UGA pushing SEC expansion?

[NaturalStateReb]

ok.  do the math on tv hh per state ( this actually makes it pretty to easy to see why slive added TX & MO):

State.TV HH...........Cable HH
TX     9,135,240      4,686,200
FL      7,491,920      5,240,940
NC     3,767,680      1,949,680
GA     3,538,390      1,924,420
VA     3,021,780      1,960,070
TN     2,421,140      1,316,180
MO     2,285,300        991,990
AL      1,815,840        889,070
SC      1,794,990        914,640
KY      1,649,100        826,740
OK      1,443,130        621,920
AR       1,101,200        461,730
MS       1,073,770        422,570

if ESPN & SEC Net can charge so much per TV HH or Cable HH, where are they going to expand to?

Add OU & Okie State = +1,443,130 TV HH
Add NC State or ECU & VA Tech = +(3,767,680+3,021,780) = 6,789,460 TV HH

or over 4x the potential viewers/revenue

4 X 0 = 0, though.  If you can't get anyone pried out of the ACC, it doesn't really matter how many people live in NC or VA.  Those areas aren't available options if you can't get ACC schools.  ECU isn't going to even guarantee statewide interest, let alone statewide in-footprint rates. 

This also assumes that the next round of realignment, assuming that there is another round, is going to be about cable subscribers.  No one's really sure what the media future holds, but it's probably going to involve more cord-cutting and a la carte cable offerings.  If that's the case, then a network is going to have to offer compelling content in order to get people to subscribe and watch.  Footprint and carriage rates might not be as important as it was last time.  If content is king, then an OU/OSU combination might make a lot of sense.

[Inhogswetrust]

What is your opinion on quadruple redundancy?  Is that enough?

He probably thinks quadruple redundancy is......................redundant.

[GuvHog]

There's this word "negotiation".........................How do you think some teams have already been able to move.

The ACC won't negotiate. The schools that want to leave would have to go to court to challenge the agreement they signed and including appeals, that might take years. If the ACC was willing to allow schools to leave the conference they wouldn't have made it extremely difficult for a school to do so.

[Inhogswetrust]

The ACC won't negotiate. The schools that want to leave would have to go to court to challenge the agreement they signed and including appeals, that might take years. If the ACC was willing to allow schools to leave the conference they wouldn't have made it extremely difficult for a school to do so.

Sometimes when "courts" get involved that is when the negotiation takes place and gets very serious. Just out of curiosity how are you such an ACC conference office and contract export? All conferences have some degree of difficulty to leave Heck the SEC's is perhaps the easiest to leave from what we've all read. The ACC DID in fact let Maryland leave after negotiating. That's when they tried to make it more difficult. That doesn't mean they made it impossible. If I know anything about when lawyers get involved it is that 99% of them will negotiate and advise their clients to do so.

[GuvHog]

Sometimes when "courts" get involved that is when the negotiation takes place and gets very serious. Just out of curiosity how are you such an ACC conference office and contract export? All conferences have some degree of difficulty to leave Heck the SEC's is perhaps the easiest to leave from what we've all read. The ACC DID in fact let Maryland leave after negotiating. That's when they tried to make it more difficult. That doesn't mean they made it impossible. If I know anything about when lawyers get involved it is that 99% of them will negotiate and advise their clients to do so.

Maryland didn't sign the agreement and left before the agreement took effect. That's why they had no problem leaving. Had they signed the agreement, they very likely would still be in the ACC. Those conference agreements are there for a reason and it's to make it as difficult as possible for schools to leave.

[Inhogswetrust]

Maryland didn't sign the agreement and left before the agreement took effect. That's why they had no problem leaving. Had they signed the agreement, they very likely would still be in the ACC. Those conference agreements are there for a reason and it's to make it as difficult as possible for schools to leave.

True. However there were STILL negotiations about the terms and payout for Maryland to leave. It is difficult to leave conferences but it isn't impossible. You still haven't said why you are such an ACC expert....................

