(11-14-2022 09:51 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 08:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 08:45 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  I don't really get why UNC and UVA would prefer the SEC. Neither really invests in football so why join a league they'd be lucky to land mid table in vs a league where they could reasonably compete with all but four schools (Mich/OSU/PsU/USC)? For basketball wouldn't those schools also prefer to play B1G teams?

Institutionally both are old money schools that align much more closely with the B1G. B1G has lacrosse.

Texas and Oklahoma are a terrific fit for the SEC and would definitely prefer that to the B1G. I think in the same way ppl were wrong to say Texas/OU would choose the B1G over SEC they are wrong now to say UVA/UNC would choose SEC over B1G.

Perhaps because in 2011 when Maryland left, North Carolina approached the SEC for a safe landing place should the ACC suffer further defections. And because Cunningham's poll of the donors found only one which preferred the Big 10 out of over 100 who responded. So perhaps real events trump the conventional wisdom of posters on message boards.

The deciding factors for Texas and Oklahoma had more to do with donor preferences than institutional preferences. Athletics, as recently indelibly reminded by the SCOTUS, is a business enterprise, and in a business enterprise travel expense, donor preferences, and playing minor sports more locally matter more than so called academic prestige, and lacrosse, which they can still schedule freely regardless of conference affiliation

.

A lot changes in 10+ years. The landscape in 2011 was far different than today and will be even more different in 2032. I have no doubt that in 2011 they'd pick SEC but I think when that decision is made in 2032 or beyond it won't be quite that clear cut.

What has changed? The need for new markets is no longer as solid as the need for brands that draw eyes to the games. Where would North Carolina basketball have the better stage? I'd say vs Kentucky, Tennessee, Florida, and with Virginia in a league which has appreciation for hoops but prefers football. There their brand would keep value. While in the Big 10 they add little to their needs in football and would find the hoops participation tougher, and the distances greater. It is a wintertime sport to boot.

The attendance at SEC basketball has always been 3rd nationally, but is improving steadily, except at places which aren't spending much money to remain competitive, like, uhm, Vanderbilt!

Everything we see with regard to natural resources indicates that travel will continue to be a key item in making decisions. Baseball and Softball have a home in the SEC, not so much in the Big 10. Spring and Summertime sports are key in both the SEC and ACC.

The brand of SEC football covers UNC in the Fall and the SEC's basketball gives them status in the Winter. I still like the SEC's chances in this changed world.

(11-14-2022 10:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 09:51 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 08:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 08:45 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  I don't really get why UNC and UVA would prefer the SEC. Neither really invests in football so why join a league they'd be lucky to land mid table in vs a league where they could reasonably compete with all but four schools (Mich/OSU/PsU/USC)? For basketball wouldn't those schools also prefer to play B1G teams?

Institutionally both are old money schools that align much more closely with the B1G. B1G has lacrosse.

Texas and Oklahoma are a terrific fit for the SEC and would definitely prefer that to the B1G. I think in the same way ppl were wrong to say Texas/OU would choose the B1G over SEC they are wrong now to say UVA/UNC would choose SEC over B1G.

Perhaps because in 2011 when Maryland left, North Carolina approached the SEC for a safe landing place should the ACC suffer further defections. And because Cunningham's poll of the donors found only one which preferred the Big 10 out of over 100 who responded. So perhaps real events trump the conventional wisdom of posters on message boards.

The deciding factors for Texas and Oklahoma had more to do with donor preferences than institutional preferences. Athletics, as recently indelibly reminded by the SCOTUS, is a business enterprise, and in a business enterprise travel expense, donor preferences, and playing minor sports more locally matter more than so called academic prestige, and lacrosse, which they can still schedule freely regardless of conference affiliation

.

A lot changes in 10+ years. The landscape in 2011 was far different than today and will be even more different in 2032. I have no doubt that in 2011 they'd pick SEC but I think when that decision is made in 2032 or beyond it won't be quite that clear cut.

What has changed? The need for new markets is no longer as solid as the need for brands that draw eyes to the games. Where would North Carolina basketball have the better stage? I'd say vs Kentucky, Tennessee, Florida, and with Virginia in a league which has appreciation for hoops but prefers football. There their brand would keep value. While in the Big 10 they add little to their needs in football and would find the hoops participation tougher, and the distances greater. It is a wintertime sport to boot.

The attendance at SEC basketball has always been 3rd nationally, but is improving steadily, except at places which aren't spending much money to remain competitive, like, uhm, Vanderbilt!

Everything we see with regard to natural resources indicates that travel will continue to be a key item in making decisions. Baseball and Softball have a home in the SEC, not so much in the Big 10. Spring and Summertime sports are key in both the SEC and ACC.

The brand of SEC football covers UNC in the Fall and the SEC's basketball gives them status in the Winter. I still like the SEC's chances in this changed world.

