Started By
Message
What would the SEC gain by adding Clemson and Florida State?
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:16 pm
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:16 pm
I do not get it. The SEC is already in those states.
41
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:17 pm to BuckI
TV markets aren't based upon states.
And we already had a team in Texas.
And we already had a team in Texas.
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:17 pm to BuckI
Brands
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:18 pm to BuckI
It's no longer about adding new states, dummy. It's about adding big-time programs that people will tune in to watch play.
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:19 pm to BuckI
If it bothers you, we gain that...
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:19 pm to BuckI
quote:
I do not get it.
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:19 pm to BuckI
FSU has around 400k alumni worldwide and are spread out pretty well across the US. They're the bigger grab. They're also fairly competitive in most of their sports, especially women's soccer. National branding.
Clemson would be to just even out the conference and to get a good football team.
Clemson would be to just even out the conference and to get a good football team.
This post was edited on 9/28/23 at 2:20 pm
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:19 pm to BuckI
17 of the last 18 national champions
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:21 pm to BuckI
quote:
What would the SEC gain by adding Clemson and Florida State?
Why did the Big 10 add both UCLA and USC? They're in the same city
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:22 pm to BuckI
Nothing…
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:22 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Why did the Big 10 add both UCLA and USC? They're in the same city
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:23 pm to BuckI
If we took a poll on who has the most shite posts and/or down votes, you win by a landslide
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:25 pm to BuckI
asking the wrong question. this is about what ESPN would gain (or stand to lose if they go B1G).
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:26 pm to BuckI
Ok SadOSUBuckI
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:27 pm to BuckI
They both turned us down in '92...
frick 'em, give me UNC and VT... JMO.
frick 'em, give me UNC and VT... JMO.
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:27 pm to BuckI
People focus on TV markets but ignore quality of the product.
Say we added two random schools like say Arizona and Utah. The product gets watered down. Great we got two additional TV markets but the product got a lot less appealing. Keep doing that and you turn into NFL lite and at that point why watch college over NFL? You won’t.
There’s a reason College football is really the only successful minor league on TV.
Say we added two random schools like say Arizona and Utah. The product gets watered down. Great we got two additional TV markets but the product got a lot less appealing. Keep doing that and you turn into NFL lite and at that point why watch college over NFL? You won’t.
There’s a reason College football is really the only successful minor league on TV.
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:28 pm to BuckI
That whole "adding TV market footprint" philosophy was always so stupid. Who cares if you increase your "footprint" if no one is watching? FSU and Climpson are known commodities. People nationwide will tune in to watch their games. You think adding Rutgers to the B1G added viewers?
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:35 pm to PerrillouxToTexas
quote:I believe you are right and if this does happen, then ESPN is behind it.
asking the wrong question. this is about what ESPN would gain (or stand to lose if they go B1G).
I'm not sure I would listen to ESPN being a sinking ship. Everything ESPN does is for their benefit and no one else.
Posted on 9/28/23 at 2:46 pm to BuckI
More likely to get teams like UNC/UVA/Vtech/ND if we start by taking Clemson & FSU - its no longer about adding TV markets as opposed to building a mini-NFL, this is just an intermediate step. give it 10 years and we wont be playing G5 schools, we'll be playing 9 or 10 conference games and the other 2 or 3 will be playing the B1G.
Think of the SEC/B1G as AFC/NFC.
Think of the SEC/B1G as AFC/NFC.
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News