[GuvHog]

True. However there were STILL negotiations about the terms and payout for Maryland to leave. It is difficult to leave conferences but it isn't impossible. You still haven't said why you are such an ACC expert....................

I'm not, It's common knowledge that the ACC agreement is much more stringent than the Big 12 agreement so it would be easier and far less expensive to go after Big 12 teams.

[Mick Hogger]

With the way people are leaving cable and satellite companies, will number of viewers in any state matter in 10 years? What will it matter if everything goes to subscription mode? Right now on Sling TV, you pay the same amount for SEC Network no matter where you live.

[hobhog]

How about GA Tech? Bet UGA wouldnt much care for that!

Hell no to OU and OSU. We benefit from being the western border of SEC and dont need those guys horning in on our conference prestige....

[Inhogswetrust]

I'm not, It's common knowledge that the ACC agreement is much more stringent than the Big 12 agreement so it would be easier and far less expensive to go after Big 12 teams.

OR perhaps it is because the little 12 has shown to be more vulnerable by LOSING FOUR teams already with the ACC only losing one. BOTH have redone their conferences agreements to make it more difficult is the common knowledge. Therefore go after the teams that would help your conference the most and that is the east coast of NC and/or VA. IF that is not viable after trying really hard then go to the second option and that is OK. Even IF you are able to get one of the eastern teams then you only need and should go after one team in OK that would help you and that is only OU. It's like playing cards.........no need to double down when you don't have to or need to.

[Inhogswetrust]

With the way people are leaving cable and satellite companies, will number of viewers in any state matter in 10 years? What will it matter if everything goes to subscription mode? Right now on Sling TV, you pay the same amount for SEC Network no matter where you live.

I just cut the cord last week and we are planning to get Sling next month when the season really gets started in earnest. That being said the number of people still do matter. It's just going to be different in to how they watch for those like us. It's like toilet paper.....you'll sell more where there is more people no matter what store they buy it at.

[uams1989]

I agree with a lot of the comments regarding having to bring OSU with OU but that defeats the whole purpose.

The SEC would pick up Oklahoma as a new TV market but we'd have to divide the pot by 2 additional teams. Pick two geographically separate markets and its 1:1. Take the Sooners and Cowboys and its 1:2.

I think OU would be a strong addition but taking OSU as well would be getting for one and paying for 2.

BTW, any serious talk about ECU is a joke!

[nwahogfan1]

My favorites are get one from Virginia and one from North Carolina and tell zero u they had their chance.

Totally agree with you.  We need to add the TV markets of North Carolina and Virginia because of population in those areas..  I would love to steal from one of the Power conferences but most of those conferences have huge exit fines that would have to be paid so looking for ECU and NC-Charlotte is not a bad idea.   The big guys in the know will have to figure which teams will add the  biggest TV audience which adds TV revenue.   

What team outside a power conference would be best to talk to in Virginia?  Any ideas???

[nwahogfan1]

I agree with a lot of the comments regarding having to bring OSU with OU but that defeats the whole purpose.

BTW, any serious talk about ECU is a joke!

Why is ECU a joke? They have a good program but expansion is all about TV sets and revenue added.   If ECU joined the SEC how many TVs would we add?   I am just asking?   Would ECU pick up lots more TV audience if they joined the SEC?  Like I said just asking.

[nwahogfan1]

Would adding West Virginia help us??  Would they add a bigger audience than a ECU?  I think they would love to jump ship?

Florida has lots of TV sets so would it help to add another Florida school?

Would UF go along with that??

[nwahogfan1]

Oklahoma State is at least solid in football, occasionally much better than solid.  They have a history of success in both basketball and baseball if that matters to anyone.  They have upgraded their facilities.  Just do it.

It is all about money and TV revenue.  OSU and OU audience over lap and would be dividing their TV revenue in half.  I say bring in the one that gives us the most TV exposure money and that would be obviously be OU, but I dont see it happening.

I can see going into the NC and Virginia TV markets though.

