Recruiting Forum Football Talk III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Follow the money. Building a Super Conference with big brands and marquee matchups will make the SEC even more powerful, the ratings even higher and the deals more lucrative. It's all about who can do what where to make the rich even richer.

Ohio State, Michigan, Clemson and UNC come on downnnnnnnn.
 
Follow the money. Building a Super Conference with big brands and marquee matchups will make the SEC even more powerful, the ratings even higher and the deals more lucrative. It's all about who can do what where to make the rich even richer.
Is there anyway Tennessee benefits from this from a football win/loss perspective? Other than obviously getting more revenue like the rest of the league
 
To me it makes more sense to still stick with two divisions instead of four pods.....

West
TAMU
TU
OK
Ark
LSU
Ole Miss
Miss State
Missouri

East
Florida
Georgia
SCar
Tennessee
Kentucky
Vandy
Bama
The Barn

9 conference games (7 divisional, 2 rotating cross divisional games) and 3 non-conference games.

This preserves all your old traditional rivals (Bama and LSU is a Johnny Come Lately rivalry IMO) and would be fairly balanced IMO, especially if Texas ever gets back.
 
IDT it matters so much how the divisions shake out. The endgame is to create big ratings with high-profile pairings every Saturday, so expect everything to be filtered through that lens to maximize ratings/dollars. The conferences and networks are going to look to preserve or resurrect old rivalries, create new ones and shape storylines that can drive interest and pre-sell games. That's what the conferences and schools have been discussing.

I wouldn't be surprised to see UT pick up Auburn as a division rival, keep Bama/TSIO as a division or crossover game, add Oklahoma as a manufactured rivalry game and Texas as a UT-UT matchup (Battle of the UTs ). Networks can build storylines and frame narratives around all of those, while creating marquee matchups with teams supported by large, loyal fanbases. And they can promote them across multiple marquee sports with a built-in appeal for for MBB, WBB, baseball and softball, as well as football.
So, are you saying that our yearly schedule would include GA, Fl, Bama, AU, OU, and Texas? Uh.... no thanks.
 
Rumors that Houston and Cincinnati may be joining the Big XII

think its going to be more likely that the AAC poaches from the Big12 than the other way around. AAC already has the ESPN contract and is viewed as an increasingly competitive conference, Big12's ESPN contract won't be pre-renewed before 2025 and the conference it self appears to falling apart.

E7PNlJiWYAUkr4V.jpeg
 
Last edited:
I think they better change the donor structure for the right to buy tickets. With more marquee games on TV, and if UT is just middle of the pack, then why pay so much more money for a seat and miss all the great games on TV with the time and travel to Neyland. Sure, go to a game or two and stay home. Even if you paid 400 per ticket for two big UT games, it is still cheaper than annual donations. I think they can definitely make the coin with TV packages to make up for it but they will lose money on the donation side with the living room being a cheaper and better option for fans.

I'm sure you've seen some of the ticket packaging options. This year's season ticket sales were protected somewhat by the pandemic, but UT has an aging donor base. Attracting younger donors and locking in next-gen donors is important, but the last decade has been... challenging. New kinds of fundraising and stadium renos propose workarounds-- reducing seating, converting sections to chairbacks and adding premium seating areas appealing to donors. The best solution is still the traditional one: win.
 
I'm sure you've seen some of the ticket packaging options. This year's season ticket sales were protected somewhat by the pandemic, but UT has an aging donor base. Attracting younger donors and locking in next-gen donors is important, but the last decade has been... challenging. New kinds of fundraising and stadium renos propose workarounds-- reducing seating, converting sections to chairbacks and adding premium seating areas appealing to donors. The best solution is still the traditional one: win.

With this news of OU and Texas... Do we even need to win? Does the administration care? Because hell, we'll be making TONS of money regardless right?
 
To me it makes more sense to still stick with two divisions instead of four pods.....

