Started By
Message
re: It’s absurd to say the SEC should not have expanded into Texas
Posted on 6/14/24 at 1:42 pm to bamabaseballsec
Posted on 6/14/24 at 1:42 pm to bamabaseballsec
quote:
No vandy is vandy bc they don’t fit in. They don’t invest remotely close to the rest of the sec. The pac 12 never had a vandy. If you took the 12 best and stuck them together no one would willingly be a vandy. Maybe an ole miss or usce atm where your pockets of success are fewer than the uga bamas of the world would be the more likely outcome.
I understand the argument that there can only be one champion, but totally agree with the above that no one has consistently bottom fed like Vandy. The parity of the SEC has been our strongest asset. MSU was #1 in the nation with Dak. Mizzou and Carolina have both won multiple recent East titles. Kentucky, Ole Miss, and Arkansas have all been highly competitive at times this century.
Sure someone always has to finish last, but it doesn’t have to always be the same team like Vandy.
1
Posted on 6/14/24 at 1:47 pm to Rebelinexile
quote:
Would have preferred to take a Virginia school and UNC before adding Texas and Oklahoma.
It doesn’t work like that. Wait for UNC and UVA first and Texas and OU would already be in the B10. Plus Texas and OU are much bigger fish by every possible metric.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:00 pm to 3down10
quote:
It gets increased anyway. Your claim is that ESPN is going to start overpaying because the SEC added 2 teams? Doubt it.
You don’t really believe this do you? You think revenue increases in each negotiation round are “automatic”? Yes they tend to go up due to inflation and drastically rising ad revenue for live sports. But how much revenue goes up is heavily dependent on the changing value the conference brings in each round. Owning the entire Texas/Oklahoma market will be a huge source of leverage in the next negotiation round. And it won’t just be ESPN we are talking to. It will be all the networks.
You think the B10 added USC and UCLA and all the aggravation of 5 hour flights just for the hell of it? No, they are going to get paid a ton for Ohio St games being watched on LA televisions.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:04 pm to RelentlessTide
Only if you’re retarded. Lol
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:13 pm to MillerLiteTime
quote:
You don’t really believe this do you? You think revenue increases in each negotiation round are “automatic”? Yes they tend to go up due to inflation and drastically rising ad revenue for live sports. But how much revenue goes up is heavily dependent on the changing value the conference brings in each round. Owning the entire Texas/Oklahoma market will be a huge source of leverage in the next negotiation round. And it won’t just be ESPN we are talking to. It will be all the networks.
You think the B10 added USC and UCLA and all the aggravation of 5 hour flights just for the hell of it? No, they are going to get paid a ton for Ohio St games being watched on LA televisions.
The TV contracts have increased every single time beyond inflation numbers.
Yes, it will overall increase because of the additions of Texas and Oklahoma, but after you then spread it out among the teams, the difference is not going to be that big. It's 2 teams on a now 16 team league.
I think they are trying to slowly change college football into a mini NFL and the ultimate goal will be to remove the majority of SEC teams. Currently, that step is turning it into only 2 major "leagues", the Big10 and the SEC. It has nothing to do with the benefit of the individual schools, of which is limited AT BEST.
The problem with the SEC and Big10 is the same thing that happens to all such things. They start caring more about the organization than those that make up the organization.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:18 pm to MillerLiteTime
quote:
I understand the argument that there can only be one champion, but totally agree with the above that no one has consistently bottom fed like Vandy. The parity of the SEC has been our strongest asset. MSU was #1 in the nation with Dak. Mizzou and Carolina have both won multiple recent East titles. Kentucky, Ole Miss, and Arkansas have all been highly competitive at times this century.
Sure someone always has to finish last, but it doesn’t have to always be the same team like Vandy.
Vandy doesn't always finish last. But they are always an easy win for better teams.
When they have decent seasons, their coach gets hired away. There is no support.
You see the same thing in other conferences. Oregon St in the Pac12 for example.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:37 pm to PerrillouxToTexas
They help in other sports and academics. The SEC should at least have
a footprint in each SE state.
a footprint in each SE state.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:41 pm to MillerLiteTime
Expanding into TX was the right decision but pre-1992 SEC would still be the best conference in CFB.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 2:44 pm to JetDawg
quote:
Sounds woke.
Says the Gerogia fan. Just make sure you guys get the job done in November, we are counting on you.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 3:01 pm to MillerLiteTime
Notice how insecure LSU fans are. We are on page 5 of this thread and not one LSU fan has commented on the thread admitting that A&M & Texas are great additions to conference. While everyone else has….. LSU is a super insecure fan base.
This post was edited on 6/14/24 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 6/14/24 at 3:07 pm to MillerLiteTime
Sure it was a good idea. Does not change the fact they're both a pain in the arse.