[nwahogfan1]

Talking about TV revenue and exposure why not move into Ohio and add Cincinnati?   they are just down the road from big blue.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

It is all about money and TV revenue.  OSU and OU audience over lap and would be dividing their TV revenue in half.  I say bring in the one that gives us the most TV exposure money and that would be obviously be OU, but I dont see it happening.

I can see going into the NC and Virginia TV markets though.

Overlapping is not a big deal and the networks could care less if Family #1 watches the OU game and then turns around and watches the OSU game as well. That's just viewership, whether it is in Oklahoma, Texas or California. I'll say it again, too many of you get overly focused on in-state T.V. markets when that isn't the singular draw at all. Oklahoma as an example, is one of the most watched teams in the nation whenever they play and that has less to do with the OKC and Tulsa t.v. markets than their national draw when they play. That is a marketable product that increases the value of any conference, just from a business standpoint.

And again, believe it or not Okla State is as big or bigger of a t.v. draw on a national basis when they play, as is Missouri. So we lose nothing and in fact gain greater value by the addition of the two. Additionally, by their addition, you move Alabama and Auburn to the East and the West, while still very difficult, becomes just a tad easier to win.

[chaz]

I would start with NC State, then ECU and last would be Wake. But, here we go again adding a "lesser team to the East and a real competitor to the West!!

We should not kid ourselves, OU would come in and be competitive from day 1.

[Inhogswetrust]

Totally agree with you.  We need to add the TV markets of North Carolina and Virginia because of population in those areas..  I would love to steal from one of the Power conferences but most of those conferences have huge exit fines that would have to be paid so looking for ECU and NC-Charlotte is not a bad idea.   The big guys in the know will have to figure which teams will add the  biggest TV audience which adds TV revenue.   

What team outside a power conference would be best to talk to in Virginia?  Any ideas???

Having lived and worked in Virginia the most followed school in the state is VT not UVA. Plus it is more "like" an SEC school than UVA.

[GuvHog]

Overlapping is not a big deal and the networks could care less if Family #1 watches the OU game and then turns around and watches the OSU game as well. That's just viewership, whether it is in Oklahoma, Texas or California. I'll say it again, too many of you get overly focused on in-state T.V. markets when that isn't the singular draw at all. Oklahoma as an example, is one of the most watched teams in the nation whenever they play and that has less to do with the OKC and Tulsa t.v. markets than their national draw when they play. That is a marketable product that increases the value of any conference, just from a business standpoint.

And again, believe it or not Okla State is as big or bigger of a t.v. draw on a national basis when they play, as is Missouri. So we lose nothing and in fact gain greater value by the addition of the two. Additionally, by their addition, you move Alabama and Auburn to the East and the West, while still very difficult, becomes just a tad easier to win.

Well said Muskogee, very well said.

[DoctorSusscrofa]

I don't think the Crimson Tide will EVER get moved to the East Division for any reason.  I just don't think the conference will put Georgia, Florida, Auburn and Bama in the same division.  LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, and TAMU are teams that will normally only pop up and be good enough to win a division or the SEC occasionally. Georgia and Floriday are the kind of teams that (if they get back on a roll) have the stature, history, talent pool, and money to lock other teams out of the top 2.  Bama is that type of team too. If you put all three of them in the same division and add Auburn, you'd likely never see S Carolina, Tenner, Kentucky, Mizzou (if still in East) or Vandy for decades at a time. Without adding Bama - those other teams have a chance to shine in the gaps that Georgia and Florida occasionally have.  You might see Mizzou still win occasionally or SCarolina/Tenner place second.  You won't see that if Bama moves.  The final rankings for the East will always be Bama and GA/FL/AU or GA/FL/AU and Bama. And even Bama may not like that because being in the West, Bama always knows they've got a good chance of winning the division 65% if the time.  In a loaded East, they probably finish top 2 or 3 every year, but may only win the division 40-45% of the time.

