Spartan4Life
| Favorite team: | Michigan State  |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 3 |
| Registered on: | 6/13/2012 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: College Football’s BCS Is Indecisive on New Postseason Format
Posted by Spartan4Life on 6/14/12 at 11:40 am
I think the title is misleading. Only the SEC is on record in saying conference titles shouldn't matter, while every other conference has said that conference championships should have weight in one way or another. That is the major sticking point.
1
re: How much are you willing to pay a month for the SEC network?
Posted by Spartan4Life on 6/14/12 at 10:41 am
quote:
Correct with the same setup you will see alot of Kentucky/Ole Miss on the SEC network as the required conf game pasty
Hence why the SEC needs to renegotiate to allow the SEC Network to get 1st or 2nd pick 2 to 3 times a year. Without that addition, the SEC Network will struggle.
re: How much are you willing to pay a month for the SEC network?
Posted by Spartan4Life on 6/14/12 at 8:47 am
For the SEC Network to be profitable, so many thing will have to happen.
#1, there needs to be a modified way to select games like the Big Ten Network and Pac 12 Network does. Some weeks, those networks has the top or #2 choice of games for football. In basketball, the conference retains games it wants for the network. You can't afford to give the network leftover games and expect systems to pick up on it (re: LHN) The BTN's rule in football is that each school must make a min. of 2 appearances, and one has to be a conference game.
#2, Because of #1, there has to be a mass appeal to put the network on systems. The disadvantage for the SEC is that many of their top markets (Dallas, Tampa, Atlanta, Miami, Kansas City, St. Louis) are shared with other conferences and will have to fight for market share. This is not the case with the Big Ten (Chicago, Cleveland, Indy) and the Pac 12 (LA, Phoenix, Bay Area).
#3, the SEC will have to fight to get it on basic cable to max its profits. It's harder then you think. Saying you will pay X amount of dollars is short sighted. The Big Ten is charging $1 in the Big Ten footprint, $.10 outside the 9 state footprint. The Pac 12 is charging similar. If the SEC goes anything above $1.50 a subscriber, it will not get picked up in many markets.
#1, there needs to be a modified way to select games like the Big Ten Network and Pac 12 Network does. Some weeks, those networks has the top or #2 choice of games for football. In basketball, the conference retains games it wants for the network. You can't afford to give the network leftover games and expect systems to pick up on it (re: LHN) The BTN's rule in football is that each school must make a min. of 2 appearances, and one has to be a conference game.
#2, Because of #1, there has to be a mass appeal to put the network on systems. The disadvantage for the SEC is that many of their top markets (Dallas, Tampa, Atlanta, Miami, Kansas City, St. Louis) are shared with other conferences and will have to fight for market share. This is not the case with the Big Ten (Chicago, Cleveland, Indy) and the Pac 12 (LA, Phoenix, Bay Area).
#3, the SEC will have to fight to get it on basic cable to max its profits. It's harder then you think. Saying you will pay X amount of dollars is short sighted. The Big Ten is charging $1 in the Big Ten footprint, $.10 outside the 9 state footprint. The Pac 12 is charging similar. If the SEC goes anything above $1.50 a subscriber, it will not get picked up in many markets.
Popular
13
