SEC Expansion (merged)

#52
#52
RaiderCane said:
ACC just got a new TV deal with ESPN. It will pay them $155 million a year now for football with the SEC getting $205 million a year from their TV deal. The ACC closed the gap quite a bit considering they were getting $67 million a year with their previous deal.
ESPN outbids Fox for ACC television rights - Triangle Business Journal
Click to expand...

Which pretty much puts the Clemson and GT to the SEC wishes to rest...Now there is no reason to pursue those schools or any ACC schools for that matter....Grab WVU and Louisville after the big east falls apart and find two other teams who might be a nice fit if Texas and Texas A&M aren't interested.
 
#53
#53
I would like for us to add Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, and Ok. State.

Move 'Bama, Auburn to the Eastern Division and stick those four new teams in the West.

Or, divide the conference into 4 divisions, but we'll have to say goodbye to permanent rivalry games every year.

Even with the abundance of great teams, you would only have to play them every so often or in the SEC championship game (or tourney, if we go to a 4-division, two-game SEC championship format).
 
#54
#54
milohimself said:
Good thing it's not up to him. I have a hard time seeing Texas/A&M/OU/Okie Lite going anywhere without eachother.
Click to expand...

Weren't Texas and OU in different conferences pre-Big 12, and had like a "Miami-still-in-Big-East but play FSU each season" setup?
 
#55
#55
VOLnMiami said:
Which pretty much puts the Clemson and GT to the SEC wishes to rest...Now there is no reason to pursue those schools or any ACC schools for that matter....Grab WVU and Louisville after the big east falls apart and find two other teams who might be a nice fit if Texas and Texas A&M aren't interested.
Click to expand...

why do we need 16? I'm just still not sure "expand as see fit" means we're going to try to get more teams than the big 10 ends up with
 
#56
#56
Rasputin_Vol said:
Why in the world would we want to keep Mississippi State and Vandy in the conference?
Click to expand...

Right, because the SEC throwing away the Nashville market totally makes sense

i mean though too, the reality is we're not getting rid of anyone to add someone else
 
#58
#58
TrueOrange said:
Right, because the SEC throwing away the Nashville market totally makes sense

i mean though too, the reality is we're not getting rid of anyone to add someone else
Click to expand...

There are far more Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn, and Ole Miss fans in Nashville than there are Vanderbilt fans. The Nashville market is very safe, regardless of where Vandy goes. I live in Nashville and I forget that Vanderbilt is even there half the time.

There really aren't very many Vanderbilt fans...
 
#59
#59
TNvol86 said:
There are far more Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn, and Ole Miss fans in Nashville than there are Vanderbilt fans. The Nashville market is very safe, regardless of where Vandy goes. I live in Nashville and I forget that Vanderbilt is even there half the time.

There really aren't very many Vanderbilt fans...
Click to expand...

They are all on the radio. Hosting.
 
#60
#60
TNvol86 said:
There are far more Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn, and Ole Miss fans in Nashville than there are Vanderbilt fans. The Nashville market is very safe, regardless of where Vandy goes. I live in Nashville and I forget that Vanderbilt is even there half the time.

There really aren't very many Vanderbilt fans...
Click to expand...

We still make a good deal of money over a city that size being in our coverage area, whether there are alot of vandy fans or not; they get booted and some other conference picks them up and makes the city its region, unless you've got another city that makes up a 1.5 million person coverage area, it kinda comes out as more of a loss

....also anyone who's a UT fan is going to forget about vandy being in this state :)
 
#62
#62
I couldn't locate where this had been covered previously so excuse me if it was posted before and I missed it:

http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2010/05/27/the-final-four-of-college-football-in-the-sec-dare-to-dream/

I love this guy's idea on expansion for the SEC. I really wasn't pro-expansion but this idea would be really exciting in my opinion.

He discusses adding 4 teams: Clemson, Texas, Texas A&M, and Florida State totaling 16 teams, splitting into 4 divisions, then divisional leaders play in 1 additional game per season at a nuetral site bringing in more TV revenue and $ from a "mini-bowl" of sorts, and forcing the playoff format on the NCAA which ends up leading to things being more interesting for all teams not just the heavy weights like UF and AL, plus the guy discusses putting Texas, Texas A&M, and Arkansas in the same division which brings back some old rivalries, and he even discusses a means where all teams can keep their traiditional rivalry games in place even with teams that would now be in different divisions.

This idea sounds really fun and IMO would solidify the SEC as the premier Football and potentially Basketball league in the nation.

Please read and discuss! I am interested in everyone else's opinion on this.
 
Last edited:
#64
#64
Rasputin_Vol said:
Why in the world would we want to keep Mississippi State and Vandy in the conference?
Click to expand...