[GuvHog]

I don't think the Crimson Tide will EVER get moved to the East Division for any reason.  I just don't think the conference will put Georgia, Florida, Auburn and Bama in the same division.  LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, and TAMU are teams that will normally only pop up and be good enough to win a division or the SEC occasionally. Georgia and Floriday are the kind of teams that (if they get back on a roll) have the stature, history, talent pool, and money to lock other teams out of the top 2.  Bama is that type of team too. If you put all three of them in the same division and add Auburn, you'd likely never see S Carolina, Tenner, Kentucky, Mizzou (if still in East) or Vandy for decades at a time. Without adding Bama - those other teams have a chance to shine in the gaps that Georgia and Florida occasionally have.  You might see Mizzou still win occasionally or SCarolina/Tenner place second.  You won't see that if Bama moves.  The final rankings for the East will always be Bama and GA/FL/AU or GA/FL/AU and Bama. And even Bama may not like that because being in the West, Bama always knows they've got a good chance of winning the division 65% if the time.  In a loaded East, they probably finish top 2 or 3 every year, but may only win the division 40-45% of the time.

Both Alabama and Auburn have indicated that they are willing to move to the East if the need arises as long as both move at the same time.

[DoctorSusscrofa]

Both Alabama and Auburn have indicated that they are willing to move to the East if the need arises as long as both move at the same time.

I still don't think it will happen, due to the consequences for Tenner, Kentucky, SCarolina, and Vandy.  The current lineup gives them a chance to place 2nd or 3rd. Adding Bama likely ends that.

[GuvHog]

I still don't think it will happen, due to the consequences for Tenner, Kentucky, SCarolina, and Vandy.  The current lineup gives them a chance to place 2nd or 3rd. Adding Bama likely ends that.

That decision won't be made by Vandy, Tennessee, or South Carolina, it will be made by the SEC home office.

[Inhogswetrust]

That decision won't be made by Vandy, Tennessee, or South Carolina, it will be made by the SEC home office.

Probably made by a vote of the members instead of some admins at the conference office. It's not a dictatorship.

[Hawghiggs]

I don't think the Crimson Tide will EVER get moved to the East Division for any reason.  I just don't think the conference will put Georgia, Florida, Auburn and Bama in the same division.  LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, and TAMU are teams that will normally only pop up and be good enough to win a division or the SEC occasionally. Georgia and Floriday are the kind of teams that (if they get back on a roll) have the stature, history, talent pool, and money to lock other teams out of the top 2.  Bama is that type of team too. If you put all three of them in the same division and add Auburn, you'd likely never see S Carolina, Tenner, Kentucky, Mizzou (if still in East) or Vandy for decades at a time. Without adding Bama - those other teams have a chance to shine in the gaps that Georgia and Florida occasionally have.  You might see Mizzou still win occasionally or SCarolina/Tenner place second.  You won't see that if Bama moves.  The final rankings for the East will always be Bama and GA/FL/AU or GA/FL/AU and Bama. And even Bama may not like that because being in the West, Bama always knows they've got a good chance of winning the division 65% if the time.  In a loaded East, they probably finish top 2 or 3 every year, but may only win the division 40-45% of the time.

You forget that those universities get to charge an enormous price for regular season tickets. Plus it would bring back rivalries that east division hasn't had in a while.

[hogcard1964]

I don't think the Crimson Tide will EVER get moved to the East Division for any reason.  I just don't think the conference will put Georgia, Florida, Auburn and Bama in the same division.  LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, and TAMU are teams that will normally only pop up and be good enough to win a division or the SEC occasionally. Georgia and Floriday are the kind of teams that (if they get back on a roll) have the stature, history, talent pool, and money to lock other teams out of the top 2.  Bama is that type of team too. If you put all three of them in the same division and add Auburn, you'd likely never see S Carolina, Tenner, Kentucky, Mizzou (if still in East) or Vandy for decades at a time. Without adding Bama - those other teams have a chance to shine in the gaps that Georgia and Florida occasionally have.  You might see Mizzou still win occasionally or SCarolina/Tenner place second.  You won't see that if Bama moves.  The final rankings for the East will always be Bama and GA/FL/AU or GA/FL/AU and Bama. And even Bama may not like that because being in the West, Bama always knows they've got a good chance of winning the division 65% if the time.  In a loaded East, they probably finish top 2 or 3 every year, but may only win the division 40-45% of the time.

