B12 expansion

[Wild Turkey]

Not sure why people say this. This akin to saying Purdue covers Indiana, so no need for Notre Dame.

Let me explain it:

1. If you add Texas then you can probably add more money from the CBS deal but only to cover pretty much what the other teams are getting now.
2. For the SEC network you are already getting premium pricing for the state of Texas so you actually dilute what will be paid out per team.

Adding another team from an existing state will take revenue from the other teams.

 

[Codaxx]

Let me explain it:

1. If you add Texas then you can probably add more money from the CBS deal but only to cover pretty much what the other teams are getting now.
2. For the SEC network you are already getting premium pricing for the state of Texas so you actually dilute what will be paid out per team.

Adding another team from an existing state will take revenue from the other teams.

There is a reason ND can do whatever it wants and get a sweet heart deal from the ACC, but Ball State can not.

 

[Wild Turkey]

There is a reason ND can do whatever it wants and get a sweet heart deal from the ACC, but Ball State can not.

No one, not ND, not Texas are going getting sweetheart deals in the SEC. The revenue model is set and to think Texas is a magical exception that is above the model is laughable.

 

[Lance Armstrong]

Wild Turkey's problem is he only see's the tier 3 network deals as making money when in fact those are usually the smallest contracts. Yes, adding Texas doesn't add much to the SEC network contract since you already have a Texas team and tier 3 network deals are paid out by number of tv sets. But the big money makers, the Tier 1 & 2's are paid by how appealing your content is. So adding a school like Notre Dame, Texas, or Oklahoma would add so much value to any tier 1 or 2 deal.

 

[Codaxx]

No one, not ND, not Texas are going getting sweetheart deals in the SEC. The revenue model is set and to think Texas is a magical exception that is above the model is laughable.

nobody said that, but OK

 

[ralphiewvu]

Let me explain it:

1. If you add Texas then you can probably add more money from the CBS deal but only to cover pretty much what the other teams are getting now.
2. For the SEC network you are already getting premium pricing for the state of Texas so you actually dilute what will be paid out per team.

Adding another team from an existing state will take revenue from the other teams.

As I tried to explain to your cohort 4D, athletics isn't the only thing in play here. Bringing in Texas would be a benefit not only for athletics but for academics. An as anyway with half a brain can tell you, the money is much better in academics.

 

[Texas Jefe]

Ok tell me why they would and that is going to increase revenue for the conference. The reasons it wouldn't happen:

1. aTm, Georgia, KY, Florida and South Carolina all block it.
2. Even if they got an imitation Texas wouldn't take it for multiple reasons.
3. It doesn't increase revenue since the entire state of Texas is already covered at premium pricing for the entire state.

It simply doesn't happen.

not saying it's GOING to happen, just that the unwritten rule of not taking two programs from the same state rule would be broken for Texas. It's a big state, there are a bunch of potential recruits; you get a lot of viewers with A&m, they'd get the rest of the entire state with Texas. They'd own the state. As it is now, they dont.

 

[Texas Jefe]

LOL @ tejas jefe throwing rainbow ratings around like fairy dust.

"The tide is a changing in Austin"

2010 - (5-7)
2011 - (8-5)
2012 - (9-4)

wait for it...

2013 - (8-5)
2014 - (6-7)
2015 - (5-7) and too fucking stupid to qualify for a bowl.

Yes, your losing team qualified because they're all Rhodes Scholars. Too bad they couldnt use some of those smarts to beat Texas. At least then we wouldnt have to listen to your bullshit.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Wild Turkey's problem is he only see's the tier 3 network deals as making money when in fact those are usually the smallest contracts. Yes, adding Texas doesn't add much to the SEC network contract since you already have a Texas team and tier 3 network deals are paid out by number of tv sets. But the big money makers, the Tier 1 & 2's are paid by how appealing your content is. So adding a school like Notre Dame, Texas, or Oklahoma would add so much value to any tier 1 or 2 deal.

Your problem is that you rely too heavily on the money the SEC Network brought in the first year and assume future years will be similar. I would also argue a NC or Virginia school would much more value with Tier 1 & 2 money because they open totally new markets. Texas would not because if you want yo admit it or not you guys are pretty much watching anyway.

 

[Wild Turkey]

not saying it's GOING to happen, just that the unwritten rule of not taking two programs from the same state rule would be broken for Texas. It's a big state, there are a bunch of potential recruits; you get a lot of viewers with A&m, they'd get the rest of the entire state with Texas. They'd own the state. As it is now, they dont.

