I think people get the fact that it's about the money and playing day games on CBS because we're #1 in the country is better than playing night games on ESPN2 because we're #15 in the country.

You bring up a valid point about the exposure to the casual fan and potentional national recruits.

But, if prime time games are more valuable to the network, which they obviously are since CBS is restricted to only 1 because of ESPN, then the SEC should squeeze more $$ out of ESPN and let them have the first pick every week instead of CBS. Give CBS the 2nd pick. More $$ from ESPN, less $$ from CBS, but as a whole we get the same amount.

The #1 SEC football game would still be televised to a national audience, only at night.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Pwishik1

Washington, DC

Member since Sep 2006

24 posts

Posted on 10/11/11 at 10:04 am to LoyalTiger

@LoyalTiger I agree with you. If the SEC is the dominant conference, a contract with ABC shouldn't preclude the games from being shown at night. But do we actually know the numbers on how many people watch which games? Do most people who might watch on TV go out at night, or do they watch during the day, or what? It's second nature to say the primetime game is the prime-est, but I would love to know the numbers on that.

But that said, the SEC may want to look at the way it structures the next TV deal and find a way to secure the primetime slot, since 1) we're the preeminent conference in football, 2) we almost always have a team in contention for the championship and 3) the other conferences are gunning for us and are looking for footholds in broadcast packages. We have to get there first, or at least, be the last ones standing.

This post was edited on 10/11/11 at 10:04 am

2 ...

Report Post

Tiger Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board