Florida has a pretty similar overall prestige factor that Arkansas does.  Prior to the 90's they were pretty up and down.

[hawgwash]

It would be fun to get OU but I think the West would be less competitive.  The move would provide the opportunity for Bama and Auburn to move East and Mizzou West.  Not saying that neither OU nor Mizzou is competitive, they are.  Just referring to the sum of the parts.

Boar, I'm not following your logic here.  How does adding two teams, one clearly East (Eastern Carolina) and one clearly West (Oklahoma) change the dynamics regarding Alabama and Auburn moving to the East and Mizzou to the West?  Looks like those moves could happen just as easily today as they could if Eastern Carolina and Oklahoma were added.  Of course, either way another team would also have to move from East to West along with Mizzou.

[GuvHog]

Boar, I'm not following your logic here.  How does adding two teams, one clearly East (Eastern Carolina) and one clearly West (Oklahoma) change the dynamics regarding Alabama and Auburn moving to the East and Mizzou to the West?  Looks like those moves could happen just as easily today as they could if Eastern Carolina and Oklahoma were added.  Of course, either way another team would also have to move from East to West along with Mizzou.

If the SEC added one team to the east and one team to the west then moved Missouri to the west only one of the two Alabama schools would have to move to the East. One won't go without the other so that won't work.

[hawgwash]

If the SEC added one team to the east and one team to the west then moved Missouri to the west only one of the two Alabama schools would have to move to the East. One won't go without the other so that won't work.

Correct.  And that's the same situation you have today, without adding a new team to the East and a new team to the West.  That was my point.

[Hawghiggs]

Correct.  And that's the same situation you have today, without adding a new team to the East and a new team to the West.  That was my point.

That's why we really need to add two in the west. So we can punt the Bama schools east. Oklahoma might be as good as Alabama. But Okie state is nowhere near as good as Auburn.

[Augustus]

With going to 16 teams probably being the max number...  and the SEC Network wanting to maximize revenue based on their payouts for in-state TV markets vs out-of-state TV markets...

It makes no sense to get to 16 teams, by adding 2 teams from the same state (Oklahoma).  The SEC Network actually loses money doing that.

So, adding OU and OSU isn't going to happen.

Just looking at TV Markets & Population, Sankey will want to add 1 school from 2 of the following 3 states: Oklahoma, Virginia, and North Carolina.

North Carolina, based on Population & Media Markets, would be a shoo-in, but the question becomes: which school?
Duke
UNC
NC State

Personally, I like Duke.  They've improved as a football program, and instantly adds clout to SEC Basketball.  But, their stadium holds a laughable 33K.  NC State would be a better "football focused" pick, but Duke's Basketball clout still makes them an SEC contender, IMO.

So... the last spot comes down to state of Virginia (Virginia, Va Tech) vs state of Oklahoma (OU, OSU). 

Virginia has more than double the Population of Oklahoma, and has 4 of top 100 media markets. Oklahoma has only 2 of the top 100 media markets. And... Norfolk, VA is ranked higher (42) than OKC (44), Richmond (57) is ranked higher than Tulsa (60)

It makes more sense to take a school from Virginia.  Virginia or Va Tech, flip a coin I guess... VaTech's stadium already holds 65K, Virginia's stadium holds 61K. Which is as much if not more than Ole Miss or Miss State's stadiums.

If we added: Duke & Va Tech, that allows the SEC Network to expand it's footprint to the largest potential markets (which means the most potential $$$ for all of the SEC member schools).

Put Duke and Va Tech in the East, move Mizzou & Vandy to the West.  Geographically, that makes the most sense... and from strength of Division schedule (across all sports), it's in the ballpark as well.

Edit: in that scenario, moving Mizzou to the West does make the SEC West division football that much harder... but certainly not as hard as the SEC West would be if we added OU to the West.

