x3=9) = 33 games. This is normal scheduling as done now. Just with more of who you actually want to play on the schedule.

Longhorn Network + SEC Network + SEC Network Alternate + ACC Network = 4 channels. For four divisions. Well isn't that convenient. Packer and Durham in the morning, Phyllis from Mulga and PAWWWWWL in the evening. Maybe Matthew McConaughey doing a late show.

Forget the ACC-B1G Challenge ... you can square these divisions at each other for all kinds of made-for-tv-and-profit fun.

This unifies the Disney properties and eliminates the inefficiencies all three conferences suffer from as a result of existing as non-overlapping entities within an overlapping parent company who is pulling the financial strings.

(01-08-2021 10:58 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Your silence is interpreted as silent endorsement. :)

I'm just trying to assess the pitfalls of the conglomerate you proposed. The first being that Atlantic Division.

(01-08-2021 12:45 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(01-07-2021 12:18 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-04-2021 08:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  Not that your proposal makes any sense, but I'm curious as to your motivation for splitting the SEC up?

Don't call it a split, call it a merger.


SoCon 2.0
Atlantic Division: Virginia, Virginia Tech, Kentucky, Louisville, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest

Southeast Division: Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, Auburn, Tennessee

Plains Division: Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, OK State, Arkansas, TCU

Texarkana Division: Texas Tech, Texas, Baylor/Houston/SMU, Texas A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, Alabama






What's that? You can't hear the money yet? Okay, let me turn it up.

100% monopoly of P5 coverage from the Ohio and Potomac River to the Colorado River.

Football schedule: Divisional round robin (7) + Permanent crossover rival (1) + Rotating (3) = 11 games. You get ONE out of conference game, it may not be FCS. You get two pre-season games which do not count in the standings which are FCS eligible. There is no spring game. The pre-season games of course are sold as part of the season ticket package. No more Missouri vs South Carolina. No more not playing Texas-TAMU. No more not playing Kansas-Missouri. No more not playing Georgia Tech-Florida State. And so on. And so on.

Basketball schedule: Divisional home and home round robin (14). Every AD in the Atlantic Division just creamed their pants thinking of the revenue from that alone. + Permanent crossover rival home-and-home (2) + Rotating two home-and-home (4) = 20 games. You still fill up on cupcakes early as normal. Cut a deal with the B1G, Pac-12, Big East, A-10, MWC, and Big West to leave the NCAA tournament and form your own tournament keeping all the money for yourselves.

Baseball schedule: 3-game series round robin with your division (7x3=21) + 3-game series with permanent crossover rival (3) + 3-game series with 3 rotating opponents (3x3=9) = 33 games. This is normal scheduling as done now. Just with more of who you actually want to play on the schedule.

Longhorn Network + SEC Network + SEC Network Alternate + ACC Network = 4 channels. For four divisions. Well isn't that convenient. Packer and Durham in the morning, Phyllis from Mulga and PAWWWWWL in the evening. Maybe Matthew McConaughey doing a late show.

Forget the ACC-B1G Challenge ... you can square these divisions at each other for all kinds of made-for-tv-and-profit fun.

This unifies the Disney properties and eliminates the inefficiencies all three conferences suffer from as a result of existing as non-overlapping entities within an overlapping parent company who is pulling the financial strings.

(01-08-2021 10:58 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Your silence is interpreted as silent endorsement. :)

I'm just trying to assess the pitfalls of the conglomerate you proposed. The first being that Atlantic Division.

What's the pitfall?

Sample TN football schedule: Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, Auburn, Kentucky, Virginia Tech, Miss State, Missouri. Pre-season games against UTC and Tennessee Tech.

(01-08-2021 12:52 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-08-2021 12:45 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(01-07-2021 12:18 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-04-2021 08:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  Not that your proposal makes any sense, but I'm curious as to your motivation for splitting the SEC up?

Don't call it a split, call it a merger.


SoCon 2.0
Mountain Division: Virginia, Virginia Tech, Kentucky, Louisville, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Tennessee

Southeast Division: Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, Auburn, Miami

Plains Division: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, OK State, Arkansas, TCU

Gulf Division: Texas Tech, Texas, Baylor, Texas A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, Alabama






What's that? You can't hear the money yet? Okay, let me turn it up.