Until last year Vanderbilt's 2012 SEC tourney title was 30+ years more recent than Tennessee's (1979). And beat Kentucky in Clark Lea's second year.

(11-14-2022 10:57 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 10:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 09:51 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 08:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 08:45 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  I don't really get why UNC and UVA would prefer the SEC. Neither really invests in football so why join a league they'd be lucky to land mid table in vs a league where they could reasonably compete with all but four schools (Mich/OSU/PsU/USC)? For basketball wouldn't those schools also prefer to play B1G teams?

Institutionally both are old money schools that align much more closely with the B1G. B1G has lacrosse.

Texas and Oklahoma are a terrific fit for the SEC and would definitely prefer that to the B1G. I think in the same way ppl were wrong to say Texas/OU would choose the B1G over SEC they are wrong now to say UVA/UNC would choose SEC over B1G.

Perhaps because in 2011 when Maryland left, North Carolina approached the SEC for a safe landing place should the ACC suffer further defections. And because Cunningham's poll of the donors found only one which preferred the Big 10 out of over 100 who responded. So perhaps real events trump the conventional wisdom of posters on message boards.

The deciding factors for Texas and Oklahoma had more to do with donor preferences than institutional preferences. Athletics, as recently indelibly reminded by the SCOTUS, is a business enterprise, and in a business enterprise travel expense, donor preferences, and playing minor sports more locally matter more than so called academic prestige, and lacrosse, which they can still schedule freely regardless of conference affiliation

.

A lot changes in 10+ years. The landscape in 2011 was far different than today and will be even more different in 2032. I have no doubt that in 2011 they'd pick SEC but I think when that decision is made in 2032 or beyond it won't be quite that clear cut.

What has changed? The need for new markets is no longer as solid as the need for brands that draw eyes to the games. Where would North Carolina basketball have the better stage? I'd say vs Kentucky, Tennessee, Florida, and with Virginia in a league which has appreciation for hoops but prefers football. There their brand would keep value. While in the Big 10 they add little to their needs in football and would find the hoops participation tougher, and the distances greater. It is a wintertime sport to boot.

The attendance at SEC basketball has always been 3rd nationally, but is improving steadily, except at places which aren't spending much money to remain competitive, like, uhm, Vanderbilt!

Everything we see with regard to natural resources indicates that travel will continue to be a key item in making decisions. Baseball and Softball have a home in the SEC, not so much in the Big 10. Spring and Summertime sports are key in both the SEC and ACC.

The brand of SEC football covers UNC in the Fall and the SEC's basketball gives them status in the Winter. I still like the SEC's chances in this changed world.

Until last year Vanderbilt's 2012 SEC tourney title was 30+ years more recent than Tennessee's (1979). And beat Kentucky in Clark Lea's second year.

Vandy has talked enhancements to the football facility for the last 20 years and hasn't done much if anything to improve a venue last renovated in 1981. I like your basketball venue, but you don't fill it any better than you do the absurdly small (for the SEC) football venue. Baseball has become the Vanderbilt sport and even a once competitive women's hoops program is now in disarray. Tennessee never failed to produce for the big money sport attendance wise, and travel attendance wise. Only Vandy baseball has any semblance of a travel crowd, and the whistling dudes are obnoxious.

I'm not one who wants to can our relationship, but your athletic department has been riding the SEC and contributing little for a long time. What once were competitive hoops programs (men & women) have been missed. Sorry but a natty in women's bowling isn't what we had in mind when softball participation (a required sport) is absent.

You are about to be making 75 million a year in media revenue. It's time to step it up in revenue sports!

And I'll bet you if movement occurs from the ACC to the SEC (say rep points) that UNC's destination is the SEC and not the Big, 10 if they are among those who leave.

(09-17-2022 06:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  The short answer to the OP is: make sure the ACC is paid fairly (doesn't have to be P2 money) and sit back and do nothing.

I just wanted to re-post this from up thread.
It's really simple and eliminates all of the potential drama of what could happen if any of the ACC schools wanted to move to another league because of money.

(11-15-2022 01:19 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2022 06:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  The short answer to the OP is: make sure the ACC is paid fairly (doesn't have to be P2 money) and sit back and do nothing.

I just wanted to re-post this from up thread.
It's really simple and eliminates all of the potential drama of what could happen if any of the ACC schools wanted to move to another league because of money.

Wasn't it John Swofford's job to make sure the ACC was paid fairly?

And if so, is there a good argument for the idea that the ACC isn't already paid fairly?

(11-15-2022 01:19 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2022 06:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  The short answer to the OP is: make sure the ACC is paid fairly (doesn't have to be P2 money) and sit back and do nothing.

I just wanted to re-post this from up thread.
It's really simple and eliminates all of the potential drama of what could happen if any of the ACC schools wanted to move to another league because of money.

At this point, for FSU, I don't think money is the issue for them wanting to leave.

