Started By
Message
re: Virginia Tech was the SEC's top choice during 2012 expansion
Posted on 9/12/14 at 12:57 pm to MrAUTigers
Posted on 9/12/14 at 12:57 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
My sentiments exactly. Bowden said at the time he didn't want any part of an SEC schedule. They had their chance. Eff 'em.
That's how the USC folks feel about Clemson. They had their chance to bolt the corrupt-as-hell ACC with us when they had the chance. They screwed us over to wander the desert for 20 years, and now that we're finally getting to where we want to be, those frickers don't get the opportunity to bail ship and come to the SEC. They didn't earn it.
0
Posted on 9/12/14 at 12:58 pm to bayou2003
While VT would have been great, I'm glad to have Mizzou in the conference. Even though they're still in a different division than us, as they were in the B12, and we've played a TON over the last several years, they seem more like conference-mates now than they ever did before.
Plus, with them winning the East already, and finishing 5th in the nation, you can't say they haven't shown they belong. I think they're a credit to the conference.
Besides, we'll get schools in VA and NC eventually, anyway. Just takes time.
Plus, with them winning the East already, and finishing 5th in the nation, you can't say they haven't shown they belong. I think they're a credit to the conference.
Besides, we'll get schools in VA and NC eventually, anyway. Just takes time.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:04 pm to Mirthomatic
quote:
Besides, we'll get schools in VA and NC eventually, anyway. Just takes time.
I hope we wait, and don't jump the gun and grab ODU and ECU, just to be in those 2 states.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:05 pm to bayou2003
quote:
It's all about $$$, SEC won't get much from the state of Virginia with one school in ACC and another in SEC. Texas is big enough for SEC to get A LOT of money out of even if they have Big 12 schools in the state.
This makes no sense. One major school in the state would open the SEC Network up to the entire states subscription market. It wouldn't matter if an ACC school was in that states footprint. SEE GEORGIA, FLORIDA and SOUTH CAROLINA
This post was edited on 9/12/14 at 1:07 pm
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:09 pm to mule74
quote:
I wanted VTech, Clemson or Florida St. to come with A&M.
Clemson and FSU were never an option from our end. We won't add any other schools inside our footprint as long as we have our current SECN deal in place.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:11 pm to Bamatab
We need North Carolina and Virginia to have a flagship in every southern state. 
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:13 pm to Tigerman97
quote:
This makes no sense. One major school in the state would open the SEC Network up to the entire states subscription market. It wouldn't matter if an ACC school was in that states footprint. SEE GEORGIA, FLORIDA and SOUTH CAROLINA
You are right. The current contract for DTV stated that the SEC got $1.30 or something in all of the states with an SEC school, and something like $.40 for those outside the footprint.
Everyone thought we wouldn't get the higher rates for TX & FL with just one school, but we did.
This post was edited on 9/12/14 at 1:15 pm
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:18 pm to Bamatab
Do you have a link to that Bamatab? I've seen a lot of people argue that point, but I haven't see any concrete details.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:20 pm to weagle99
quote:
UNC is the ACC. They will never join the SEC.
I grew up in Maryland and an ACC fan. Maryland is the epitome of the ACC. They bolted...
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:21 pm to mule74
quote:
I wanted VTech, Clemson or Florida St. to come with A&M. He'll even NC State would have allowed us to keep some geographic parity.
Sorry Mizzou. But not really.
Duke, UNC and UVA would never join the SEC. FSU and Clemson are very much SEC schools (and I bet Clemson would give their left nut to join) but their instate rivals will never let them in.
Heads up. Nobody gives a frick what you wanted. We're here and we're winning at a high level.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:22 pm to beaver
Wasn't this common knowledge? Everyone knew that UNC wasn't going to leave their neighbors alone, but that Va Tech was a legit option.
Mizzou was a good fall back plan though IMO
Mizzou was a good fall back plan though IMO
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:25 pm to Bamatab
quote:
Clemson and FSU were never an option from our end. We won't add any other schools inside our footprint as long as we have our current SECN deal in place.
I wouldn't say they were never an option.
But yes, TV makes Virginia Tech a far better option because new cable TV subscribers are all that matters for conference specific cable channels. Thus Mizzou became far more viable and A&M was like annexing Fort Knox in terms of new cable TV subscribers they delivered.
Virginia Tech would have been a better fit culturally than Mizzou but Mizzou acquitted themselves just fine last year. I went to Blacksburg in '02 when LSU played them and that is a bee-you-tee-ful road trip. I'd take them over Mizzou just for the road trips. It would be a good road trip for several of the East schools. Less than 4 hours from Knoxville & Columbia.
I would be Virginia Tech was interested but the exit fees were too high and it was easier to stay put. Had to be damn tempting though.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:26 pm to Hubbhogg
quote:
Mizzou was a good fall back plan though IMO
Yeah, they were. We can admit it now I guess.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:27 pm to BrerTiger
Mizzou has produced, so a tip of the cap to them.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:35 pm to beaver
Paul Finebaum has another unverifiable opinion?
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:38 pm to Bamatab
to be fair, that doesn't really answer it. We know what the rate cards say. Contracts are a different matter. You mentioned DTV contract was 1.30/.40. That's an entirely different ball of wax. AFAIK, no contractual rates have been leaked yet.
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:40 pm to Weagle25
quote:With the SEC Network cash, no reason other members of the Big 6 can't shock the world and also hire the best, even if that means stealing successful coaches entrenched at major basketball schools.
Don't need UNC and Kansas. We added Pearl
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:45 pm to AUBorn
Some of us don't need to steal a basketball coach. 
Posted on 9/12/14 at 1:50 pm to tmc94
quote:
You mentioned DTV contract was 1.30/.40. That's an entirely different ball of wax. AFAIK, no contractual rates have been leaked yet.
When the announcement was made that DTV had come to terms with the SECN, the $1.40/$0.25 was what was announced in the same series of articles (I though it was $1.30/$0.40, but I was wrong). I assumed that info was leaked by one of the parties. Before DTV signed on, those exact figures weren't being used, yet now every article that talks about the SECN uses those figures. I'm guessing if you search hard enough, you can find one of those first articles that announced DTV had come to terms with the SECN.
ETA: My bad, it was the series of articles that followed Comcast's announcement, not DTV's. But still, even if it is just the rate card figures, I'm guessing they aren't too far off from the actual contract numbers.
This post was edited on 9/12/14 at 2:09 pm
Page 4 of 8
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News