Started By
Message
re: If Oklahoma joined SEC every team/school would literally lose money.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 3:43 pm to Boomer00
Posted on 5/2/17 at 3:43 pm to Boomer00
quote:
MO has 5 pro sports teams including the second most dominant franchise in baseball history, and the Chiefs. I live in KC and nobody on this side of the state watches MU athletics. MU has a very isolated following in the NE part of the state hence the half empty stadium you see 80% of the time. I see more sporting KC soccer merch than Mizzou merch and it's not even close.
It not all about sports though.
Mizzou is a AAU school. As is A&M. College presidents (the people signing off on expansion) like that kind of stuff. OU is not a AAU school.
1
Posted on 5/2/17 at 3:45 pm to cardboardboxer
I think it's mostly about sports. As you know OU and A&M both had invites before MU, so we know the sec is willing to take OU. Sadly the Oklahoma leadership chose to stick with Texas and the PAC deal fell through because of the LHN.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 3:53 pm to thelawnwranglers
quote:
St Louis TV's
There is a reason they were brought in
We keep hearing that TV markets are the most important thing in sports now and are the cause of conference realignment. But then we also hear that everyone will have cut the cord on cable within 10-20 years. When everything is digital, TV markets will be a thing of the past. So it seems like more thought needed to be put into conference realignment in general, not just in the SEC.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 3:53 pm to Boomer00
No, butts in seats doesn't translate to cable subscribers. Your stadium is 30k bigger than MUs. However, their state population is several million more than yours.
It's simple math.
It's simple math.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 3:53 pm to Boomer00
quote:
I think it's mostly about sports.
For some conference sure. For ones like the B1G it seems that AAU status matters.
quote:
As you know OU and A&M both had invites before MU, so we know the sec is willing to take OU.
I think the SEC was happy to take OU at 14. I doubt they want to take them alone as 15 if that means unilaterally getting the conference realignment ball rolling again. OSU as a 16th team is a non-starter and the ACC looks really solid right now. I don't know where a 16th team would come from.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 3:54 pm to The Balinese Club
Why was Rutgers added to the Big Ten when they are literally the worst program in all of college athletics right now?
Answer: They brought the New York City market to the Big Ten and are an AAU school.
Answer: They brought the New York City market to the Big Ten and are an AAU school.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 3:58 pm to cardboardboxer
Exactly! I was would have been happy with OU as #14 and was kind of disappointed that we got Missouri instead. But I wasn't looking at it correctly. VT would have also been a really great #14 but that wasn't meant to be.
I'm not convinced that chord cutting is going to change the dynamics much. ESPN is still going to charge for the delivery of their product regardless of how you receive it. And my DTV feed is still far superior than what I get on SEC+ through Apple TV. And when I go to the cabin DTV is my only option.
I'm not convinced that chord cutting is going to change the dynamics much. ESPN is still going to charge for the delivery of their product regardless of how you receive it. And my DTV feed is still far superior than what I get on SEC+ through Apple TV. And when I go to the cabin DTV is my only option.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 3:58 pm to Boomer00
Plus, OU would rustle Arky, LSU, TAMU, and MU. I am all about it.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 3:58 pm to Boomer00
I don't question any of that and it sounds right to me. But under the current cable subscription model it is irrelevant. ALL cable subscribers within a state of a member school pay the same price for the SECN whether they ever watch it or not. That's why Texas was so valuable to the SEC and why Missouri, despite everything you just said, is more valuable than Oklahoma.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:00 pm to CrimsonCrusade
quote:
So it seems like more thought needed to be put into conference realignment in general, not just in the SEC.
Conference realignment isn't some sort of grand plan. Its not like the conference commissioners all go into one room and decide to cut up other conferences like cake.
The whole time its been reactionary and has been dictated often by timing, namely who is there when conferences want to expand.
When the 2010 realignment happened it drove me nuts that everyone kept wanting to judge each program on the metrics that mattered in 1990's realignment (namely TV ratings). It took the average fan YEARS to understand the whole "cable subscribers in the footprint" method for valuing programs.
Therefore when we get to the next wave of realignment any sort of planning for what might happen isn't even on the table. In fact I think the real impact from cord cutting will be the crash of the college sports bubble, and conference will be looking to contract or merge (to consolidate inventory) instead of outright expansion.