[Hawghiggs]

With going to 16 teams probably being the max number...  and the SEC Network wanting to maximize revenue based on their payouts for in-state TV markets vs out-of-state TV markets...

It makes no sense to get to 16 teams, by adding 2 teams from the same state (Oklahoma).  The SEC Network actually loses money doing that.

So, adding OU and OSU isn't going to happen.

Just looking at TV Markets & Population, Sankey will want to add 1 school from 2 of the following 3 states: Oklahoma, Virginia, and North Carolina.

North Carolina, based on Population & Media Markets, would be a shoo-in, but the question becomes: which school?
Duke
UNC
NC State

Personally, I like Duke.  They've improved as a football program, and instantly adds clout to SEC Basketball.  But, their stadium holds a laughable 33K.  NC State would be a better "football focused" pick, but Duke's Basketball clout still makes them an SEC contender, IMO.

So... the last spot comes down to state of Virginia (Virginia, Va Tech) vs state of Oklahoma (OU, OSU). 

Virginia has more than double the Population of Oklahoma, and has 4 of top 100 media markets. Oklahoma has only 2 of the top 100 media markets. And... Norfolk, VA is ranked higher (42) than OKC (44), Richmond (57) is ranked higher than Tulsa (60)

It makes more sense to take a school from Virginia.  Virginia or Va Tech, flip a coin I guess... VaTech's stadium already holds 65K, Virginia's stadium holds 61K. Which is as much if not more than Ole Miss or Miss State's stadiums.

If we added: Duke & Va Tech, that allows the SEC Network to expand it's footprint to the largest potential markets (which means the most potential $$$ for all of the SEC member schools).

Put Duke and Va Tech in the East, move Mizzou & Vandy to the West.  Geographically, that makes the most sense... and from strength of Division schedule (across all sports), it's in the ballpark as well.

Edit: in that scenario, moving Mizzou to the West does make the SEC West division football that much harder... but certainly not as hard as the SEC West would be if we added OU to the West.

This all sounds good and has been recommended just about every time. The real problem with this is ESPN. ESPN already owns the rights to all of the ACC and they own all the rights to the SEC except CBS game of the week. ESPN is currently working on an ACC network. If they are doing that. Why would they do anything to hurt themselves? The answer is they simply won't and we will need them to be willing to renegotiate contracts to make the money work.

When it comes down to it. The SEC is sorta limited to who they can expand with.  The list is really ECU and several Big 12 programs. Oklahoma is the prize and should be. Adding them is like adding college football royalty.  So now its down to 5 programs from the Big 12. Iowa state is a great academic university with a loyal fanbase. But its a small state and not exactly south. Kansas is closer and ESPN owns the tier 3 rights to the University. Good academic school and a smaller state. West Virginia, small state and very poor academics. Texas is everything you would want and everything you wouldn't want as a conference member.  The last is Oklahoma state. Good school in a small state that we would already have a program from. But including them might be the only way to get the Sooners.

[GuvHog]

Correct.  And that's the same situation you have today, without adding a new team to the East and a new team to the West.  That was my point.

No it isn't. If the SEC adds one team to each Division then moves Missouri to the west, it would leave the East with only 7 schools while the West would have 9 schools.

[OklaU]

OU will not go to the SEC (or any conference) without Oklahoma State OR Texas.  They are not going to get away from playing the Red River (whatever it is now) and Bedlam.  With that said, they are not going to play both in non-conference play while having an SEC schedule - so one or the other will have to come in order to see both of those games continue.

[atekido]

More rumors of OU going to the Big 10 than the SEC. 

[RebelAt]

ECU would be a ridiculous addition to the conference.  If any North Carolina school were to be added, it'd have to be State or UNC (no thanks, Duke!).

[Pig in the Pokey]

I'm not, It's common knowledge that the ACC agreement is much more stringent than the Big 12 agreement so it would be easier and far less expensive to go after Big 12 teams.

not if 4 times the revenue caim from adding eastern teams. screw oklahoma. they don't bring the eyeballs to the table. that buyout for the ACC wouldn't stop a thing. there's this little thing called return on investment to consider.

