Started By
Message
re: Does the SEC want the Sooners?
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:12 am to PeaRidgeWatash
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:12 am to PeaRidgeWatash
quote:
If anyone goes to the East, it would be Auburn. Geographically speaking.
Yeah, good one.
Oklahoma and Alabama in the same division?
I don't think so.
0
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:15 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
When we got to 16 (its going to happen ESPN wants it) pods will be the only way to go.
I doubt this (see my post above this one)
Lets look at each conference in the P5
ACC, could stand to lose a team or 2 before adding value and teams remaining provide little value. ACC stopping at 12 made sense but to survive they had to make a deal with the devil to land Notre Dame. Long term I can see the ACC "helping" schools like Wake Forest to drop out.
B12, adding 2 more to get to 12 gets them to a CCG and an additional 1 - 3 million per school per year. Problem is, no real good candidates exist so they are picking below P5 type teams.
B1G, adding KU and MU for 14 and MD and RU for 16 made some sense, but that did not happen and the B1G at 14 probably now wishes they had stopped at 12
PAC, the PAC has a geographic moat protecting them so they really can stay at 12 from here till eternity. They benefit very little from now on as getting to 12 got them a CCG and that is a financial reason to go to 12 in the first place. Unless they add Texas, there is nothing out there that adds enough value to push them past 12. Anybody who says the PAC "must" get to 16 has no real understanding of how realignment works.
SEC, was happy at 12 and had no real desire to go past this. TAMU came on the market and they made sense. Mizzou was not happy with the B1G offer so they made the pair to 14. As the SEC has no desire the raid the ACC (and not adding VPI with TAMU should have alerted folks to this) scenario's with ACC schools are foolish at best.
ESPN controls the SEC and the ACC. If ESPN says jump the SEC says which way east or west.
If the SEC adds NCST and VT then it gets to charge the same amount in NC and Va that it gets to charge which is almost a $1/subscriber/month more. There are ~10 million ppl in NC today and ~8 millin in Va and both states populations are increasing. That is alot of tv sets and the SECN will get to make an additional $9/subscriber/yr which will more than cover the cost of adding 2 more teams.
If the ACC adds ND (for football), WVU, UCONN, Cincy, and an additional ACC team lets just assume they add memphis. A hypothtical ACC network gets to charge in state price for:
Tenn population 6.5 million
Ct population 3.6 million
Ohio population 11.6 million
West Virginia population 1.8 million
Indiana population 6.6 million
That is in addition to what the subscribers they get to charge in existing states.
Fox controls the PAC-12 and the BIG-10 and it is not going to let ESPN get the jump on them so it will force the BIG and PAC to expand to 16.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:21 am to 3down10
quote:
Well that's just a dumb thing to say.
this, they are a bigger brand than TAMU. They have a national audience regardless of the population of Oklahoma.
Dallas market is part of the OU market.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:26 am to Duckie
quote:
this, they are a bigger brand than TAMU. They have a national audience regardless of the population of Oklahoma. Dallas market is part of the OU market.
Let's not get too carried away with ourselves. OU has more MNCs, but we have numbers. Put in some distance and some losing seasons and their allure fades away without numbers. You younguns' have short memories. OU was rotten in the 1990s. Almost as rotten as LSU. No one cared about OU when the XII was formed. Nebraska and Colorado were the big national brands, at the time, from the old Big 8. It's all about alums.
And OU does not deliver the DFW Metroplex as well as we do. TAMU still has more alums in the Metroplex than OU. And that is the bottom line.
This post was edited on 6/25/15 at 10:30 am
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:30 am to RocketBallz
Okla, has a huge fan base in Fexas as well. They would be a good team to add.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:30 am to Diamondawg
quote:
How does one make the leap from David Boren saying the B12 should have 12 teams to Oklahoma leaving the B12?
Boren said more than that. He took some shots at the LHN. I'd dig up his statements but on phone.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:34 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
Do you really not understand this?
Costs 50 bucks to join the SEC and 0 bucks to leave. the lack of an exit fee and the lack of the GoR just shows the lack of need. Georgia Tech, Tulane, and Sewanee all left the SEC. None have experienced the sports success since. The higher the exit fee and the higher the GoR means that conference must "bribe or threaten" schools not to leave which indicates the desire to do so.