We are already seeing many signs that what people are assuming today will be wrong when the time comes. For example people always talk about the SEC poaching ACC teams, but that conference is solid right now. Or people talk about the Big 12 getting poached by the PAC when Big 12 teams make more money right now.
I think when the time actually comes very few will be prepared for it, and we will see conferences make mistakes that look terrible given hindsight just like we saw last time (with the Big 12 adding WVU or the B1G adding Maryland).
This post was edited on 5/2/17 at 4:01 pm
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:02 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
For some conference sure. For ones like the B1G it seems that AAU status matters.
I would say academics matter at 4 of the 5 P5's, only the B12 seems not to care. If memory serves Sooners have a better academic profile than Clemson but is below Florida State. Sooners would fit the SEC in both sports and academics but if another SEC school is invited to the AAU it will be Georgia probably followed by Kentucky.
quote:
I think the SEC was happy to take OU at 14. I doubt they want to take them alone as 15
I tend to agree with this which is why if OU + KU was announced it would not surprise me at all. ACC and SEC are ESPN so SEC raiding the ACC seems unlikely while raiding the B12 flips FOX schools to ESPN schools.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:07 pm to cardboardboxer
I agree with you, I think everything is just in limbo right now until the B10 decides to make a move in a few years. There's really no reason for the SEC to take a 15th team in OU if there's nobody else to come with them. OU has weak leadership(Boren) that held them back in favor of keeping OSU happy and for that reason went all in on the PAC deal that would have included both OK schools. There are no state laws holding OU and OSU together it's just Boren and the way the chips fell the first time. However Boren is 77 years old. I think In about 4-5 years the GOR will be ending, boren will be on his way out or already gone. And when the big 10 makes a move the SEC will be quick to secure OU and probably an Eastern school along with them. There's just no way the SEC will let the B10 have both the KS/Western side of MO,(KU) AND the OU market. That would put two more succesful BBall programs, and one more blue blood CFB program in the B10. I don't see why the SEC or any SEC fans would want that to happen. I'd love to see the sec with a more balanced east/west and another 1-2 GOOD BBall programs. Throw in OUs baseball and gymnastics success and you add good value to the sec and keep it out of B10 hands.
This post was edited on 5/2/17 at 4:18 pm
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:13 pm to The Balinese Club
quote:
I'm not convinced that chord cutting is going to change the dynamics much. ESPN is still going to charge for the delivery of their product regardless of how you receive it.
I'm thinking you don't talk to your neighbors who also have a cable subscription very much. My guess is (outside of Alabama
) that less than 20% of cable subscribers watch ANY sports EVER. But it is probably closer to 10%. Those 80-90% who don't watch are subsidizing ESPN and SECN, whether they know it or not. Once a la carte takes over (as it appears it will sooner or later), then to make the same amount of money ESPN will have to charge 5-10x the current rate. Or drastically cut payouts to networks like SECN, and for that matter the Longhorn Network. I've no idea how DirectTV and Dish subscriptions work, but I suspect it is similar. If/when a la carte happens us sports nuts are going to be in a world of hurt if we want the same coverage. At that time bringing in OU would make more sense, but I'm not sure it would matter at that point. It will all be about prestige rather than dollars.Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:15 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
Conference realignment isn't some sort of grand plan.
I will agree to disagree with you on this one. Most of the moves in 2010 were rooted in the moves from the 1990's. Most of modern realignment has been based on the B1G trying to corner Notre Dame and force them into a struggle snuggle of B1G membership.
quote:
The whole time its been reactionary
Not really, TAMU is back in the SEC after 100 year absence. Nebraska is in the B1G after 100 years of trying. If anything, realignment is like glass being a slow moving liquid. B1G knew in the 1970's that they were the dying footprint and the other footprints would only grow.
quote:
I think the real impact from cord cutting will be the crash of the college sports bubble
The real crash of the sports bubble will be self inflicted along the lines of the Roman Empire. They have priced the next generation out and they will vote with their wallets on other entertainment options.
quote:
conference will be looking to contract or merge (to consolidate inventory) instead of outright expansion.