The topic is expansion, not retraction. As others have stated, Nashville is a big media market. Vandy is also respectable in both basketball and baseball. Probably more important is the strong academic side that it brings to the SEC. Miss. St. has natural rivalries in the West, which would only be enhanced by the addition of say Texas, A&M, Oklahoma etc...
 
#65
#65
even if Nashville was a big market people aren't tuning in to watch Vandy lose. Getting rid of them won't hurt ratings
 
#66
#66
utvolpj said:
even if Nashville was a big market people aren't tuning in to watch Vandy lose. Getting rid of them won't hurt ratings
Click to expand...

but they still watch and get shown other SEC games and the city's population and viewers count in towards our own regional viewership, merchandise, etc

so we would lose that

it's really not about who follows their teams with the most pride or respect. It's silly to throw away a market that big. If - I don't know which city gets ATL so i'll say Ga tech - the ACC threw away GA tech comes to mind as an example

Regardless of the team, you throw away a big market, you're losing financially on a big market. Vandy gets kicked and goes elsewhere and Nashville becomes someone else's profit
 
#67
#67
they'll still tune in to watch SEC football and not whatever conf chooses the short straw and picks up Vandy. Commodore fans make up a very small part of that market
 
#68
#68
utvolpj said:
they'll still tune in to watch SEC football and not whatever conf chooses the short straw and picks up Vandy. Commodore fans make up a very small part of that market
Click to expand...

I think you might have misunderstood my point a bit. It wasnt about Vandy's fans, it was about what region the city falls under so what games it gets shown.

Whoever can lay claim to the region gets their network coverage there. It's kind of hard to imagine "SEC Network" coverage when the closest teams don't quite completely cover it

I wonder if maybe you're kind of getting at a "Colts games still get shown regionally in TN" scenario....but I'm not quite sure that'll happen here.

I'm not saying Vandy's fans are what make up the Nashville market; for positioning and regionality for the SEC the school I think is still needed to get the regional coverage, so that the ESPN SEC network and deal and games still receive the coverage (and money) that make up part of the revenue outside of just the CBS 1 game a week coverage and the ESPN non-conflicting games

I'm not sure if that all made sense...



I mean it's all a moot point though. The SEC isn't booting a team unless it's found to be committing major infractions (or not paying its dues) that threatened to put the conference in trouble somehow anyways
 
#69
#69
utvolpj said:
they'll still tune in to watch SEC football and not whatever conf chooses the short straw and picks up Vandy. Commodore fans make up a very small part of that market
Click to expand...

I agree. A good example of what would happen can be found in Atlanta. That market is not exactly dominated by the ACC just because of Georgia Tech. That is still SEC country. As long at UT is around, the SEC owns most of Tennessee. That includes the Nashville area.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#71
#71
Mike Slive On SEC Expansion: Contract Terms Matter -- NCAAFB FanHouse

SANDESTIN, Fla. -- SEC commissioner Mike Slive might best be described as the counterpuncher to the Big Ten's Jim Delany in the growing fistfight over conference expansion. That's because, while Slive isn't going to be the first major conference commissioner to throw a punch -- that's likely to be Delany -- he intends to be the most successful counterpuncher. In an interview with Slive for my radio show back in Nashville, I had the opportunity to ask him what I wrote was the most important unexplored issue of the conference expansion issue: Did the SEC's multi-billion dollar deal with CBS and ESPN have a provision that would increase the payout to the league in the event the conference chose to expand?

Slive, a practicing attorney for many years, answered the question as only a lawyer can.

"Let me try to answer that in a way that's consistent with our contractual obligations," Slive said. "There are confidentiality clauses in almost all of these contracts. Having said that, it's not unusual in a contract to have a clause that talks about the composition of the league, what it is at the start and then what might happen if the league were to get smaller or grow larger."

Then he laughed. "You can figure that out," Slive said, "That's a Casey Stengel kind of answer."

Parsing that language, limited as it is by contractual confidentiality provisions, it appears clear the SEC would, in fact, receive more money from its television partners in the event the league chose to expand.

That's tremendously important, and I'll tell you why. But first, if you're so inclined, you can listen to Commissioner Slive's eight minute interview that aired on our station by clicking here.

My favorite line from our interview: Slive dismissing my suggestion that having a legal background offers much help as the commissioner of a league. "There's an old saying," Slive said. "Anyone who represents themselves has a fool for a client."

Whether expansion would lead to an increase in television revenue was never a question for the Big Ten since the primary driving force behind the television revenue for the Big Ten is its own network. As soon as the Big Ten expands, it adds television markets and with those markets comes more revenue payments for cable networks that carry the Big Ten on their channel lineup. (The higher up on the pecking order in the channel lineup the Big Ten can move, the more revenue it receives as payment for being carried.) The result? Big Ten expansion is likely to be immediately revenue positive for the league.