In the course of this discussion, I think it's reasonable to ask whether ESPN would be interested in keeping the Big Ten out of the South definitively or if ESPN is interested in keeping the Big Ten away from major brand programs.

I mean, if you think about it, the Big Ten could grab South Florida and Tulane any time they want and those schools would accept. The Big Ten isn't doing that and there's obviously a reason.

We can certainly debate on who the Big Ten would be willing to take, but one thing is clear, keeping the major programs of the South united in one conference wouldn't be too difficult given the right political strings being pulled. The question here seems to be how many strings need to be pulled and what is the most efficient way to keep the major Southern brands under one roof.

Efficiency seems to be the name of the game. How many schools does the SEC need to take in order to make it work...

Beyond that, there might not be much cause for concern. The Big Ten's ability to dot the map will be limited by schools with budgets strong enough to connect all those dots on a regular basis. Some schools would flatly have an issue moving about the country just for some perceived advantage in linking up with a "national conference."

This isn't a major professional league even if the boundaries are being blurred by NIL and pay-for-play. Pro leagues have larger travel budgets and more focused expenses. Major colleges do not have that advantage. These schools still want their minor sports to travel a reasonable distance, be on TV if possible, and retain the ability for traveling fans to beef up attendance numbers. You can't feasibly do any of that flying coast to coast every other weekend.

(11-15-2022 02:32 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(11-15-2022 01:19 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(09-17-2022 06:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  The short answer to the OP is: make sure the ACC is paid fairly (doesn't have to be P2 money) and sit back and do nothing.

I just wanted to re-post this from up thread.
It's really simple and eliminates all of the potential drama of what could happen if any of the ACC schools wanted to move to another league because of money.

At this point, for FSU, I don't think money is the issue for them wanting to leave.

FSU wants to leave the ACC? And just what is this "issue" that you speak of?

(11-14-2022 11:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 10:57 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 10:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 09:51 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 08:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Perhaps because in 2011 when Maryland left, North Carolina approached the SEC for a safe landing place should the ACC suffer further defections. And because Cunningham's poll of the donors found only one which preferred the Big 10 out of over 100 who responded. So perhaps real events trump the conventional wisdom of posters on message boards.

The deciding factors for Texas and Oklahoma had more to do with donor preferences than institutional preferences. Athletics, as recently indelibly reminded by the SCOTUS, is a business enterprise, and in a business enterprise travel expense, donor preferences, and playing minor sports more locally matter more than so called academic prestige, and lacrosse, which they can still schedule freely regardless of conference affiliation

.

A lot changes in 10+ years. The landscape in 2011 was far different than today and will be even more different in 2032. I have no doubt that in 2011 they'd pick SEC but I think when that decision is made in 2032 or beyond it won't be quite that clear cut.

What has changed? The need for new markets is no longer as solid as the need for brands that draw eyes to the games. Where would North Carolina basketball have the better stage? I'd say vs Kentucky, Tennessee, Florida, and with Virginia in a league which has appreciation for hoops but prefers football. There their brand would keep value. While in the Big 10 they add little to their needs in football and would find the hoops participation tougher, and the distances greater. It is a wintertime sport to boot.

The attendance at SEC basketball has always been 3rd nationally, but is improving steadily, except at places which aren't spending much money to remain competitive, like, uhm, Vanderbilt!

Everything we see with regard to natural resources indicates that travel will continue to be a key item in making decisions. Baseball and Softball have a home in the SEC, not so much in the Big 10. Spring and Summertime sports are key in both the SEC and ACC.

The brand of SEC football covers UNC in the Fall and the SEC's basketball gives them status in the Winter. I still like the SEC's chances in this changed world.

Until last year Vanderbilt's 2012 SEC tourney title was 30+ years more recent than Tennessee's (1979). And beat Kentucky in Clark Lea's second year.

Vandy has talked enhancements to the football facility for the last 20 years and hasn't done much if anything to improve a venue last renovated in 1981. I like your basketball venue, but you don't fill it any better than you do the absurdly small (for the SEC) football venue. Baseball has become the Vanderbilt sport and even a once competitive women's hoops program is now in disarray. Tennessee never failed to produce for the big money sport attendance wise, and travel attendance wise. Only Vandy baseball has any semblance of a travel crowd, and the whistling dudes are obnoxious.

I'm not one who wants to can our relationship, but your athletic department has been riding the SEC and contributing little for a long time. What once were competitive hoops programs (men & women) have been missed. Sorry but a natty in women's bowling isn't what we had in mind when softball participation (a required sport) is absent.

You are about to be making 75 million a year in media revenue. It's time to step it up in revenue sports!

And I'll bet you if movement occurs from the ACC to the SEC (say rep points) that UNC's destination is the SEC and not the Big, 10 if they are among those who leave.

It's extremely unlikely that Vanderbilt ever becomes anything more than occasionally competitive in Football (2 or 3 SEC wins a year), though basketball should definitely be better. 66th in last year's Director's Cup is only ahead of Mississippi State in the SEC, which is an indictment of the admin really. Not having softball is honestly bonkers and should be rectified immediately.