West
TAMU
TU
OK
Ark
LSU
Ole Miss
Miss State
Missouri

East
Florida
Georgia
SCar
Tennessee
Kentucky
Vandy
Bama
The Barn

9 conference games (7 divisional, 2 rotating cross divisional games) and 3 non-conference games.

This preserves all your old traditional rivals (Bama and LSU is a Johnny Come Lately rivalry IMO) and would be fairly balanced IMO, especially if Texas ever gets back.
That's too much of the same. Make it pods, 9 games and every team faces every team in the conference in 3 years. This would be sooo much better than divisions and marquee match ups every other year between divisions
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeusExMachina
Is there anyway Tennessee benefits from this from a football win/loss perspective? Other than obviously getting more revenue like the rest of the league

I doubt the SEC cares one bit about UT's win-loss record. The conference cares about scheduling games that get prime timeslots and maximize revenue. Nobody cares that UT is rebuilding or has a new staff or is down a large number of scholarship players and has walk-ons in the two-deep. The onus is on UT to pull its weight. Big brands play big brands, and we're either up to it or we're not.
 
So, are you saying that our yearly schedule would include GA, Fl, Bama, AU, OU, and Texas? Uh.... no thanks.

IDK how alignment and scheduling will shake out. Nobody does. But those games would be revenue drivers, on an annual or rotational basis. There will be a lot of sausagemaking in the scheduling, and some schools generally fare better than others. Some schools have more clout, some schools fight harder for what they want and different school presidents demand different things. But the indication is they will try to keep and create rivalries and marquee games capable of generating significant fan and national interest. And UT is still a national brand with a large, passionate fanbase and a huge social media presence.
 
I'm sure you've seen some of the ticket packaging options. This year's season ticket sales were protected somewhat by the pandemic, but UT has an aging donor base. Attracting younger donors and locking in next-gen donors is important, but the last decade has been... challenging. New kinds of fundraising and stadium renos propose workarounds-- reducing seating, converting sections to chairbacks and adding premium seating areas appealing to donors. The best solution is still the traditional one: win.


Folks with the money all say that. Add in some version of PSL's like the pros. There will still be plenty of traditional seating options.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LA Vol


Folks with the money all say that. Add in some version of PSL's like the pros. There will still be plenty of traditional seating options.

Many tens of thousands of them. Some willing to pay more allows others to pay less while putting a butt in every seat.
 
Texas gonna be pissed when they go 6-6 in the SEC for a while.
Definitely see that happening to start out. Not sure they get that part.

Though if their theory goes according to their plan, it's possible their recruiting could reach new heights. Then they could go 9-3/10-2 which in a 12 team playoff is probably good enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smyrna ATL Vol
IDK how alignment and scheduling will shake out. Nobody does. But those games would be revenue drivers, on an annual or rotational basis. There will be a lot of sausagemaking in the scheduling, and some schools generally fare better than others. Some schools have more clout, some schools fight harder for what they want and different school presidents demand different things. But the indication is they will try to keep and create rivalries and marquee games capable of generating significant fan and national interest. And UT is still a national brand with a large, passionate fanbase and a huge social media presence.
Yep, so let's trade the bama rivalry for a rival of UT/TU. GA is considered to be the best team in the East, lets create a yearly rivalry between them and Bama. That would create revenue. Let's do that.
 
To me it makes more sense to still stick with two divisions instead of four pods.....

West
TAMU
TU
OK
Ark
LSU
Ole Miss
Miss State
Missouri

East
Florida
Georgia
SCar
Tennessee
Kentucky
Vandy
Bama
The Barn

9 conference games (7 divisional, 2 rotating cross divisional games) and 3 non-conference games.

This preserves all your old traditional rivals (Bama and LSU is a Johnny Come Lately rivalry IMO) and would be fairly balanced IMO, especially if Texas ever gets back.
In this scenario, as it stands now, the West is way weaker than the East. I mean, wayyyyyy weaker.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top