That's why Big Ten expansion is, from a business perspective, a no-brainer.

But the SEC's position has been more uncertain.

That's because the league has a 15-year contract with CBS and ESPN and, until now, no one has explored whether television revenue would increase in the event of SEC expansion. If television revenue would not grow, then it would be hard for the SEC to expand because any expansion would dilute the amount of payments each school would receive from the league. But thanks to Slive's answer, in combination with the fact that he's too damn smart not to protect the league in the event of expansion and the fact that CBS and ESPN are too damn smart not to protect themselves in the event of league contraction, we can now be virtually certain those two networks would pay more money to the SEC in the event of league expansion (and less in the incredibly unlikely event of contraction).

How much more?

Well, that remains unclear to anyone who hasn't read actual contract.

That's a question that may not be answered until (if) the SEC chooses to expand.

What is now clear is whether the SEC will act to expand before the Big Ten.

That answer is no.

"Given our success over the past decade," said Slive, "we're very comfortable where we are. For obvious reasons. But having said that, if there's a significant paradigm shift in conferences, we will be thoughtful and strategic in maintaining the fact that we're one of the best leagues in the country."

In Slive's terminology, a "significant paradigm shift" is the Big Ten expanding. Now, what remains unclear is how much of an expansion represents a paradigm shift.

Slive then unpacked some of his own language, "When people say to me, what do you mean by a significant paradigm shift, I say to them, 'Well, I'm not sure I know today, but I'll know it when I see it, like Justice Potter Stewart once said in the Supreme Court (regarding the definition of obscenity)."

"Not to compare the two (expansion and obscenity)," Slive quickly interjected.

We can surmise that a significant paradigm shift, one Slive knows when he sees it, would require a Big Ten expansion to 14 or 16 members. Why? Because if the Big Ten only expanded by one member, to 12, it would merely equalize the SEC's paramount position and not represent an altering of the collegiate landscape.

Only by going to 14 or 16 will the Big Ten's punch provoke a counterpunch from the mild-mannered Slive.

Immediately upon ending our conversation, the media converged upon Slive, the small white-haired man at the center of the college football storm. Slive repeated his talking points, grinning slightly, eyes shrinking up occasionally in great thought.

In a hotel placed firmly upon the sunny beaches of Florida, you couldn't help but get the sense that Mike Slive was playing chess while the rest of us were playing Uno.
Click to expand...
 
#72
#72
I think that Va. Tech makes a lot more sense than Clemson for the SEC's purposes. USCjr already gives us the SC market (which isn't anything special to begin with), whereas VT could bring in the Richmond/Norfolk/Hampton Roads/Va Beach markets and potentially D.C. as well.

I think extending offers to Texas, A&M, FSU, and VT would be best if the SEC were to go to 16.
 
#73
#73
TrueOrange said:
lol, yeah but it's mainly cause they're one of the biggest cash cows (and alot also think about expansion as adding good teams, not the financial issue that it really is)

Texas really said no to the big ten very quickly (which makes the most money out of the conferences....by quite a bit actually) it seemed to suggest they didn't plan on going anywhere anytime soon
Click to expand...

This is true. One thing to remember on this though. The Texas administration was hesitant to become the southern boundary for the Big 10.

Also, looking at it from Texas perspective, why would you be so quick to jump? Your basically the most coveted team out of any that are being considered, so you can afford to sit back and entertain your options.

As for Texas and how they relate to the SEC. While I understand that the Big10 network currently is worth more than the SEC deal, adding a team like Texas to the SEC may prove to have a larger payoff in the long run than joining the Big 10. The SEC has been gaining ground in TV deals and other revenue. Adding valuable markets while keeping them from the Big10 and Pac10 would only boost that revenue, while they are forced to tap into smaller markets.

As for Texas and going independent. One thing I wonder about is how this benefits them. Say they go independent and Oklahoma and A&M decide to go to one of these super conferences. It would not make sense for Oklahoma and A&M to keep their rivalries with Texas intact, when they would essentially be adding another tough game to an already loaded schedule. My question here is, Would the super conferences hinder Texas' ability to put together a quality schedule year in and year out? Also, where is Texas going to go in regards to its other sports? Is what is left of the Big12 going to let them stay after football bolted? Would they be comfortable dropping to a lesser conference and running roughshod through their other sports in the lesser league?

Just some thoughts....
 
#74
#74
GoVols2003 said:
This is true. One thing to remember on this though. The Texas administration was hesitant to become the southern boundary for the Big 10.

Also, looking at it from Texas perspective, why would you be so quick to jump? Your basically the most coveted team out of any that are being considered, so you can afford to sit back and entertain your options.