Duke is probably the closest reasonable comparison for the sports program, and that'll take 30-40 years of reaching Kentucky level basketball success for any non-alumni to actually care about Vanderbilt revenue sports though. Stanford and Northwestern are similar comparisons that struggle to make it work in fball/bball for any length of time despite being in big cities and large states with local competition (Cal and Illinois, respectively) that's far weaker than what Vanderbilt has to deal with (Tennessee). Vanderbilt will, with almost 100% certainty, never bring the attendance at home or large travel crowds on the road - there's a slightly smaller chance that basketball home games could become a thing in Nashville if that team became elite/near-elite on a regular basis.

I'm a realist, Vanderbilt will never "pull its weight" in the SEC beyond being the only private school and the benefits that provides the conference. It's essentially nearly impossible and each expansion since Arkansas has lowered our chances of ever pulling our weight. I do object to the characterization that we've been riding coattails for a long time since college sports has only become a true big money enterprise (regarding media rights payouts) over the past 15 years and that's a blink in history and the school needs to make athletics more of a priority.

(11-16-2022 04:30 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 11:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 10:57 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 10:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 09:51 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  A lot changes in 10+ years. The landscape in 2011 was far different than today and will be even more different in 2032. I have no doubt that in 2011 they'd pick SEC but I think when that decision is made in 2032 or beyond it won't be quite that clear cut.

What has changed? The need for new markets is no longer as solid as the need for brands that draw eyes to the games. Where would North Carolina basketball have the better stage? I'd say vs Kentucky, Tennessee, Florida, and with Virginia in a league which has appreciation for hoops but prefers football. There their brand would keep value. While in the Big 10 they add little to their needs in football and would find the hoops participation tougher, and the distances greater. It is a wintertime sport to boot.

The attendance at SEC basketball has always been 3rd nationally, but is improving steadily, except at places which aren't spending much money to remain competitive, like, uhm, Vanderbilt!

Everything we see with regard to natural resources indicates that travel will continue to be a key item in making decisions. Baseball and Softball have a home in the SEC, not so much in the Big 10. Spring and Summertime sports are key in both the SEC and ACC.

The brand of SEC football covers UNC in the Fall and the SEC's basketball gives them status in the Winter. I still like the SEC's chances in this changed world.

Until last year Vanderbilt's 2012 SEC tourney title was 30+ years more recent than Tennessee's (1979). And beat Kentucky in Clark Lea's second year.

Vandy has talked enhancements to the football facility for the last 20 years and hasn't done much if anything to improve a venue last renovated in 1981. I like your basketball venue, but you don't fill it any better than you do the absurdly small (for the SEC) football venue. Baseball has become the Vanderbilt sport and even a once competitive women's hoops program is now in disarray. Tennessee never failed to produce for the big money sport attendance wise, and travel attendance wise. Only Vandy baseball has any semblance of a travel crowd, and the whistling dudes are obnoxious.

I'm not one who wants to can our relationship, but your athletic department has been riding the SEC and contributing little for a long time. What once were competitive hoops programs (men & women) have been missed. Sorry but a natty in women's bowling isn't what we had in mind when softball participation (a required sport) is absent.

You are about to be making 75 million a year in media revenue. It's time to step it up in revenue sports!

And I'll bet you if movement occurs from the ACC to the SEC (say rep points) that UNC's destination is the SEC and not the Big, 10 if they are among those who leave.

It's extremely unlikely that Vanderbilt ever becomes anything more than occasionally competitive in Football (2 or 3 SEC wins a year), though basketball should definitely be better. 66th in last year's Director's Cup is only ahead of Mississippi State in the SEC, which is an indictment of the admin really. Not having softball is honestly bonkers and should be rectified immediately.

Duke is probably the closest reasonable comparison for the sports program, and that'll take 30-40 years of reaching Kentucky level basketball success for any non-alumni to actually care about Vanderbilt revenue sports though. Stanford and Northwestern are similar comparisons that struggle to make it work in fball/bball for any length of time despite being in big cities and large states with local competition (Cal and Illinois, respectively) that's far weaker than what Vanderbilt has to deal with (Tennessee). Vanderbilt will, with almost 100% certainty, never bring the attendance at home or large travel crowds on the road - there's a slightly smaller chance that basketball home games could become a thing in Nashville if that team became elite/near-elite on a regular basis.

I'm a realist, Vanderbilt will never "pull its weight" in the SEC beyond being the only private school and the benefits that provides the conference. It's essentially nearly impossible and each expansion since Arkansas has lowered our chances of ever pulling our weight. I do object to the characterization that we've been riding coattails for a long time since college sports has only become a true big money enterprise (regarding media rights payouts) over the past 15 years and that's a blink in history and the school needs to make athletics more of a priority.

