Started By
Message
re: If OU and UT joined the SEC
Posted on 1/15/19 at 5:39 pm to Hook Em Horns
Posted on 1/15/19 at 5:39 pm to Hook Em Horns
UTs and OUs obsession with A&M makes that easy to predict
1
Posted on 1/15/19 at 5:44 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
WestCoastAg
Whoooooop[ed]!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Furk!
Posted on 1/15/19 at 5:45 pm to CharlotteSooner
I'm sorry I broke you
Posted on 1/15/19 at 6:00 pm to WestCoastAg
Oh yeah.....I'm shattered.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Posted on 1/15/19 at 6:04 pm to CharlotteSooner
I mean...
Posted on 1/15/19 at 6:07 pm to WestCoastAg
Furk?
Posted on 1/15/19 at 6:09 pm to Hook Em Horns
quote:
I was under in my assessment. 12 pages was to small. What was i thinking?
Two many?
Posted on 1/15/19 at 6:12 pm to finestfirst79
quote:
It would mean the majority of the TV market in TX. It would add about $5M to each teams payout.
The $5M I was talking about would be the bargaining power the SEC would have when negotiating the SECN and the rest of the TV packages.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 6:29 pm to Irons Puppet
quote:
The $5M I was talking about would be the bargaining power the SEC would have when negotiating the SECN and the rest of the TV packages.
Still irrelevant. EVERY cable and Direct TV subscriber in Texas pays the same price for SECN, whether they ever watch it or not. Same deal for all SEC states.
Now if cord cutting continues to accelerate, bringing in UT would make sense financially, at least someday. But it's moot. Texas would never agree to join the SEC or any other conference they don't have the power to wreck.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 6:40 pm to finestfirst79
quote:
Still irrelevant. EVERY cable and Direct TV subscriber in Texas pays the same price for SECN, whether they ever watch it or not. Same deal for all SEC states.
It is the footprint outside of TX that would be appealing to the Networks (to include the West and Midwest). Having OU and UT play games against Bama, LSU, TN, UF, UGA and Auburn (Big 6) would make the TV schedule very appealing every week. Now you see OU vs Tex and that is for TV out of that area.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 6:42 pm to dstone12
quote:
That’s why I’d like to see:
Bay
Tt
Tcu
.....to the pac 12
Ou
Osu
.....to sec
Ku
Ksu
......big 10
WVU
Nd
.......To acc
Better yet. Just like you except UT and ND go to hell.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 6:55 pm to Irons Puppet
quote:
It is the footprint outside of TX that would be appealing to the Networks (to include the West and Midwest).
OK, maybe. But out-of-state subscribers pay substantially less to ESPN than SEC states do, and I don't think Oklahoma has enough TVs to make in-state subscribers a lucrative deal for the SEC. I haven't done the math but I think it's possible that bringing in OU would actually cost money to existing SEC members. If the SEC expands (and right now I see no reason to), it would make much more financial sense to look at NC and VA schools.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:01 pm to finestfirst79
quote:
OK, maybe. But out-of-state subscribers pay substantially less to ESPN than SEC states do, and I don't think Oklahoma has enough TVs to make in-state subscribers a lucrative deal for the SEC. I haven't done the math but I think it's possible that bringing in OU would actually cost money to existing SEC members. If the SEC expands (and right now I see no reason to), it would make much more financial sense to look at NC and VA schools.
It is not about the fanbase that lives in that area, it is about CF fans that live all over the country. It would be the closest thing that College Sports would have to the NFL's TV Package. It would also for the Playoffs to 8 teams, because two would have to come from the SEC every year with that lineup.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:35 pm to RD Dawg
The B12 sat on the conference programming topic for years. Texas AD was the one pushing it & finally said frick it & sourced their own options.
A&M turned down the partner programming option & OU, Nebraska each were sourcing at the same time.
Those minor details never seem to make the conversation.
A&M turned down the partner programming option & OU, Nebraska each were sourcing at the same time.
Those minor details never seem to make the conversation.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 7:38 pm to OldSchoolHorn
Pay half the costs for less than a quarter of the revenue?
Only an idiot would take that deal.
That detail seems to be always absent from your posts.
Only an idiot would take that deal.
That detail seems to be always absent from your posts.
This post was edited on 1/15/19 at 7:39 pm
Posted on 1/15/19 at 8:19 pm to OldSchoolHorn
Deloser Dodd had already made his secret deal with ESiPN before anyone knew anything...and it was never going to be a fair share. This is why A&M said F U!
Not really a minor detail no is it?
Not really a minor detail no is it?
Posted on 1/15/19 at 8:20 pm to Irons Puppet
We've been trying to get UT to join the SEC for 15 years now. They just may do it with the MBB program, if Barnes doesn't screw the pooch......
Posted on 1/15/19 at 8:33 pm to Kline777
quote:
Deloser Dodd had already made his secret deal with ESiPN before anyone knew anything...and it was never going to be a fair share. This is why A&M said F U! Not really a minor detail no is it?
That's because you didn't have the money to put up so Texas was going to shoulder the bulk of getting it started. Why should it be 50-50 if your broke asses couldn't pay their share?
Also, any conference expansion as far as Texas was concerned was going to benefit academics as opposed to athletics. Texas is never going to make a move like that for athletics only. Hence, the PAC 12/Big 10 options. They don't see the SEC as strong academically as those other two.
Posted on 1/15/19 at 8:37 pm to bigdog
Bud- don’t even try with this clown- he’s just taking a sabbatical from his job demanding that knights answer his riddles before crossing the bridge he lives under.
This post was edited on 1/15/19 at 8:38 pm
Posted on 1/15/19 at 8:43 pm to bigdog
quote:
That's because you didn't have the money to put up so Texas was going to shoulder the bulk of getting it started. Why should it be 50-50 if your broke asses couldn't pay their share?
bullshite. The discussion about putting up capital only went so far as to be a 50/50 split with the fricking longhorns getting an unequal split on revenue.
Don't sit there and make shite up.
You think we would have passed on a deal if it was acrually viable?
quote:
Also, any conference expansion as far as Texas was concerned was going to benefit academics as opposed to athletics. Texas is never going to make a move like that for athletics only. Hence, the PAC 12/Big 10 options. They don't see the SEC as strong academically as those other two.
More bullshite. You added West Virginia to the Big 12. Academics seems to be of little importance.
This post was edited on 1/15/19 at 8:46 pm
Page 14 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News