Ones a cult, the other a collection of power mad bureaucrats.
Ones a cult, the other a collection of power mad bureaucrats.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 3:09 pm to GoGators1995
quote:
Expanding into TX was the right decision but pre-1992 SEC would still be the best conference in CFB.
No doubt in the short term. But eventually a lack of revenue from staying in a small, regional, mostly rural footprint would take its toll. The B10 would pay to hire our best coaches, facilities would lag, donations would have to be directed towards operational costs at the expense of NIL, and defections of key programs would become inevitable.
Prior to Michigan’s title this past year, you could easily make the argument that the ACC, with Clemson and FSU’s titles have been more relevant than the B10 in modern times. But look at what stagnant revenue has done to that conference, even with the wins.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 3:36 pm to MillerLiteTime
I could have lived without either Texas team.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 4:34 pm to 3down10
quote:
Just don't see how this increases the revenue for the schools.
Yeah frankly this stuff isn't as transparent as it was last round of realignment so I don't have hard evidence to refute you like when the SEC added TAMU and Mizzou and that provided a huge known boost (mostly because it reset a bad contract).
I blame it on the ACC situation: knowing what everyone else is projected to make is driving Florida State into playing an insane version of Russian Roulette.
There is a reason that ESPN is treating that ACC contract like its the secret formula to Coca-cola: it doesn't benefit from everyone knowing what everyone is going to make when they already have the whole sport locked up.
We just have to assume that SEC member schools wouldn't have voted yes unless it benefitted them in some way. But we have no proof.
This post was edited on 6/14/24 at 4:36 pm
Posted on 6/14/24 at 5:09 pm to 3down10
quote:
So Nebraska IS actually an example
Nebraska has a five year current average attendance of over 85k and averaged 86k this past season. So no that’s just a stupid take on your part
Posted on 6/14/24 at 5:34 pm to bamabaseballsec
quote:
Nebraska has a five year current average attendance of over 85k and averaged 86k this past season. So no that’s just a stupid take on your part
No, they don't. Boosters have been buying tickets by the thousands at discounted prices.
Go read their own AD for yourself. They are literally downsizing their stadium to 70k in 2026 to keep their record going. They already downsized it by over 4k.
Back in the day, that was an extremely difficult ticket to get.
I don't know what better evidence could exist, and you want to pretend like it's not happening.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 5:43 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
Yeah frankly this stuff isn't as transparent as it was last round of realignment so I don't have hard evidence to refute you like when the SEC added TAMU and Mizzou and that provided a huge known boost (mostly because it reset a bad contract).
I blame it on the ACC situation: knowing what everyone else is projected to make is driving Florida State into playing an insane version of Russian Roulette.
There is a reason that ESPN is treating that ACC contract like its the secret formula to Coca-cola: it doesn't benefit from everyone knowing what everyone is going to make when they already have the whole sport locked up.
We just have to assume that SEC member schools wouldn't have voted yes unless it benefitted them in some way. But we have no proof.
As I understood back then, when we added A&M to the conference, it meant that ESPN got the entire state of Texas in their revenue from the cable companies. The same with Missouri which has St Louis and part of Kansas City. So apparently it was a big boost in revenue, and each team got a bunch.
I don't know how that works now with Texas and Oklahoma, but obviously the state of Texas is already covered. And Oklahoma isn't very populated. ESPN covered the addition of the teams, but that didn't increase the payouts for the existing SEC teams.
So I don't think this was done for an increase in revenue, there are other motives. I think they just want 2 super conferences/leagues.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 6:07 pm to 3down10
Nebraska was also top 25 in Nielson viewership with 11 observed games(phenomenal numbers). Probably just the boosters buying up all the tvs and putting the Nebraska game on huh?
I keep giving you facts and you just keep shatting your drawers
I keep giving you facts and you just keep shatting your drawers
This post was edited on 6/14/24 at 6:09 pm
Posted on 6/14/24 at 6:37 pm to bamabaseballsec
quote:
Nebraska was also top 25 in Nielson viewership with 11 observed games(phenomenal numbers). Probably just the boosters buying up all the tvs and putting the Nebraska game on huh?
I keep giving you facts and you just keep shatting your drawers
Nebraska is a blue blood. They should be in the top10.
I'm going to guess you haven't been watching college football for very long.
Posted on 6/14/24 at 8:35 pm to MillerLiteTime
You really do not want to argue with 3down10, he sets his mind on something and will not budge no matter how much logic and reason is piled upon him.
I do like when 3down10 said Alabama should leave the SEC,……PLEASE GO, and take several Gump posters with you….
Good thread MillerLiteTime, keep up the good work.
I do like when 3down10 said Alabama should leave the SEC,……PLEASE GO, and take several Gump posters with you….
Good thread MillerLiteTime, keep up the good work.
Page 5 of 10
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News