I think that is a fair synopsis, but Football comparatively speaking, has always been the money-making sport which funded the others. Its rising tide simply lifts all programs. But OU/UGA vs the NCAA was what loosed the Kraken of lucre. So, revenue from the money sports (particularly football) has been ballooning since 1984. I do think that bubble pops by 2036 when all of the coming paradigm shifts surrounding the exit of Boomers from their long-held grip on economic statistical data passes. Since it is a global phenomenon, I believe it will be the looked back upon as the incept of a new era of downsizing and adjustment. On the other side of that which will likely take a decade to work through the opportunities for the young should see a tremendous upside. I try to get my grandchildren to focus upon that rather than what will be a temporary hardship. Supply and demand. When the large demand bubble passes deflation will make things tough for a little bit, but then it should also make things cheaper, and create a higher demand for skilled labor. I expect it to impact education similarly. We'll see, or most likely you will see.

Vanderbilt is family. I'm not a kick'em out guy. But there is much more within their scale of things that they could be doing. That is the thrust of my comments.

(11-14-2022 10:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 09:51 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 08:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 08:45 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  I don't really get why UNC and UVA would prefer the SEC. Neither really invests in football so why join a league they'd be lucky to land mid table in vs a league where they could reasonably compete with all but four schools (Mich/OSU/PsU/USC)? For basketball wouldn't those schools also prefer to play B1G teams?

Institutionally both are old money schools that align much more closely with the B1G. B1G has lacrosse.

Texas and Oklahoma are a terrific fit for the SEC and would definitely prefer that to the B1G. I think in the same way ppl were wrong to say Texas/OU would choose the B1G over SEC they are wrong now to say UVA/UNC would choose SEC over B1G.

Perhaps because in 2011 when Maryland left, North Carolina approached the SEC for a safe landing place should the ACC suffer further defections. And because Cunningham's poll of the donors found only one which preferred the Big 10 out of over 100 who responded. So perhaps real events trump the conventional wisdom of posters on message boards.

The deciding factors for Texas and Oklahoma had more to do with donor preferences than institutional preferences. Athletics, as recently indelibly reminded by the SCOTUS, is a business enterprise, and in a business enterprise travel expense, donor preferences, and playing minor sports more locally matter more than so called academic prestige, and lacrosse, which they can still schedule freely regardless of conference affiliation

.

A lot changes in 10+ years. The landscape in 2011 was far different than today and will be even more different in 2032. I have no doubt that in 2011 they'd pick SEC but I think when that decision is made in 2032 or beyond it won't be quite that clear cut.

What has changed? The need for new markets is no longer as solid as the need for brands that draw eyes to the games. Where would North Carolina basketball have the better stage? I'd say vs Kentucky, Tennessee, Florida, and with Virginia in a league which has appreciation for hoops but prefers football. There their brand would keep value. While in the Big 10 they add little to their needs in football and would find the hoops participation tougher, and the distances greater. It is a wintertime sport to boot.

The attendance at SEC basketball has always been 3rd nationally, but is improving steadily, except at places which aren't spending much money to remain competitive, like, uhm, Vanderbilt!

Everything we see with regard to natural resources indicates that travel will continue to be a key item in making decisions. Baseball and Softball have a home in the SEC, not so much in the Big 10. Spring and Summertime sports are key in both the SEC and ACC.

The brand of SEC football covers UNC in the Fall and the SEC's basketball gives them status in the Winter. I still like the SEC's chances in this changed world.

It has changed. The SEC is better compared to the big 10 now than they were in 2010, in revenue, in overall athletics, in population and in academics. There is nothing that has made the Big 10 more favorable relative to the SEC in the last 10 years.

(11-16-2022 07:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 04:30 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 11:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 10:57 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 10:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  What has changed? The need for new markets is no longer as solid as the need for brands that draw eyes to the games. Where would North Carolina basketball have the better stage? I'd say vs Kentucky, Tennessee, Florida, and with Virginia in a league which has appreciation for hoops but prefers football. There their brand would keep value. While in the Big 10 they add little to their needs in football and would find the hoops participation tougher, and the distances greater. It is a wintertime sport to boot.

The attendance at SEC basketball has always been 3rd nationally, but is improving steadily, except at places which aren't spending much money to remain competitive, like, uhm, Vanderbilt!

Everything we see with regard to natural resources indicates that travel will continue to be a key item in making decisions. Baseball and Softball have a home in the SEC, not so much in the Big 10. Spring and Summertime sports are key in both the SEC and ACC.

The brand of SEC football covers UNC in the Fall and the SEC's basketball gives them status in the Winter. I still like the SEC's chances in this changed world.

Until last year Vanderbilt's 2012 SEC tourney title was 30+ years more recent than Tennessee's (1979). And beat Kentucky in Clark Lea's second year.