100% monopoly of P5 coverage from the Ohio and Potomac River to the Colorado River.

Football schedule: Divisional round robin (7) + Permanent crossover rival (1) + Rotating (3) = 11 games. You get ONE out of conference game, it may not be FCS. You get two pre-season games which do not count in the standings which are FCS eligible. There is no spring game. The pre-season games of course are sold as part of the season ticket package. No more Missouri vs South Carolina. No more not playing Texas-TAMU. No more not playing Kansas-Missouri. No more not playing Georgia Tech-Florida State. And so on. And so on.

Basketball schedule: Divisional home and home round robin (14). Every AD in the Atlantic Division just creamed their pants thinking of the revenue from that alone. + Permanent crossover rival home-and-home (2) + Rotating two home-and-home (4) = 20 games. You still fill up on cupcakes early as normal. Cut a deal with the B1G, Pac-12, Big East, A-10, MWC, and Big West to leave the NCAA tournament and form your own tournament keeping all the money for yourselves.

Baseball schedule: 3-game series round robin with your division (7x3=21) + 3-game series with permanent crossover rival (3) + 3-game series with 3 rotating opponents (3x3=9) = 33 games. This is normal scheduling as done now. Just with more of who you actually want to play on the schedule.

Longhorn Network + SEC Network + SEC Network Alternate + ACC Network = 4 channels. For four divisions. Well isn't that convenient. Packer and Durham in the morning, Phyllis from Mulga and PAWWWWWL in the evening. Maybe Matthew McConaughey doing a late show.

Forget the ACC-B1G Challenge ... you can square these divisions at each other for all kinds of made-for-tv-and-profit fun.

This unifies the Disney properties and eliminates the inefficiencies all three conferences suffer from as a result of existing as non-overlapping entities within an overlapping parent company who is pulling the financial strings.

(01-08-2021 10:58 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Your silence is interpreted as silent endorsement. :)

I'm just trying to assess the pitfalls of the conglomerate you proposed. The first being that Atlantic Division.

What's the pitfall?

Sample TN football schedule: Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, Auburn, Kentucky, Virginia Tech, Miss State, Missouri. Pre-season games against UTC and Tennessee Tech.

Well for starters you can rename it. There's precious little Atlantic exposure in it. The Mountain Division or Blue Ridge Division would be more appropriate. And the Gulf Division would work just fine for the Texarkana which doesn't include Arkansas. No SMU/Houston to it. The metrics for Baylor are better. Besides, L.S.U. and A&M more than adequately cover Houston.

You essentially took the ACC / Big 12 / SEC minus Vanderbilt. Why? Why not Wake Forest? Nashville is the better demographic. Vanderbilt is the better academic school. Vanderbilt earnings are higher on the P5 pecking order, and Vanderbilt in Wake's position ties in the State of Tennessee (7) million (2) schools into 2 divisions which is better for audience size than 4 schools from North Carolina a state of just over 10 million divided among 4 schools. But for that matter why include Wake Forest or even Vanderbilt and leave out Miami? It's private covers a demographic of Florida not covered by Florida and F.S.U. and you could move Tennessee to the Mountain Division remove Wake, add Miami to the Southeast and strengthen all of it.

And let's let Nebraska stay in the Big 10 which they would do anyway and keep Iowa State.

Now I think we have the relationships and geography about as right as they are going to get.

(01-07-2021 12:18 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Maybe Matthew McConaughey doing a late show.

Sign me up.

(01-06-2021 10:51 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  ACC would benefit the most, simply from the addition of Auburn. If Clemson left tomorrow, ACC football is no better than the MAC. Overnight, the ACC would have two respectable football teams.

Yes, Auburn was lost in the shuffle from my original post. Auburn in conference with a recovered Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, NC State, Virginia Tech, Louisville, and tag-along Mississippi State is nothing to sneeze at and would be considered a P5-level league on its own. Of course, the ACC would still have a handful of private schools along with Pitt to join with complete coverage of the southeastern states east of the Mississippi River.

