Started By
Message
re: Virginia to the SEC? What do they bring to the table?
Posted on 4/2/13 at 4:14 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Posted on 4/2/13 at 4:14 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
The realities of the market are that the producers are dictating the demand to the consumers. We shall want what they tell us to want. I'm sorry if you don't like me objecting to that notion.
Demonstrating your ignorance of the difference between customer and market and a total lack of understanding of demand is no way to win an economic argument.
quote:
justify Missouri's admission
I don't have to, nor have I attempted to, justify any such thing. The move to the SEC wasn't about academics for us (obviously).
You're being obtuse because you won't even admit to what the market realities are. Cable markets are driving this. You can say it's shortsighted to look at conference realignment on this basis and then you and I would agree.
You could say that college sports and its revenue models are broken and you and I would agree again.
And you could say that there will be a seismic shift in the way sports programming is delivered in the future that we can't even foresee now that will make all this shuffling moot and I'll agree again.
You can't repeat the same "I'm the customer and I'm the demand and I should be driving the revenue" argument ad nauseam and be taken seriously. I don't agree with stupidity.
1
Posted on 4/2/13 at 4:16 pm to McRebel42
quote:
part of me would like to see better teams as well
I'cve seen this leak out of various posters' keyboards. But it's like something we're not supposed to consider, and when we do, we're chastized for it.
quote:
BUT, the other part of me thinks the SEC is hard/good enough already and just wants more fodder to beat
- McRebel42, Ole Miss fan
Yes, I see your point.
quote:
my feelings and wants kind of align with what the SEC is trying to do as of now.
So would you be willing to see V-Tech and NC State enter the league? Appalacian State? Old Dominion? Marshall? How far are we willing to go?
Posted on 4/2/13 at 4:34 pm to the808bass
quote:
Demonstrating your ignorance of the difference between customer and market and a total lack of understanding of demand is no way to win an economic argument.
than why are the answers to these two questions different:
What team from your region would you like to see play regularly in your home stadium?
and
Who should the conference extend an invitation to?
quote:
You're being obtuse because you won't even admit to what the market realities are.
Quite the contrary. You pick an interesting example, cable 'markets'. Cable television is the epitome of the producer determining demand. this is happening in markets all over, the consumer is being shut out of the demand side of the equation and is being told what to demand.
Cable TV? Are you serious? 74 channels of shite, and one channel worth watching - until they see the popularity of that channel and decide to make it a seperate pay channel? There is very little consumer driven about cable TV.
quote:
You can say it's shortsighted to look at conference realignment on this basis and then you and I would agree.
Then we agree.
quote:
You could say that college sports and its revenue models are broken and you and I would agree again.
Then we agree again.
quote:
And you could say that there will be a seismic shift in the way sports programming is delivered in the future that we can't even foresee now that will make all this shuffling moot and I'll agree again.
And we agree yet again.
Why has it taken you so long to see my point?
quote:
You can't repeat the same "I'm the customer and I'm the demand and I should be driving the revenue" argument ad nauseam and be taken seriously. I don't agree with stupidity.
I'm not saying they necessarily have to cater to MY demand, but that the consumer, the one who watches the games for entertainment) doesn't seem to be taken into consideration.
Yes, a new state equals a bigger package for the SECN. But will people in those states really watch the SECN? Okay, so you can count every single TV in a state when considering a deal for the SECN, but what about what the real demand for the eyeballs of the consumers?
It seems like you're considering the cable TV compainies to be the consumers of the SECN and not the actual fans as the consumers.
So when we agree that the revenue models for college sports is broken, I contend that it is broken for the VERY reason I am stating - they are ignoring consumer demand. And as I state previously, this is happening (has BEEN happening) in markets all over the country.
"What's good for GM is good for America!" Making shitty cars is good for us, really? Okay, I'll buy one...?
Posted on 4/2/13 at 4:46 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
The issue is markets and the most profitable approach would be to add Virginia/Virginia Tech, U.N.C., Pitt, and Syracuse for the markets and then to either wait to see what shakes loose from the Big 12, or consolidate by taking the only two teams who fit an SEC profile thereby monopolizing the brand in the Southeast. Those two of course would be Clemson and Florida State. 4 five team divisions would work quite nicely.
The Big 10 could move South with Duke, Georgia Tech, Virginia/Virginia Tech (they'll soon qualify for AAU consideration), and Miami. That would leave them two spots for Kansas and Oklahoma.
The PAC can take the rest. If we move to three 20 team conferences the payout for each of the 60 teams goes up 2 million per year without footprint additions even being figured in. It comes from the elimination of the 4th split on playoff money. Where I come from they call that incentive for the elimination of both the ACC and Big 12.
The Big 10 could move South with Duke, Georgia Tech, Virginia/Virginia Tech (they'll soon qualify for AAU consideration), and Miami. That would leave them two spots for Kansas and Oklahoma.
The PAC can take the rest. If we move to three 20 team conferences the payout for each of the 60 teams goes up 2 million per year without footprint additions even being figured in. It comes from the elimination of the 4th split on playoff money. Where I come from they call that incentive for the elimination of both the ACC and Big 12.
Posted on 4/2/13 at 4:55 pm to BigD Ag
quote:
Literally has everything you want.
There's no way you can say that without knowing what EVERYONE else wants first.