Vandy has talked enhancements to the football facility for the last 20 years and hasn't done much if anything to improve a venue last renovated in 1981. I like your basketball venue, but you don't fill it any better than you do the absurdly small (for the SEC) football venue. Baseball has become the Vanderbilt sport and even a once competitive women's hoops program is now in disarray. Tennessee never failed to produce for the big money sport attendance wise, and travel attendance wise. Only Vandy baseball has any semblance of a travel crowd, and the whistling dudes are obnoxious.

I'm not one who wants to can our relationship, but your athletic department has been riding the SEC and contributing little for a long time. What once were competitive hoops programs (men & women) have been missed. Sorry but a natty in women's bowling isn't what we had in mind when softball participation (a required sport) is absent.

You are about to be making 75 million a year in media revenue. It's time to step it up in revenue sports!

And I'll bet you if movement occurs from the ACC to the SEC (say rep points) that UNC's destination is the SEC and not the Big, 10 if they are among those who leave.

It's extremely unlikely that Vanderbilt ever becomes anything more than occasionally competitive in Football (2 or 3 SEC wins a year), though basketball should definitely be better. 66th in last year's Director's Cup is only ahead of Mississippi State in the SEC, which is an indictment of the admin really. Not having softball is honestly bonkers and should be rectified immediately.

Duke is probably the closest reasonable comparison for the sports program, and that'll take 30-40 years of reaching Kentucky level basketball success for any non-alumni to actually care about Vanderbilt revenue sports though. Stanford and Northwestern are similar comparisons that struggle to make it work in fball/bball for any length of time despite being in big cities and large states with local competition (Cal and Illinois, respectively) that's far weaker than what Vanderbilt has to deal with (Tennessee). Vanderbilt will, with almost 100% certainty, never bring the attendance at home or large travel crowds on the road - there's a slightly smaller chance that basketball home games could become a thing in Nashville if that team became elite/near-elite on a regular basis.

I'm a realist, Vanderbilt will never "pull its weight" in the SEC beyond being the only private school and the benefits that provides the conference. It's essentially nearly impossible and each expansion since Arkansas has lowered our chances of ever pulling our weight. I do object to the characterization that we've been riding coattails for a long time since college sports has only become a true big money enterprise (regarding media rights payouts) over the past 15 years and that's a blink in history and the school needs to make athletics more of a priority.

I think that is a fair synopsis, but Football comparatively speaking, has always been the money-making sport which funded the others. Its rising tide simply lifts all programs. But OU/UGA vs the NCAA was what loosed the Kraken of lucre. So, revenue from the money sports (particularly football) has been ballooning since 1984. I do think that bubble pops by 2036 when all of the coming paradigm shifts surrounding the exit of Boomers from their long-held grip on economic statistical data passes. Since it is a global phenomenon, I believe it will be the looked back upon as the incept of a new era of downsizing and adjustment. On the other side of that which will likely take a decade to work through the opportunities for the young should see a tremendous upside. I try to get my grandchildren to focus upon that rather than what will be a temporary hardship. Supply and demand. When the large demand bubble passes deflation will make things tough for a little bit, but then it should also make things cheaper, and create a higher demand for skilled labor. I expect it to impact education similarly. We'll see, or most likely you will see.

Vanderbilt is family. I'm not a kick'em out guy. But there is much more within their scale of things that they could be doing. That is the thrust of my comments.

Actually, money dropped for 7 or 8 years when the monopoly went away in 1984. It was only in the 90s when it picked up and around 2007 with the Big 10 deal when it took off.

(11-16-2022 08:56 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 07:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 04:30 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 11:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 10:57 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  Until last year Vanderbilt's 2012 SEC tourney title was 30+ years more recent than Tennessee's (1979). And beat Kentucky in Clark Lea's second year.

Vandy has talked enhancements to the football facility for the last 20 years and hasn't done much if anything to improve a venue last renovated in 1981. I like your basketball venue, but you don't fill it any better than you do the absurdly small (for the SEC) football venue. Baseball has become the Vanderbilt sport and even a once competitive women's hoops program is now in disarray. Tennessee never failed to produce for the big money sport attendance wise, and travel attendance wise. Only Vandy baseball has any semblance of a travel crowd, and the whistling dudes are obnoxious.

I'm not one who wants to can our relationship, but your athletic department has been riding the SEC and contributing little for a long time. What once were competitive hoops programs (men & women) have been missed. Sorry but a natty in women's bowling isn't what we had in mind when softball participation (a required sport) is absent.

You are about to be making 75 million a year in media revenue. It's time to step it up in revenue sports!

And I'll bet you if movement occurs from the ACC to the SEC (say rep points) that UNC's destination is the SEC and not the Big, 10 if they are among those who leave.

It's extremely unlikely that Vanderbilt ever becomes anything more than occasionally competitive in Football (2 or 3 SEC wins a year), though basketball should definitely be better. 66th in last year's Director's Cup is only ahead of Mississippi State in the SEC, which is an indictment of the admin really. Not having softball is honestly bonkers and should be rectified immediately.