Auburn would still likely play Alabama and Georgia in non-conference every year or at least every other because too much money is at stake, and they could rotate through the Tennessee and Florida tier of rivals as they wish. Their path to the CFP would seem a bit more navigable every year, too. Anyway, just food for thought.

The way I look at it, gravity tends to suck everything in.

Right now, the SEC is the strongest league considering a lot of factors. They are the strongest Disney property, certainly.

I've always been of the belief that monopolizing content would drive the price up so you give me a scenario where quality leagues are combining in some fashion and I tend to agree it works.

I think 20-24 is the number you strive for in order to achieve that effect...depending on which additions you can make.

(01-08-2021 04:43 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  The way I look at it, gravity tends to suck everything in.

Right now, the SEC is the strongest league considering a lot of factors. They are the strongest Disney property, certainly.

I've always been of the belief that monopolizing content would drive the price up so you give me a scenario where quality leagues are combining in some fashion and I tend to agree it works.

I think 20-24 is the number you strive for in order to achieve that effect...depending on which additions you can make.

Uhm! ESPN is the "Black Hole", not the SEC! The SEC is more like an expanding Universe that wants to include more of Texas and possibly Oklahoma and Kansas. ESPN is the black hole at the center of that Universe that will seek to eventually suck everything into itself. Therefore expanding the SEC universe is the best way to escape for now the gravity of the Disney Singularity.

(01-08-2021 12:52 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-08-2021 12:45 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(01-07-2021 12:18 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(01-04-2021 08:52 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  Not that your proposal makes any sense, but I'm curious as to your motivation for splitting the SEC up?

Don't call it a split, call it a merger.


SoCon 2.0
Atlantic Division: Virginia, Virginia Tech, Kentucky, Louisville, North Carolina, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest

Southeast Division: Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, Auburn, Tennessee

Plains Division: Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, OK State, Arkansas, TCU

Texarkana Division: Texas Tech, Texas, Baylor/Houston/SMU, Texas A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, Alabama






What's that? You can't hear the money yet? Okay, let me turn it up.

100% monopoly of P5 coverage from the Ohio and Potomac River to the Colorado River.

Football schedule: Divisional round robin (7) + Permanent crossover rival (1) + Rotating (3) = 11 games. You get ONE out of conference game, it may not be FCS. You get two pre-season games which do not count in the standings which are FCS eligible. There is no spring game. The pre-season games of course are sold as part of the season ticket package. No more Missouri vs South Carolina. No more not playing Texas-TAMU. No more not playing Kansas-Missouri. No more not playing Georgia Tech-Florida State. And so on. And so on.

Basketball schedule: Divisional home and home round robin (14). Every AD in the Atlantic Division just creamed their pants thinking of the revenue from that alone. + Permanent crossover rival home-and-home (2) + Rotating two home-and-home (4) = 20 games. You still fill up on cupcakes early as normal. Cut a deal with the B1G, Pac-12, Big East, A-10, MWC, and Big West to leave the NCAA tournament and form your own tournament keeping all the money for yourselves.

Baseball schedule: 3-game series round robin with your division (7x3=21) + 3-game series with permanent crossover rival (3) + 3-game series with 3 rotating opponents (3x3=9) = 33 games. This is normal scheduling as done now. Just with more of who you actually want to play on the schedule.

Longhorn Network + SEC Network + SEC Network Alternate + ACC Network = 4 channels. For four divisions. Well isn't that convenient. Packer and Durham in the morning, Phyllis from Mulga and PAWWWWWL in the evening. Maybe Matthew McConaughey doing a late show.

Forget the ACC-B1G Challenge ... you can square these divisions at each other for all kinds of made-for-tv-and-profit fun.

This unifies the Disney properties and eliminates the inefficiencies all three conferences suffer from as a result of existing as non-overlapping entities within an overlapping parent company who is pulling the financial strings.

(01-08-2021 10:58 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Your silence is interpreted as silent endorsement. :)

I'm just trying to assess the pitfalls of the conglomerate you proposed. The first being that Atlantic Division.

What's the pitfall?

Sample TN football schedule: Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, Auburn, Kentucky, Virginia Tech, Miss State, Missouri. Pre-season games against UTC and Tennessee Tech.

Play everyone in your division home and away in Basketball.