I picked Clemson and FSU..... doubt we get either of them and I'm against expansion, but if its inevitable id rather get teams that ensure the SEC stays the best conference in college football...... Missouri? Wtf.... that was lame....
Just for kicks and giggles, ASSUMING that the SEC is going to 16 teams, who do you think should be the next two? If you pick other, please list a team.....PLEASE ONLY PICK TWO.
I picked Clemson and FSU..... doubt we get either of them and I'm against expansion, but if its inevitable id rather get teams that ensure the SEC stays the best conference in college football...... Missouri? Wtf.... that was lame....
The next two teams to join the S.E.C. will not necessarily geographically close to the other schools.
Here is why I say this. Suppose that the S.E.C. gets
14,000,000 each season for t.v. contract "X". This means that each member school will get $1,000,000 each season.
Now, let's imagine that the S.E.C. expands and schools such as Louisville or Clemson join the S.E.C.
The S.E.C. already has a presence in Kentucky and South Carolina t.v. markets. So, the t.v. contract dollar amount won't increase, so that would mean $14,000,000 divided by 16 member schools. This means that the season prior to the expansion, U.T. earned $1,000,000 for the t.v. contract. Now, with the 16 member S.E.C.
U.T. will earn $875,000. So, it will not financially be advantageous for those schools to join the S.E.C.
However; if you get a school from a large t.v. market area to join the S.E.C., then the t.v. contract will also increase. A market such as Houston, (A & M) St. Louis, (Missouri) Miami, (U of M) New York, Los Angeles, etc. will bring a larger t.v. contract to the S.E.C. and the member schools will earn more money.
You don't want to expand the conference and lose money in the process. such as $14,000,000 divided by 16 member schools.
It is likely that NONE of the schools on this list will really be in the S.E.C. when they expand.
Who will it most likely be... VT and NC State or UL....
Who do i want it to be... UNC and Duke... mainly for bball. We would then be unquestionably the top conference in pretty much EVERY major sport.
And if it is UNC and Duke, they go to the east and Missouri can then go to where they belong, the west.
Plus we need some other elite bball teams to humble UK a bit.
The next two teams to join the S.E.C. will not necessarily geographically close to the other schools.
Here is why I say this. Suppose that the S.E.C. gets
14,000,000 each season for t.v. contract "X". This means that each member school will get $1,000,000 each season.
Now, let's imagine that the S.E.C. expands and schools such as Louisville or Clemson join the S.E.C.
The S.E.C. already has a presence in Kentucky and South Carolina t.v. markets. So, the t.v. contract dollar amount won't increase, so that would mean $14,000,000 divided by 16 member schools. This means that the season prior to the expansion, U.T. earned $1,000,000 for the t.v. contract. Now, with the 16 member S.E.C.
U.T. will earn $875,000. So, it will not financially be advantageous for those schools to join the S.E.C.
However; if you get a school from a large t.v. market area to join the S.E.C., then the t.v. contract will also increase. A market such as Houston, (A & M) St. Louis, (Missouri) Miami, (U of M) New York, Los Angeles, etc. will bring a larger t.v. contract to the S.E.C. and the member schools will earn more money.
You don't want to expand the conference and lose money in the process. such as $14,000,000 divided by 16 member schools.
It is likely that NONE of the schools on this list will really be in the S.E.C. when they expand.
St. Louis is the #21 television market and Kansas City is #31. If you keep adding top thirty television markets to your conference, you will demand more money in contract negotiations which means more money for the member schools. It might suck, but it is purely business.
The next two teams to join the S.E.C. will not necessarily geographically close to the other schools.
Here is why I say this. Suppose that the S.E.C. gets
14,000,000 each season for t.v. contract "X". This means that each member school will get $1,000,000 each season.
Now, let's imagine that the S.E.C. expands and schools such as Louisville or Clemson join the S.E.C.
The S.E.C. already has a presence in Kentucky and South Carolina t.v. markets. So, the t.v. contract dollar amount won't increase, so that would mean $14,000,000 divided by 16 member schools. This means that the season prior to the expansion, U.T. earned $1,000,000 for the t.v. contract. Now, with the 16 member S.E.C.
U.T. will earn $875,000. So, it will not financially be advantageous for those schools to join the S.E.C.
However; if you get a school from a large t.v. market area to join the S.E.C., then the t.v. contract will also increase. A market such as Houston, (A & M) St. Louis, (Missouri) Miami, (U of M) New York, Los Angeles, etc. will bring a larger t.v. contract to the S.E.C. and the member schools will earn more money.
You don't want to expand the conference and lose money in the process. such as $14,000,000 divided by 16 member schools.
It is likely that NONE of the schools on this list will really be in the S.E.C. when they expand.
If your argument was correct the Big East Football TV deal would have been more lucrative than the SEC's as their was only 1 real TV market in the SEC last year (Nashville)
the Big East would have had Miami (South Florida), Louisville, Pittsburgh, upstate New York (Syracuse), NYC (Rutgers), etc
there is a lot more that matters other than TV markets - how good the brands are is incredibly important, how much people nationally care about those brands, how much people care in the home markets b/c that contributes to atmosphere, etc
people all over the country want to watch a night game in Death Valley, bama TN, GA FLA
rutgers vs south florida? not so much
So, by your assertion, the reason we brought in Texas A&M was to enter into television markets like Houston and Dallas-Ft. Worth, a pair of top ten television markets. Missouri was brought in for the markets in St. Louis (#21) and Kansas City (#31). By your own reasoning, the North Carolina and Virginia schools make the most sense as additions. If you add a North Carolina school, you gain access to the markets of Charlotte (#24), Raleigh-Durham (#27), and Greensboro-High Point-Winston-Salem (#46). Add a Virginia school and you make headway into Washington, D.C. (#9), Norfolk-Portsmouth-Newport News (#43), and Richmond-Petersburg (#58). If you can create a rivalry with Tennessee and Virginia Tech, you can own the Tri-Cities area, which is the #92 market. My point is that you will satisfy existing members and the financial considerations with such an addition.
It's not that big a rivalry compared to a UNC-Duke. I also remember people saying that about Texas and Texas A&M.
North Carolina State University is a constituent institution of the University of North Carolina (UNC) system. According to The UNC Code, NC State shall have a board of trustees composed of thirteen persons: eight are elected by the UNC Board of Governors, four are appointed by the governor, and the remaining member is the president of the student government, ex officio.
The Board of Trustees shall promote the sound development of its institution within the functions prescribed for it, helping it to serve the people of the state in a way that will complement the activities of the other institutions and aiding it to perform at a high level of excellence in every area of endeavor. Each board of trustees shall serve as an advisor to the Board of Governors on matters pertaining to its institution and shall also serve as advisor to the Chancellor concerning the management and development of the institution.
As for NC State a school oft-mentioned because no one believes North Carolina and/or Duke would move to the SEC there would be some serious political issues to work out as well. NCSU is a constituent institution of the University of North Carolina system. In other words, the schools have a connection. Were not talking Texas and Texas A&M, here.
State has a 13-person board of trustees. One member is the president of the student government. Four trustees are appointed by the governor. The remaining eight NCSU trustees are elected by the UNC board of governors.
If States administration decided that their school would be better off in the SEC, it appears from afar that at least two of the eight trustees put in place by UNCs board would have to okay the move. And thats if all the other non-UNC-elected trustees favored the move. And thats if a vote to switch conferences only requires a 7-6 majority.
Other than basketball, the S.E.C. has a better product to market than the "Big L east" does.
If the S.E.C. were in the markets that the "Big Least" is in, we would have better numbers.