Duke is probably the closest reasonable comparison for the sports program, and that'll take 30-40 years of reaching Kentucky level basketball success for any non-alumni to actually care about Vanderbilt revenue sports though. Stanford and Northwestern are similar comparisons that struggle to make it work in fball/bball for any length of time despite being in big cities and large states with local competition (Cal and Illinois, respectively) that's far weaker than what Vanderbilt has to deal with (Tennessee). Vanderbilt will, with almost 100% certainty, never bring the attendance at home or large travel crowds on the road - there's a slightly smaller chance that basketball home games could become a thing in Nashville if that team became elite/near-elite on a regular basis.

I'm a realist, Vanderbilt will never "pull its weight" in the SEC beyond being the only private school and the benefits that provides the conference. It's essentially nearly impossible and each expansion since Arkansas has lowered our chances of ever pulling our weight. I do object to the characterization that we've been riding coattails for a long time since college sports has only become a true big money enterprise (regarding media rights payouts) over the past 15 years and that's a blink in history and the school needs to make athletics more of a priority.

I think that is a fair synopsis, but Football comparatively speaking, has always been the money-making sport which funded the others. Its rising tide simply lifts all programs. But OU/UGA vs the NCAA was what loosed the Kraken of lucre. So, revenue from the money sports (particularly football) has been ballooning since 1984. I do think that bubble pops by 2036 when all of the coming paradigm shifts surrounding the exit of Boomers from their long-held grip on economic statistical data passes. Since it is a global phenomenon, I believe it will be the looked back upon as the incept of a new era of downsizing and adjustment. On the other side of that which will likely take a decade to work through the opportunities for the young should see a tremendous upside. I try to get my grandchildren to focus upon that rather than what will be a temporary hardship. Supply and demand. When the large demand bubble passes deflation will make things tough for a little bit, but then it should also make things cheaper, and create a higher demand for skilled labor. I expect it to impact education similarly. We'll see, or most likely you will see.

Vanderbilt is family. I'm not a kick'em out guy. But there is much more within their scale of things that they could be doing. That is the thrust of my comments.

Actually, money dropped for 7 or 8 years when the monopoly went away in 1984. It was only in the 90s when it picked up and around 2007 with the Big 10 deal when it took off.

Well Bullet, that would be because academics had no clue as to what to do without the damned NCAA standing by to dole out 3 million a year! The court ruling in 84 took about 5 years for people to start to figure it out. Stockholm syndrome was definitely part of the academic experience when the SCOTUS liberated football from the NCAA. The idiots had been so enamored with their captor they couldn't function for a few years without him!

I say it will be ditto when the numbskulls decide it's time to free hoops!

They are so afraid of change they can't grasp 2.25 X current earnings for hoops sans the NCAA. Pavlov's experiments apply amazingly well to the situation.

(11-16-2022 07:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 04:30 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 11:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 10:57 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 10:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  What has changed? The need for new markets is no longer as solid as the need for brands that draw eyes to the games. Where would North Carolina basketball have the better stage? I'd say vs Kentucky, Tennessee, Florida, and with Virginia in a league which has appreciation for hoops but prefers football. There their brand would keep value. While in the Big 10 they add little to their needs in football and would find the hoops participation tougher, and the distances greater. It is a wintertime sport to boot.

The attendance at SEC basketball has always been 3rd nationally, but is improving steadily, except at places which aren't spending much money to remain competitive, like, uhm, Vanderbilt!

Everything we see with regard to natural resources indicates that travel will continue to be a key item in making decisions. Baseball and Softball have a home in the SEC, not so much in the Big 10. Spring and Summertime sports are key in both the SEC and ACC.

The brand of SEC football covers UNC in the Fall and the SEC's basketball gives them status in the Winter. I still like the SEC's chances in this changed world.

Until last year Vanderbilt's 2012 SEC tourney title was 30+ years more recent than Tennessee's (1979). And beat Kentucky in Clark Lea's second year.

Vandy has talked enhancements to the football facility for the last 20 years and hasn't done much if anything to improve a venue last renovated in 1981. I like your basketball venue, but you don't fill it any better than you do the absurdly small (for the SEC) football venue. Baseball has become the Vanderbilt sport and even a once competitive women's hoops program is now in disarray. Tennessee never failed to produce for the big money sport attendance wise, and travel attendance wise. Only Vandy baseball has any semblance of a travel crowd, and the whistling dudes are obnoxious.

I'm not one who wants to can our relationship, but your athletic department has been riding the SEC and contributing little for a long time. What once were competitive hoops programs (men & women) have been missed. Sorry but a natty in women's bowling isn't what we had in mind when softball participation (a required sport) is absent.

You are about to be making 75 million a year in media revenue. It's time to step it up in revenue sports!