It has never been about expansion since the 1960's. Some will fall but it has always been about consolidation since they allowed commercials for football games on TV. Sporting events slowed to a crawl by TV spots is the sure long term death.
quote:
few will be prepared for it
Only if they view the moves favoring their own team or conference. If you view it as a moving whole, all the moves make fairly good sense for those ahead of the curve. Biggest mistake the B12 did was allowing dissension so when the B1G and PAC attempted to buy the B12 success, they actually succeeded. ACC and SEC got stronger by not letting the B1G and PAC desires happen.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:17 pm to Boomer00
quote:
I agree with you, I think everything is just in limbo right now until the B10 decides to make a move in a few years. There's really no reason for the SEC to take a 15th team in OU if there's no eastern team to come with them. OU has weak leadership(Boren) that held them back in favor of keeping OSU happy and for that reason went all in on the PAC deal that would have included both OK schools. There are no state laws holding OU and OSU together it's just Boren and the way the chips fell the first time. However he is getting very old. I think In about 4-5 years the GOR will be ending, boren will be on his way out or already gone. And when the big 10 makes a move the SEC will be quick to secure OU and probably an Eastern school along with them. There's just no way the SEC will let the B10 have both the KS/Western side of MO,(KU) AND the OU market. That would put two more succesful BBall programs, and one more blue blood CFB program in the B10. I don't see why the SEC or any SEC fans would want that to happen. I'd love to see the sec with a more balanced east/west and another 1-2 GOOD BBall programs.
Frankly I think conferences will be obsolete before too long. I think the Power 5 will combine into a single NFL-like entity with divisions kinda based around current conferences. Eventually the only way to keep the $ up will be to restrict supply and so conferences will need to collude instead of compete to maximize the possible bids on media inventory. Plus I think the legal and political problems from kicking teams out of the Power 5 level will be too great, and that will motivate leaders to work together in an era where ESPN can no longer fight their fights for them.
We will see.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:21 pm to kingbob
quote:
blue bloods of College Football. T
umm no! Any success they have had in football was tied to scandalous behavior on the part of the athletic department. Their "national Following" consists of the same kind of sidewalk fans that Bama and Ohio State have.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:23 pm to finestfirst79
Here's the counter to that:
An "a la carte" model will cause over 80% of the channel lineup to go out of business due to who owns what channels.
An "a la carte" model will cause over 80% of the channel lineup to go out of business due to who owns what channels.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:25 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
I will agree to disagree with you on this one. Most of the moves in 2010 were rooted in the moves from the 1990's.
Oh for sure its iterative, I am just saying its not like the conferences currently work together. I think one day they might have to though.
quote:
The real crash of the sports bubble will be self inflicted along the lines of the Roman Empire. They have priced the next generation out and they will vote with their wallets on other entertainment options.
That is a huge part of the problem sure. The other side of that coin is college sports are currently being subsidized by millions of non-sports watching grannies who pay the cable bills full of ESPN and SEC Network fees because they don't know any better. When that generation dies and generations used to Netflix take over it will be a sea change. Amazon and Netflix and Hulu have avoided bidding for sports rights for a reason- they know they are overpriced! So they will wait until after the bubble burst and then pick up the pieces.
In a way it is a feedback loop. Granny stops paying for ESPN because she dies, so a smaller consumer base (aka actual sports fans) have to cover the costs for these networks. Fees for sports tiers and sports streaming services will go up, which will turn some people away completely from the sport. Less people will mean the costs for access go even higher. Higher costs means less people, etc.
I can see it escalating to a point where the average sports fan is paying $100+ a month JUST for access to the games on the conference they care about (and not every game), at which point the hardcore fans will start to look at other entertainment options.
The only question is if head injuries and lawsuits can kill this golden goose before granny dying does.
Posted on 5/2/17 at 4:33 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
Here's the counter to that:
An "a la carte" model will cause over 80% of the channel lineup to go out of business due to who owns what channels.
Yeah, I think you're correct. I'm just sitting in my cocoon here worrying about sports coverage. "Lifetime, Television for Women"? Gone. (And all married males rejoice.
) I sure don't have any inside info, but it seems like Sen. McCain and others are going to make a la carte happen, whether it's a good idea or not.
Page 4 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News