That is true that those schools haven't had the success since, but outside of Georgia Tech, they didn't land in stable situations. Georgia Tech hasn't had the success, but that is tough to judge just based upon one school who isn't #1 in their own state. The Pac and BIG are definitely stable conferences.
quote:
With no such threats the SEC demonstrates how strong they are as a group that no individual teams has a desire to leave. Lets say in a decade MU wanted to leave, SEC will happily let them go and replace them with another team who wants to be part of the group. History can always change, but based on the past history the SEC is the tights knit P5 conference. The money is a bonus but the core is strong.
I'd say the BIG is a legit threat. They are almost as good, if not on par in football, better in basketball, and loads better in academic prestige.
If we play out a scenario in 10 years where the Big 12 is imploding, I see a very real chance that MU could jump to the BIG. IF they had offered full membership the first time around, that is where we would be right now. Alas they didn't, but alot of people see that as a huge mistake.
You are correct, the core of the SEC is strong together, but I wouldn't call Mizzou the core of the SEC.
I see in my scenario the BIG taking kansas and Mizzou, with the SEC taking Texas and the Oklahoma schools. ACC grabs a few more (not sure who). 16 teams all around.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:34 am to RocketBallz
Oklahoma and Okie Light are a packaged deal.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:34 am to Arkiebarkie
quote:
Okla, has a huge fan base in Fexas as well. They would be a good team to add.
We all understand that. LSU has fans in Texas and so does Arkansas. What Cheese Grits correctly explained is that adding OU does not allow the SECN to charge more per/subscriber in Texas or in any other state outside of Oklahoma, therefore they do not move the revenue needle.
Their addition simply would not increase the footprint in terms of revenue.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:35 am to RocketBallz
Virginia Tech and NC State are the adds.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:37 am to WeeWee
Nobody doubts the value of VA or NC in college sports value. The key question is if this value clears the financial hurdle to move.
VPI may be a great addition, but is it worth say 50 million a year over what ESPN is paying them as an ACC member. Since ESPN writes the checks, realignment stops with them and what makes financial sense.
VPI may be a great addition, but is it worth say 50 million a year over what ESPN is paying them as an ACC member. Since ESPN writes the checks, realignment stops with them and what makes financial sense.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:40 am to Bubbles Up
quote:
We all understand that. LSU has fans in Texas and so does Arkansas. What Cheese Grits correctly explained is that adding OU does not allow the SECN to charge more per/subscriber in Texas or in any other state outside of Oklahoma, therefore they do not move the revenue needle.
Their addition simply would not increase the footprint in terms of revenue.
Nope the only additions that make sense money and geography wise in a team from Virginia and North Carolina. It doesn't matter if it is UNC and UVA, VT and NCST, or ODU/VCU and ECU if the SEC has an instate team it gets to charge those subscribers in-state price ($1.40/subscriber/month) vs out of state price (~$0.25/subscriber/month).
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:42 am to RocketBallz
I think the SEC would take OU and another school back east.. maybe a NCSU or UNC. UVA wants the B1G, even if it's a terrible cultural fit.. I, like most others here, would love to have our former ACC rivals UNC and UVA in the SEC East. They provide natural rivals for SC because the history of hate is there, especially for UNC.
OU would love SEC money. They committed to an ambitious stadium project that would've rivaled A&M's Kyle Field redo and had to scale back because finances weren't there.. That was embarrassing.
OU would love SEC money. They committed to an ambitious stadium project that would've rivaled A&M's Kyle Field redo and had to scale back because finances weren't there.. That was embarrassing.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:45 am to RocketBallz
Boren's statements taken from an OU board and narrated:
LINK
LINK
quote:
“I think it’s something we should strive for while we have the time, stability, all of that to look and be choosy,” Boren said. “(We) can be very selective about who we want to add. It would have to add value to the conference. I think we should.”
Boren said he worried about not only the perception of the league as other major conferences have expanded but there long-term health of such a setup.
“How many years can this go on?” Boren said. “Finally, it just gets to be really debilitating. I worry about that. That’s something I just worry about long-term about the conference, not short term.”
Boren spoke after the school’s board of regents approved $105 million in funding for the renovation of the south end zone of Gaylord Family-Oklahoma Memorial Stadium.
Boren also said without explicitly naming it that the Longhorn Network—which keeps the Big 12 from having a conference network like the SEC, Big 10 and Pac 12—is a big problem for the conference.