And I'll bet you if movement occurs from the ACC to the SEC (say rep points) that UNC's destination is the SEC and not the Big, 10 if they are among those who leave.

It's extremely unlikely that Vanderbilt ever becomes anything more than occasionally competitive in Football (2 or 3 SEC wins a year), though basketball should definitely be better. 66th in last year's Director's Cup is only ahead of Mississippi State in the SEC, which is an indictment of the admin really. Not having softball is honestly bonkers and should be rectified immediately.

Duke is probably the closest reasonable comparison for the sports program, and that'll take 30-40 years of reaching Kentucky level basketball success for any non-alumni to actually care about Vanderbilt revenue sports though. Stanford and Northwestern are similar comparisons that struggle to make it work in fball/bball for any length of time despite being in big cities and large states with local competition (Cal and Illinois, respectively) that's far weaker than what Vanderbilt has to deal with (Tennessee). Vanderbilt will, with almost 100% certainty, never bring the attendance at home or large travel crowds on the road - there's a slightly smaller chance that basketball home games could become a thing in Nashville if that team became elite/near-elite on a regular basis.

I'm a realist, Vanderbilt will never "pull its weight" in the SEC beyond being the only private school and the benefits that provides the conference. It's essentially nearly impossible and each expansion since Arkansas has lowered our chances of ever pulling our weight. I do object to the characterization that we've been riding coattails for a long time since college sports has only become a true big money enterprise (regarding media rights payouts) over the past 15 years and that's a blink in history and the school needs to make athletics more of a priority.

I think that is a fair synopsis, but Football comparatively speaking, has always been the money-making sport which funded the others. Its rising tide simply lifts all programs. But OU/UGA vs the NCAA was what loosed the Kraken of lucre. So, revenue from the money sports (particularly football) has been ballooning since 1984. I do think that bubble pops by 2036 when all of the coming paradigm shifts surrounding the exit of Boomers from their long-held grip on economic statistical data passes. Since it is a global phenomenon, I believe it will be the looked back upon as the incept of a new era of downsizing and adjustment. On the other side of that which will likely take a decade to work through the opportunities for the young should see a tremendous upside. I try to get my grandchildren to focus upon that rather than what will be a temporary hardship. Supply and demand. When the large demand bubble passes deflation will make things tough for a little bit, but then it should also make things cheaper, and create a higher demand for skilled labor. I expect it to impact education similarly. We'll see, or most likely you will see.

Vanderbilt is family. I'm not a kick'em out guy. But there is much more within their scale of things that they could be doing. That is the thrust of my comments.

MR.SEC sure was. He published a litany of reasons of why Vanderbilt did not belong in the SEC.
Maybe that movement has died down and that school of thought no longer exists.

(08-25-2022 07:23 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-23-2022 08:04 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  With some selective pickups from The Big 12 along with the basketball members of the Big East, ESPN would have the best basketball and football programs under contract. That idea would bring together the most successful basketball and football programs of the last 20-30 years.

The Big East contract with FOX does not expire until after the 2025 season, and it looks like FOX may have the inside track for renewal.

ESPN could however make selections from the Big 12 and place them in the ACC.

If you will recall it was widely agreed that the value in the Big 12 was in 4 schools:
Texas
Oklahoma
Kansas
West Virginia

ESPN has already captured Texas and Oklahoma, now all they need to do is lasso Kansas and West Virginia into the ACC, and perhaps do some shuffling later to match schools to the right conferences.
We may start by moving Miami to the SEC and Missouri to the ACC to make Kansas and Missouri contiguous to the other ACC schools, while giving the SEC a needed second school in Florida.

This didn't age well!

(09-10-2022 12:09 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  "How do ESPN , The SEC and The ACC keep The Big Ten out of the South."

Most straight-forward way:

1.) espn gets the media rights to the B12
2.) Split the ACC between the SEC and the B12.
3.) ND likely goes independent (non-fb probably to the Big East)
4.) Move Kansas and OK state to the SEC.
5.) Add SMU, Rice, Memphis, and USF to B12.

This limits the B10 to only adding PAC schools.

Granted, this presumes that none of the schools below decide to join the B10 instead of the SEC or B12.

-------
(sorted by region - re-arrange how you like.)

SEC - 28
Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma state, Texas, Texas A&M

Florida, Florida State, Miami, Georgia, Georgia tech, South Carolina, Clemson

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisiana State

VA, VA tech, NC, NC state, Duke, Vanderbilt, Louisville

B12 - 18
Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Cincinnati, Wake Forest, Memphis, UCF, USF

Iowa state, Kansas state, Baylor, Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU, Texas tech, BYU

Since ESPN and FOX have decided to split the Big 12 again (with ESPN taking the majority of the football and FOX getting the bulk of the basketball inventory), it would appear the cornerstone of this approach has been thwarted.
Also since the Kansas legislature has inserted themselves into realignment, it will be harder for Kansas to move anywhere unless Kansas State has been accounted for.