If you get ESPN then the chances are great you get the SEC Network and are paying the premium price for it. We already have he state of Texas if your ride let's you acknowledge that or not.

 

[Red_Alert]

LOL

tejas thinks mighty highly of themselves.

Everybody needs them doncha know?

Yer all massive failures without tejas. CFB wouldn't exist if it weren't for tejas. You'd all be broke if it weren't for tejas.

.

 

[Lance Armstrong]

Your problem is that you rely too heavily on the money the SEC Network brought in the first year and assume future years will be similar. I would also argue a NC or Virginia school would much more value with Tier 1 & 2 money because they open totally new markets. Texas would not because if you want yo admit it or not you guys are pretty much watching anyway.

You miss the point again, but that's ok. Yes, tier 3 money is a nice bonus, but tell me how much of the piece of the pie is it compared to tier 1 & 2?

 

[starbigd]

LOL if you think ANY conference would turn down Texas. If you believe that, you're the biggest fool on this board.

Texas generates more money than anyone......there isn't a single conference in this country that won't take that, not a single one. If you honestly think the SEC has the state of Texas because of A&M, you are SADLY MISTAKEN.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

LOL if you think ANY conference would turn down Texas. If you believe that, you're the biggest fool on this board.

Texas generates more money than anyone......there isn't a single conference in this country that won't take that, not a single one. If you honestly think the SEC has the state of Texas because of A&M, you are SADLY MISTAKEN.

Every conference would take Texas, but not on Texas's terms. LHN, unequal revenue, etc. would all be sticking points, and to think that conferences would just roll over and give in to every demand by Texas is foolish. Texas does not have near as much bargaining power outside of the Big 12 because other major conferences are doing just fine without them.

 

[BoiseMike19]

Cot dammit, you guys are all talking about financial shit! Let's take money (the only thing that in reality really matter here), out of the equation for a moment and pretend. Now that said, I want everyone to focus on why Boise State is an obvious next invite to the Big 12.......Go!

 

[Wild Turkey]

LOL if you think ANY conference would turn down Texas. If you believe that, you're the biggest fool on this board.

Texas generates more money than anyone......there isn't a single conference in this country that won't take that, not a single one. If you honestly think the SEC has the state of Texas because of A&M, you are SADLY MISTAKEN.

PAC already did and if think any other P5 conference would take Texas while the LHN is still in place you are crazy. Hate to break it to you but I don't see Texas' worth to tier 1 or 2 rights being worth more than the dilution of future network earnings. Now if the conference were to move to pay per view model then yes but don't see that happening anytime soon.

The SEC will break records every time they renegotiate T1 and T2 so why exactly do they need Texas? I could make a stronger case Texas needs the SEC more but you would never admit it.

Let's be honest here Texas doesn't want anything to do with the SEC as it would make any national championship run extremely challenging and that's not your style. There is only one real move for Texas and that is to the PAC. It would deliver huge revenue pickups to the PAC network, assist with T1/T2, open new recruiting roads for all schools and give the PAC a foothold in a new time zone.

The PAC makes sense the SEC does not its just that simply.

 

[nddulac]

Cot dammit, you guys are all talking about financial shit! Let's take money (the only thing that in reality really matter here), out of the equation for a moment and pretend. Now that said, I want everyone to focus on why Boise State is an obvious next invite to the Big 12.......Go!

Why not? We live in a world where Donald Trump can run for president . . and people actually vote for him . .

 

[TexasExes98]

Every conference would take Texas, but not on Texas's terms. LHN, unequal revenue, etc. would all be sticking points, and to think that conferences would just roll over and give in to every demand by Texas is foolish. Texas does not have near as much bargaining power outside of the Big 12 because other major conferences are doing just fine without them.

FYI for the uninformed, Nebraska demanded unequal sharing when the Big 12 was formed. NU was actually relevant when this was happening and was on primetime TV all the time, so it made sense why Nebraska demanded the lion's share. After NU became irrelevant for the rest of eternity and the likes of KU and TTECh were dropping 70pts on their asses, only then did NU start complaining about unequal revenue sharing b/c their has been program was no longer on prime time TV. With that being said, there is no longer any unequal revenue sharing in the Big 12 now. All tier 1 & 2 revenue is split evenly amongst conference members the way the other conferences do it.

 

[Lance Armstrong]

Why not? We live in a world where Donald Trump can run for president . . and people actually vote for him . .

I blame Team SEC

 

[nddulac]

I blame Team SEC

So does Phil Mickelson . . But that's different.