- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

Here's what doesn't make sense...
Posted on 6/12/10 at 12:56 am
Posted on 6/12/10 at 12:56 am
Okay you've got the Big-12 in financial straights (enough so that they can be dismantled by other conferences), and you've got the PAC-10 that is weak financially. How are you expecting to make big bucks from two weak conferences? You are just going to get a bigger weak conference.
Here's a simple analysis. What the TV networks are looking for is big games. The games that aren't so big? ...well they could put on some other programming and bring in as many viewers. So why did the Big-12 fail? Weak TV deals. Why were the deals weak? Because they average 2.0 marquee match-ups per year (about 0.2 per team), (OU/UT and a 50% chance of UT/Neb and a 50% chance of OU/Neb). Why is the PAC-10 weak? They only have 3 marquee match-ups per year (0.3 per team), (USC/CAL, USC/Oregon, and CAL/Oregon...some years it won't be CAL and Oregon, but there will still be 3 top quality teams). For comparison, in the SEC you have 10 (0.8 per team).
Now what will you get in the new PAC-16? 4.75 (0.3 per team), (OU/TX, USC/CAL, USC/Oregon, CAL/Oregon, and once every 8 years OU/USC, OU/CAL, OU/Oregon, UT/USC, UT/Cal, and/or UT/Oregon). So in reality, without a championship game the PAC-10 isn't really helping themselves (except by giving themselves a little more clout). The teams joining, however, should see a significant rise in income, but this is still not enough to compete with the SEC.
Now what do you get is OU, UT, TAMU, and OSU join the SEC? In the eastern division alone you'll have 10 marquee match-ups (Bama/Aub, Bama/Tenn, Bama/UF, Bama/UGA, Aub/Tenn, Aub/UGA, Aub/UF, Tenn/UF, Tenn/UGA, UGA/UF). You'll get 3 more from the west (OU/UT, UT/LSU. OU/LSU), plus 15 different marquee inter-division games that happen once every 8 years (1.875 per year), plus an SECCG. That's 15.875 a year (1.0 per team). So, if the Big-12 teams join the SEC, I would expect the SEC TV deal to go up 60% (Wow!).
So, the 4 teams from the Big-12 can increase their television revenue by 50% (0.2 to 0.3) by jumping to the PAC-10, or they can increase it by 400% (0.2 to 1.0) by jumping to the SEC. This is a no brainer? Why does UT have no brain? Or is it balls they are lacking?
So, if UT takes their pussy (oops, I mean posse) to the PAC-10, I think we'll see UT destroy another conference.
Here's a simple analysis. What the TV networks are looking for is big games. The games that aren't so big? ...well they could put on some other programming and bring in as many viewers. So why did the Big-12 fail? Weak TV deals. Why were the deals weak? Because they average 2.0 marquee match-ups per year (about 0.2 per team), (OU/UT and a 50% chance of UT/Neb and a 50% chance of OU/Neb). Why is the PAC-10 weak? They only have 3 marquee match-ups per year (0.3 per team), (USC/CAL, USC/Oregon, and CAL/Oregon...some years it won't be CAL and Oregon, but there will still be 3 top quality teams). For comparison, in the SEC you have 10 (0.8 per team).
Now what will you get in the new PAC-16? 4.75 (0.3 per team), (OU/TX, USC/CAL, USC/Oregon, CAL/Oregon, and once every 8 years OU/USC, OU/CAL, OU/Oregon, UT/USC, UT/Cal, and/or UT/Oregon). So in reality, without a championship game the PAC-10 isn't really helping themselves (except by giving themselves a little more clout). The teams joining, however, should see a significant rise in income, but this is still not enough to compete with the SEC.
Now what do you get is OU, UT, TAMU, and OSU join the SEC? In the eastern division alone you'll have 10 marquee match-ups (Bama/Aub, Bama/Tenn, Bama/UF, Bama/UGA, Aub/Tenn, Aub/UGA, Aub/UF, Tenn/UF, Tenn/UGA, UGA/UF). You'll get 3 more from the west (OU/UT, UT/LSU. OU/LSU), plus 15 different marquee inter-division games that happen once every 8 years (1.875 per year), plus an SECCG. That's 15.875 a year (1.0 per team). So, if the Big-12 teams join the SEC, I would expect the SEC TV deal to go up 60% (Wow!).
So, the 4 teams from the Big-12 can increase their television revenue by 50% (0.2 to 0.3) by jumping to the PAC-10, or they can increase it by 400% (0.2 to 1.0) by jumping to the SEC. This is a no brainer? Why does UT have no brain? Or is it balls they are lacking?
So, if UT takes their pussy (oops, I mean posse) to the PAC-10, I think we'll see UT destroy another conference.
Posted on 6/12/10 at 1:00 am to DocBugbear
heres the thing UT doesn't want to be in the SEC. UT doesn't want to equally share revenue and it wants to be the biggest fish in the pond.
OU needs to stay with Texas and keep its rivalry going with them. OU has to have an impact in Texas to be a valuable team.
OU needs to stay with Texas and keep its rivalry going with them. OU has to have an impact in Texas to be a valuable team.
Posted on 6/12/10 at 1:03 am to DocBugbear
UT is going west to maintain the status quo. They are the richest athletic dept and are a perennial powerhouse. They don't need more tv money, they need to make sure they stay on top. The Pac 10 guarantees that.
A&M to the SEC is a thing of beauty.
A&M to the SEC is a thing of beauty.
Posted on 6/12/10 at 1:11 am to Spaceball 1
quote:
They don't need more tv money, they need to make sure they stay on top. The Pac 10 guarantees that.
Which is why UT is going to destroy another conference. That line of thinking makes them poison.
Popular
Back to top

2





