Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/9/25 at 6:13 pm to 1BIGTigerFan
quote:
We got nothing but gayer with the other two.
So you're acknowledging you were gay to begin with?
Posted on 5/9/25 at 6:23 pm to RD Dawg
What's crazy is that OU and Texas didn't increase SEC payouts like adding Mizzou and A&M did. And even as an Aggie fan I can admit OU and Texas should be more valuable.
I think the last expansion was more a defensive move to not let the B1G get way ahead.
I think the last expansion was more a defensive move to not let the B1G get way ahead.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 7:23 pm to Faurot fodder
quote:
So you're acknowledging you were gay to begin with?
Posted on 5/9/25 at 9:45 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
What's crazy is that OU and Texas didn't increase SEC payouts like adding Mizzou and A&M did. And even as an Aggie fan I can admit OU and Texas should be more valuable.
I think the last expansion was more a defensive move to not let the B1G get way ahead.
Dynamics have changed. A&M and Mizzou added TV sets which is how the payouts were determined. The TVs in Texas were already all counted, so no bump there - and Oklahoma is a low population state.
But like I said, dynamics have changed. When next TV deal is negotiated it won't be based on TV sets, it will be based on brands both of the conferences themselves as well as the individual teams.
Posted on 5/9/25 at 11:29 pm to 1BIGTigerFan
quote:
We got nothing but ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF MONEY with the other two.
Fixed it for you dumbass! Going through life looking stupid is a choice. Read a fricking article or two!
Posted on 5/9/25 at 11:30 pm to cjohn
quote:
But like I said, dynamics have changed. When next TV deal is negotiated it won't be based on TV sets, it will be based on brands both of the conferences themselves as well as the individual teams.
I believe this to be true in the current environment.
Posted on 5/10/25 at 7:15 am to dallasga6
quote:Garcia only had the Alabama win to his resume. The rest of his tenure was...bla bla bla. Connor Shaw was the real deal with us..... He was 27-5 as a starter and 17-0 at Willy B. Garcia was 20-14 as a starter. It's not even close. Connor was 3-1 against UGA.
If only for Steven Garcia and the Old Ball Coach...
This post was edited on 5/10/25 at 7:18 am
Posted on 5/10/25 at 7:20 am to Hawgeye
as much as I can’t stand their painfully obnoxious fans/pigsooey crap, I would be remiss in not admitting that having Arkie in Basketball and baseball has been fantastic for the conference. Track? Sure. I like track. LSU was/is good too. But it’s the games like last night where people stay until 2AM to see a fantastic product which proves my point. And Arkie brings it.
Also like having Okie and UT from a big game and branding and $$ perspective. Don’t have a ton of respect for Okie bc they are perennial choke artists in football but softball and gym get some credit. Texas is Texas and will succeed as long as they don’t have morons in leadership and will bring big money and lots of coverage. Long term fit for both remains to be seen but I think they’ll work out alright. Unfortunately I see Okie reverting to the mean and being a mid-tier player. SOME risk of that happening to LSU if we don’t play our cards exactly right. Lots more room for error at UA and UT for example.
Mizzou? I can hardly get fired up when we play them in football much less anything else. I often forget they are even IN the league.
Aggie? having some trouble coming up with any redeeming qualities. open to suggestions.
Also like having Okie and UT from a big game and branding and $$ perspective. Don’t have a ton of respect for Okie bc they are perennial choke artists in football but softball and gym get some credit. Texas is Texas and will succeed as long as they don’t have morons in leadership and will bring big money and lots of coverage. Long term fit for both remains to be seen but I think they’ll work out alright. Unfortunately I see Okie reverting to the mean and being a mid-tier player. SOME risk of that happening to LSU if we don’t play our cards exactly right. Lots more room for error at UA and UT for example.
Mizzou? I can hardly get fired up when we play them in football much less anything else. I often forget they are even IN the league.
Aggie? having some trouble coming up with any redeeming qualities. open to suggestions.
Posted on 5/10/25 at 7:24 am to CelticTiger
quote:
Adding A&M and Mizzou in 2012 gave Slive the extra leverage needed to negotiate and launch the SEC network in an unprecedented deal (at the time), enriching ALL SEC schools.
Mizzou had very little to do with this, don’t kid yourself. aTm is who the SEC really wanted but they wanted 2 teams so Mizzou made the most sense geographically. aTm had the money, Mizzou was just as broke then in there great years than they are now.
Posted on 5/10/25 at 8:58 am to Hawgeye
The SEC had to expand or we were going to get left in the dust in a tv household driven funding environment. No matter how many football titles the original 10 won, we would not be able to sustainably pay for top facilities, coaches, recruiting budgets etc without a competitive tv household footprint. The other major conferences had a massive advantage over our original 10 in that area.
Plus, consolidation was coming even if we chose to not participate. If we don’t claim those Texas households, the Big Ten would have. A Big Ten with NYC, Baltimore, DC, Philly, Pittsburgh, Cinci, Cleveland, Detroit, Indianapolis, Chicago, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, St Louis, Kansas City, DFW, Houston, Austin, San Antonio, OKC, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, LA, and San Diego makes us tiny with only Miami, Tampa, Orlando, Jacksonville, Atlanta, Birmingham, Nashville, Memphis, NOLA, and Louisville.
We were a tiny regional conference in mostly stagnant growth states economically and population. Atlanta and a slice of the FL market couldn’t sustain us. Same reason the Big 8 had to bring in the 4 SWC schools.
Remember back when Southern athletes went to Nebraska, Ohio State, Michigan, and USC to get the exposure and facilities the SEC couldn’t give them? That would still be us today except exponentially worse in an NIL pay for play environment.
Missouri and Arkansas were the expense we paid to essentially wall in the Texas market and make the SEC the only logical choice for them. The Texas market today is roughly the same size the entire SEC was prior to the 92 expansion.
Plus, consolidation was coming even if we chose to not participate. If we don’t claim those Texas households, the Big Ten would have. A Big Ten with NYC, Baltimore, DC, Philly, Pittsburgh, Cinci, Cleveland, Detroit, Indianapolis, Chicago, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, St Louis, Kansas City, DFW, Houston, Austin, San Antonio, OKC, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, LA, and San Diego makes us tiny with only Miami, Tampa, Orlando, Jacksonville, Atlanta, Birmingham, Nashville, Memphis, NOLA, and Louisville.
We were a tiny regional conference in mostly stagnant growth states economically and population. Atlanta and a slice of the FL market couldn’t sustain us. Same reason the Big 8 had to bring in the 4 SWC schools.
Remember back when Southern athletes went to Nebraska, Ohio State, Michigan, and USC to get the exposure and facilities the SEC couldn’t give them? That would still be us today except exponentially worse in an NIL pay for play environment.
Missouri and Arkansas were the expense we paid to essentially wall in the Texas market and make the SEC the only logical choice for them. The Texas market today is roughly the same size the entire SEC was prior to the 92 expansion.
This post was edited on 5/10/25 at 9:16 am
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News