As for Texas and how they relate to the SEC. While I understand that the Big10 network currently is worth more than the SEC deal, adding a team like Texas to the SEC may prove to have a larger payoff in the long run than joining the Big 10. The SEC has been gaining ground in TV deals and other revenue. Adding valuable markets while keeping them from the Big10 and Pac10 would only boost that revenue, while they are forced to tap into smaller markets.

As for Texas and going independent. One thing I wonder about is how this benefits them. Say they go independent and Oklahoma and A&M decide to go to one of these super conferences. It would not make sense for Oklahoma and A&M to keep their rivalries with Texas intact, when they would essentially be adding another tough game to an already loaded schedule. My question here is, Would the super conferences hinder Texas' ability to put together a quality schedule year in and year out? Also, where is Texas going to go in regards to its other sports? Is what is left of the Big12 going to let them stay after football bolted? Would they be comfortable dropping to a lesser conference and running roughshod through their other sports in the lesser league?

Just some thoughts....
Click to expand...

The independent scenarios and conference rivalries intact still makes sense. Unless the whole "super-conference" idea leads to teams only play their conference members as their season in their schedule, then it will hold. You'll see a situation like UF and FSU or how ND still plays Michigan and USC yearly. You're not going to see a situation where OU and/or A&M decide "my schedule's too tough, I dont want to play A&M" if rivalry scheduling worked that way, UF would have stopped playing FSU in the 90s and FSU would have stopped playing Miami earlier this decade....just isn't how it goes.

Also remember that pre-big 12, Texas (SWC) and OU (Big 8) were in different conferences and played each other as out of conference every single year....these are both time tested rivalries. They would stay just as intact as any other OOC rivalry.

Texas's ability to schedule would still be just fine barring a "no OOC games" scenario for teams, which I feel would be unlikely.

The other sports still would be a question for them, but apparently the feeling is that - with the money a successful Texas Sports Network would bring in - the only ones that might suffer are the much lesser revenue or non-revenue sports might suffer (travel costs and all) but that Texas's independence would be, unlike ND's, an all Longhorn sports (not just football) would be get network coverage, basketball, baseball, etc. They could very well though - if some sports need a conference - just remain in whatever becomes the reminants of the old Big 12, assuming a fall apart (which would really most likely require Texas leaving)


Going independent though benefits them b/c the school makes an insane amount of money and is insanely popular to begin with. If they add a network that makes near Big 10 network money that's just for Texas, that's a HUGE gain in revenue. Plus whatever they make from there on out (bowls, television, etc) would not have to be split. Believe me, they are extremely gung ho though about trying to set up this network for Longhorn sports alone.

Back to the rest:

The thing is though, Texas isn't playing their cards close to see who makes the best offer. It wasnt hesitation of "oh the big 10 would be cool but we'd be the southern-most region." Everything seems to suggest it was pretty cut and dry, with a short consideration followed by "no."

You have to remember too that, while you're saying the SEC markets have a better deal for them long term, the SEC deal ESPN money is staying the same. Currently, with the Big 10 Network deal, the teams in the conference each make $22 mil a year. (any region they add as "regional" to the BTN, the value per subscriber goes up x7) so if their expansion does bring them the St Louis and Kansas City markets, the Nebraska fans, and somehow the city of NYC, that number is going to go up again. In all honesty, Texas is looking at about similar (at the worst) from both conference.

Again though, the thing to remember, while everyone is saying "Texas here" or "Texas there"....Texas isnt currently looking to move and hasnt been. These have all come from worst case scenario speculations where we all think the Big 12 is going to fall apart (or as some people call it, the fans are having expansion fever).

Most likely the reality is that - if Texas is considering joining another conference - they are looking for someone to bend and break for them, give them more money than the equal revenue split that the Big 10, SEC, etc use (they make more than everyone else in the Big 12). This can't happen in the Big 10 b/c of the uproar it would cause among schools like OSU, and if it were done in the SEC schools like Bama, UF, UT, etc would get very upset about it.

I think what I'm getting at is that Texas isn't actively and openly looking to change conferences right now. They very likely may if their Big 12 conference falls apart, but currently it's not a sinking ship, so they're not trying to get off of it right now nor likely for a while. Think of it kind of like ND....ND isn't going to join the Big 10 unless something major happens, in their case something that destroys the Big East. Texas isn't looking to change conferences unless the Big 12 completely and utterly falls apart, which isn't going to be happening yet
 
#75
#75
TrueOrange said:
The thing is though, Texas isn't playing their cards close to see who makes the best offer. It wasnt hesitation of "oh the big 10 would be cool but we'd be the southern-most region." Everything seems to suggest it was pretty cut and dry, with a short consideration followed by "no."
Click to expand...

According to the guy from Orangebloods, this was a major deal for the Texas administration.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top