“The elephant in the room remains the network south of us that has struggled and has in a way as long as it’s there,” Boren said. “And we have done quite well with our network and if anything ever changed, it has value to it which we see. But someday, maybe we’ll get past that other problem as well. It’s a problem.”
Boren said the problem of reduced revenue per school with expansion wasn’t as big of a hurdle as it had been made out to be.
“The contract says that our main television contract … if we grow from 10 to 11 or 11 to 12, their payments to us grow proportionally,” Boren said. “So everybody’s share stays the same. If it’s ‘X’ dollars, it stays ‘X’ dollars.
“Our main media contract says it’s not the same pie now cut 12 ways instead of 10.”
Boren did say that that only includes the primary television contract, not other revenue that is split between the schools.
“It’s not total because there’s some smaller—much smaller—amounts of money around the edges but if you can find the right people, it should be additive even though it’s split 12 ways instead of 10.”
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:48 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
Nobody doubts the value of VA or NC in college sports value. The key question is if this value clears the financial hurdle to move.
According to this, the ACC was $11million behind the SEC this year and the ACC should cut it to $5 million by the end of the contract. If NCST and VT (the 2 I think are most likely) leave the day after the GOR expires in 2027 there is no penalty. LINK I am not a lawyer, but I don't think the ACC can force the schools to extend the GOR without each individual school's approval so if any school wants to jump the greener pa$ture$ they can do so in July 2027.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:55 am to 5thTiger
quote:
Georgia Tech hasn't had the success, but that is tough to judge just based upon one school who isn't #1 in their own state.
Here is the benefit of me being old. Today GT has maybe 10% of GA and UGA has 90% (ballpark). When I was young, and GT was still an SEC school, that number was much closer to 50 /50 and GT had 3 MNC's in the SEC under 3 different coaches in 3 different eras. In addition they had a much bigger following outside the state of GA because of the strength of their football. While Tech surveys in the SEC, in sports they are a shell of their former self, and highly unlikely they will ever return to their old history. This in not some 20 year old googling it on the internet, this is somebody actually alive to see it firsthand.
quote:
The Pac and BIG are definitely stable conferences.
They are stable in the sense they have points that make them more able to survive. The PAC has geography and the B1G has money and population on their side. The bigger issue is if inside these confines there is not a defined pecking order that could cause an internal shift. If Indiana continues to lose power in the B1G, does an invite from the ACC look better and better?
With Notre Dame now in the ACC (and probably 100% by the next round of realignment in say 2025) IU may not be as B1G as it was 100 years ago.
quote:
You are correct, the core of the SEC is strong together, but I wouldn't call Mizzou the core of the SEC.
: kige ;
But the longer they stay, the harder to break the bonds. Pretty sure the B12 or ACC could offer AR and SC the bank, but pretty sure they would not move now.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 10:56 am to Bubbles Up
Had to laugh at The Balinese Club's comment about OU & LSU being rotten. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. And what years exactly was LSU on NCAA probation in the 90's? But as to OU joining the SEC: 1) that would make the West look like this: Alabama, AU, Ark. LSU. O. Miss. Ms.St. OU.2) not for unless the SEC office was relocated to Norman. Just to piss off bama fans. 3) only if OU was given Fla as its permanent opponent
Posted on 6/25/15 at 11:00 am to 5thTiger
quote:
If we play out a scenario in 10 years where the Big 12 is imploding, I see a very real chance that MU could jump to the BIG. IF they had offered full membership the first time around, that is where we would be right now. Alas they didn't, but alot of people see that as a huge mistake.
I see 0% chance of that happening. Mizzou and the B1G are not on friendly terms, and by all accounts are fat and happy in the SEC. There would be nothing to gain by the move and it would put Mizzou in a bad light.
I suspect the B1G would be afraid to even make an offer. Mizzou would reject it and leak it to some key media to make the B1G look bad.
This post was edited on 6/25/15 at 11:03 am
Posted on 6/25/15 at 11:01 am to Keltic Tiger
Who said LSU was on probation in the 90's? I didn't. I just said that their program was down, as was OU's at that time. It happens. We were rotten during the bulk of the 2000's.
Posted on 6/25/15 at 11:17 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
VPI
What does veterinary pet insurance have to do with realignment?
Page 6 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News