[GuvHog]

not if 4 times the revenue caim from adding eastern teams. screw oklahoma. they don't bring the eyeballs to the table. that buyout for the ACC wouldn't stop a thing. there's this little thing called return on investment to consider.

Read MuskogeeHogFan's posts in this thread. It isn't all about television sets and viewers. Besides, the SEC Network is pretty well nationwide anyway.

[Hogwild]

Maryland didn't sign the agreement and left before the agreement took effect. That's why they had no problem leaving. Had they signed the agreement, they very likely would still be in the ACC. Those conference agreements are there for a reason and it's to make it as difficult as possible for schools to leave.

Maryland didn't sign and it still cost them $31.5 million to leave, if a school signed the newest agreement it will cost them $52 million to leave the ACC.

How about GA Tech?

Not a chance, they were in  and left on their own accord.

[HogBreath]

OU will not go to the SEC (or any conference) without Oklahoma State OR Texas.  They are not going to get away from playing the Red River (whatever it is now) and Bedlam.  With that said, they are not going to play both in non-conference play while having an SEC schedule - so one or the other will have to come in order to see both of those games continue.

Haha..yeah right..put OU in the SEC west and you better get ready for about 8-9 weeks each season of ..BEDLAM, you won't be in Kansas any more, Okie.

[Hogwild]

Read MuskogeeHogFan's posts in this thread. It isn't all about television sets and viewers. Besides, the SEC Network is pretty well nationwide anyway.

The SEC network is available on the International Space Station (NASA pays the bill) But it should be noted that the provider pays $1.30 per-subscriber per month in SEC markets, but between a dime and a quarter in non-SEC markets. So adding a team like Missouri provides additional income ($1+) from every subscriber from Kansas City to St. Louis.

That's why the Big Ten added Rutgers. Most popular draw in college football biggest market, plus all the subscribers in New Jersey & NY.

[hawgXi]

Read MuskogeeHogFan's posts in this thread. It isn't all about television sets and viewers. Besides, the SEC Network is pretty well nationwide anyway.

sorry to disagree with you guv & the okie from muskogee.

there is a reason that we are paying $3.00 to $5.00 or more for a beer today vs. 50 cents to $1.00 before the CFA broke off from the NCAA football telecast package. & formed their own programming entity.

there is a reason why cable bills went from 19.95/month to 50-100/month.

network & cable providers have to show bud & miller that they have a quantifiable number of tv households & viewers to base their commercial charges rate.

this is not based on who has a hot hand this season, nor who has a good match up this weekend. 

it is based on number of tv or cable tv household subscribers that networks or ESPN can deliver to advertisers like bud or miller.

yes, sure viewers might like to watch the bedlam series between OU & OSU, but that can't justify charging cable customers $1.00/month for the ESPN/SEC sports package nationally every month of every year for that one game.

otoh, the tv/cable content providers can show potential advertisers how many exposures they can get from the number of TV hh or cable subscribers in any given market area for an SEC package that can guarantee to be in XXX household every game day.

just "good games" have no objective way of quantifying how much the entertainment provider can expose to the commercial sponsor.

bottom line is NC>VA>OK in viewers = more potential SALES of products.

everybody makes more money with more potential views.

we pay for it all with higher beer prices because commercials cost more for more viewers.

[Murr]

If the writer is merely looking to find a footprint in N. Carolina, why not North Carolina A&T or Appalachian State? I'm kidding obviously, but it might make the SEC look somewhat desperate to invite the likes of E. Carolina. I think that would be a bit of a stretch. Is that the best that the SEC can do for the East Division and the conference as a whole?

As for the West side, I know it has been stated repeatedly but I don't think you are going to see Oklahoma being allowed (state politics) to leave Oklahoma State behind holding the bag. Oklahoma's departure wouldn't have to change their annual grudge match with Texas in Dallas each year, but that departure would probably end the annual Bedlam Game with Okla State and within Oklahoma that is a pretty big and important game each year. If Oklahoma brought Oklahoma State with them to the SEC, they could keep both of these games in their scheduling and state politics would likely approve such a move.

