Who are the next additions to the SEC?

[TrueOrange]

Originally Posted by UTGhostHunter

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.

Both pretty much instantly became the third and fourth largest markets in our viewing footprint also

[TrueOrange]

I feel like we just had one of these threads

[UTGhostHunter]

Originally Posted by Rudy123

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.

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.

[Rudy123]

Originally Posted by SCvol333

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

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.

[TrueOrange]

Originally Posted by Panthro

I really can't see NCSU ever leaving UNC.

Yeah they're a bit more complexly tied together

[UTGhostHunter]

Originally Posted by Panthro

I really can't see NCSU ever leaving UNC.

It's not that big a rivalry compared to a UNC-Duke. I also remember people saying that about Texas and Texas A&M.

[82_VOL_83]

Originally Posted by TrueOrange

I feel like we just had one of these threads

Similar but different. The other thread made me want VN's opinion on who we thought would be the new teams.

[Rudy123]

Originally Posted by UTGhostHunter

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.

I tried to figure out why Florida State, Southern Miss, Clemson, Louisville, Va. tech, were not added to the S.E.C.
When a decision is made that doesn't make a lot os sense, then you follow the "money factor"
The only reason I could imagine for "A & M" and "Missouri" to be selected by the S.E.C. is for some type of financial gain for the S.E.C.
The only possible financial gain I could see was the t.v. market.

[TrueOrange]

Originally Posted by UTGhostHunter

It's not that big a rivalry compared to a UNC-Duke. I also remember people saying that about Texas and Texas A&M.

Tied together differently.

Give me sec to find some of that stuff again, but what comes to mind immediately is that 3/4 of NC State's board of trustees are people elected (put in place) by UNC's Board of Governors

Got it:


Board of Trustees :: University Administration :: North Carolina State University

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.

Alabama | MrSEC

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. We’re 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 State’s 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 UNC’s board would have to okay the move. And that’s if all the other non-UNC-elected trustees favored the move. And that’s if a vote to switch conferences only requires a 7-6 majority.

[SCvol333]

Originally Posted by Rudy123

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.

That's exactly the point - TV markets don't matter near as much as people think - they only matter if people care about your product in those markets and how likely, if you moved in, you would be to get a reasonable share of the market

the main thing you focus on is keeping the product great and then the markets will come b/c you will have national appeal

if you can do both - a la A&M then adding makes a lot of sense - if you can't or are in a bind and need an ad for scheduling you sacrifice one or the two but not both - so MO is a product sacrafice, but at least you get a market

the main reason for the MO move though imo was that balanced out the A&M add - which was a perfect add from a product (think long-term) and TV market standpoint - you don't only get big markets, you get big markets that give a ^%$* about football and you can then get share for your conference in many of those

product is always more important though

[UTGhostHunter]

Originally Posted by Rudy123

I tried to figure out why Florida State, Southern Miss, Clemson, Louisville, Va. tech, were not added to the S.E.C.
When a decision is made that doesn't make a lot os sense, then you follow the "money factor"
The only reason I could imagine for "A & M" and "Missouri" to be selected by the S.E.C. is for some type of financial gain for the S.E.C.
The only possible financial gain I could see was the t.v. market.

I think with A&M, you could argue that there were football and recruiting considerations there, but at the end of the day, I think you do have to follow the money. That said, I still think the SEC wants to remain reasonably regional, making robbing the ACC the most realistic option. The only concern there is the increase in the buyouts that was added due to a concern over the conference being picked apart. I personally think that was done to discourage ACC teams from joining the SEC. Ultimately, I think the SEC will provide sufficient assurances to the schools to convince them to make the move. My guess is the defectors will be NC State and Virginia Tech.

[UTGhostHunter]

Originally Posted by TrueOrange

Tied together differently.

Give me sec to find some of that stuff again, but what comes to mind immediately is that 3/4 of NC State's board of trustees are people elected (put in place) by UNC's Board of Governors

Got it:


Board of Trustees :: University Administration :: North Carolina State University



Alabama | MrSEC

I hear what you're saying, but allow me to provide this counter. What would be the impetus for North Carolina to block the move? Again, they are particularly heated rivals. We aren't talking about officials who have a major stake in the football aspect of things. If there is this link, couldn't UNC potentially benefit from this new connection. I understand what the writers are saying could be a fight, but I'm not seeing the point of the fight.

[Kurtastrophe]

Originally Posted by TrueOrange

I feel like we just had one of these threads

Same flavor. Different texture.

[82_VOL_83]

Originally Posted by UTGhostHunter

I hear what you're saying, but allow me to provide this counter. What would be the impetus for North Carolina to block the move? Again, they are particularly heated rivals. We aren't talking about officials who have a major stake in the football aspect of things. If there is this link, couldn't UNC potentially benefit from this new connection. I understand what the writers are saying could be a fight, but I'm not seeing the point of the fight.

Good point since the entire UNC system could seemingly benefit from the SEC monies....

[thebjd]

Originally Posted by TrueOrange

I feel like we just had one of these threads

Glitch in the Matrix.