What if someone wants a all women's school, or a community college. Not so literal then.
Posted on 4/2/13 at 5:00 pm to LiterallyPolice
quote:
LiterallyPolice
Posted on 4/2/13 at 5:15 pm to JRsec
Southern Conference FTW
Posted on 4/2/13 at 5:17 pm to UFownstSECsince1950
UVA in the sec works for me
Offer more already than:
Missouri
Ole miss
Miss st
Arky
Sorry to those fans but its a fact
Offer more already than:
Missouri
Ole miss
Miss st
Arky
Sorry to those fans but its a fact
Posted on 4/2/13 at 5:24 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
So would you be willing to see V-Tech and NC State enter the league? Appalacian State? Old Dominion? Marshall? How far are we willing to go?
ABSOLUTELY NO FURTHER SOUTH THAN VaTech & NCState.
Ideally I'd want UVA & UNC but I'd settle for ^^that^^.
Posted on 4/2/13 at 5:30 pm to danfraz
quote:
UVA in the sec works for me
Offer more already than:
Missouri
Ole miss
Miss st
Arky
Sorry to those fans but its a fact
False without Ole Miss ... LSU & Alabama would be the racists
Posted on 4/2/13 at 5:32 pm to McRebel42
quote:
McRebel42
Quality sig
Posted on 4/2/13 at 5:49 pm to NekiEcko
quote:For me, I'd prefer to stay in the ACC and maintain the traditional rivalries both in the major sports and the non-revenue sports. Should the ACC dissolve, I think it'd be much more fun to be in the SEC, but I doubt UVA would even consider it without UNC coming as well. We're committed to always being an academic school first and associating predominately with schools that are similarly oriented. We can claim that in the ACC with Duke, UNC, GA Tech, Wake Forest, etc. and we could claim it in the Big Ten with Michigan, Northwestern, Wisconsin and even IU, Illinois, Iowa and Purdue to an extent. With the SEC, the draw will be tougher with only Vandy as the national academic name, A&M and Mizzou as solid schools with average prestige, and UGA and UF still trying to establish themselves as truly elite state schools.
But I have a question for VA fans here, what is the feeling that Virginia wants to go to B1G, Stay in ACC or go to SEC?
Posted on 4/2/13 at 6:02 pm to Crowknowsbest
Posted on 4/2/13 at 6:29 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
So when we agree that the revenue models for college sports is broken, I contend that it is broken for the VERY reason I am stating - they are ignoring consumer demand. And as I state previously, this is happening (has BEEN happening) in markets all over the country.
No. It's broken because it's not working.
When a university has $150M of "revenue" of which 20% is made of donations and which still generates 0 "profit" and whatever money is generated is simply recycled as part of an arms race to get bigger or better, college sports revenue is broken.
When 95% of colleges/universities lose money on sports in an effort to become part of the those elite teams which still lose money but have more visibility, college sports revenue is broken.
It didn't take me any time to agree with some of your points, especially as you never delineated the points I made. You agreed with me.
And your responses sound likr the responses of the line worker who is mad that management never listens to his ideas. That's why you're not in charge.
Cable TV is still susceptible to market demands. The B1G network wasn't initially adopted by cable networks until customer demand in market areas drove the subscriptions.
Posted on 4/2/13 at 6:44 pm to the808bass
quote:
And your responses sound likr the responses of the line worker who is mad that management never listens to his ideas. That's why you're not in charge.
Or like a fan who sees people say things like, "I'd like to see [insert teams] join the league, but that'll never happen" and points out that their opinion should be valid, only to be told I don't understand how the system works - over and over again. Because that's a lot closer to the situation than your ridiculous analogy.
Forgive me for taking it out on you, but I generally stay out of these threads because after 20 years of telling people that their opinions should matter, I've tired of noobs telling me that I just don't understand.
So yeah, let's bring Rutgers and NC State into the league just because the numbers add up, and let's ignore the fact that the fans don't really care to watch them play. Awesome.
Posted on 4/2/13 at 7:09 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
So yeah, let's bring Rutgers and NC State into the league just because the numbers add up, and let's ignore the fact that the fans don't really care to watch them play. Awesome.
That's a lovely man constructed of dried grass. You should frame it up.
And again, the target market for a North Carolina team is not LSU fans interested in The Wolfpack. It's Wolfpack fans. Surely you're not so stupid as to misunderstand that.
Restating your pitiful argument in a hundred different iterations, while avoiding this central fact just makes you look like a curmudgeon.
Posted on 4/2/13 at 7:18 pm to Al Bundy Bulldog
Virginia should stay where they are we dont need to make more mistakes!
Posted on 4/2/13 at 7:52 pm to Ray Zorback
I really like this signature.
Can I use it too McRebel?
Also why is UF on that??!?!
Can I use it too McRebel?
Also why is UF on that??!?!
Posted on 4/2/13 at 7:54 pm to Al Bundy Bulldog
quote:
Other than yhe DC TV market
I know the deal with the TV markets you only get the count the POPULATION in your state in terms of $$$$$. That's what the conferences get paid for in TV contracts, the subscribers in the state.
Don't know if DC would be included with VA, MD, etc...
Posted on 4/2/13 at 7:55 pm to I Bleed Garnet
and you forgot arkansas. we have the nicest campus in the SEC
Page 9 of 11
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News