If OU calls the SEC Commish and says we want in, then OU would follow the same process Texas A&M and Missouri had to follow in order to join the SEC; separate themselves from the B12 before applying to join the SEC.  This is all for legal purposes to keep the SEC from getting sued by B12 members for damages occured during this realignment process. 

The debate becomes would OU, or any other program that has signed a Grant of Rights with their original conference, be able to bring their TV rights with them?  Each conference's GOR is supposedly different and should have different termination clauses that would be argued in court.  Exit fees from a conference are different from a GOR as the conference's own by-laws must clearly state what its member have previously agreed upon the terms the exit should be.

Anyway, if OU comes without OSU, I think the SEC looks to Virginia Tech or NC State as realistic schools to round up with to 16 members assuming pie in the sky additions UNC and Tejas are out of the question.

[Murr]

The SEC network is available on the International Space Station (NASA pays the bill) But it should be noted that the provider pays $1.30 per-subscriber per month in SEC markets, but between a dime and a quarter in non-SEC markets. So adding a team like Missouri provides additional income ($1+) from every subscriber from Kansas City to St. Louis.

That's why the Big Ten added Rutgers. Most popular draw in college football biggest market, plus all the subscribers in New Jersey & NY.

Adding cable boxes is one way to add value, but you don't want to dilute your product to the point of adding worthless filler.  Adding a blue blood like OU would be a great content multiplier that might actually get CBS to up it's tier one contract to increase the payouts per team as opposed to increasing the contract to maintain the previous per team payout with two new members as when we added A&M and Mizzou.

[rzrbackrob]

When the next phase of expansion hits, the SEC will only be looking to expand in North Carolina and Virginia and they will not go further down the food chain than NCST and VT. The only way that Oklahoma gets in is if the SEC expands past 16 and OKST gets left behind.

[Pig in the Pokey]

Haha..yeah right..put OU in the SEC west and you better get ready for about 8-9 weeks each season of ..BEDLAM, you won't be in Kansas any more, Okie.

from an anti-fan's perspective I would LOVE to see the gooners play an SEC west schedule.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

If OU calls the SEC Commish and says we want in, then OU would follow the same process Texas A&M and Missouri had to follow in order to join the SEC; separate themselves from the B12 before applying to join the SEC.  This is all for legal purposes to keep the SEC from getting sued by B12 members for damages occured during this realignment process. 

The debate becomes would OU, or any other program that has signed a Grant of Rights with their original conference, be able to bring their TV rights with them?  Each conference's GOR is supposedly different and should have different termination clauses that would be argued in court.  Exit fees from a conference are different from a GOR as the conference's own by-laws must clearly state what its member have previously agreed upon the terms the exit should be.

Anyway, if OU comes without OSU, I think the SEC looks to Virginia Tech or NC State as realistic schools to round up with to 16 members assuming pie in the sky additions UNC and Tejas are out of the question.

Problem is, Oklahoma (and possibly Okla State) cannot follow the same line that A&M and Missouri did because they exited prior to signing of the current Big 12 GOR's Agreement which presents entirely different circumstances. The GOR's and T.V. Rights aren't separate issues, they are a part of the singular issue that relates to the GOR's Agreement. That is the fly in the ointment. The value of the team (or teams) that a conference wants to add is in the television rights and in the absence of that being able to be transferred to the receiving conference, there is little value to be found. And what conference (especially the Big 12) is going to give up their television rights to a member who is departing for another conference? I would think that a pretty big buy out would be involved and especially more so if you are talking about teams like Oklahoma.

[OklaU]

Haha..yeah right..put OU in the SEC west and you better get ready for about 8-9 weeks each season of ..BEDLAM, you won't be in Kansas any more, Okie.

If you don't think OU will be competitive in the SEC, you're kidding yourself.