- 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
re: More lucrative for A&M to stay in Big 12?
Posted on 8/26/11 at 1:22 pm to TheCheshireHog
Posted on 8/26/11 at 1:22 pm to TheCheshireHog
quote:
TheCheshireHog
More lucrative for A&M to stay in Big 12?
Nothing A&M does is going to change the fact that the state of Texas is dominated by the Longhorns.
Correct
Posted on 8/26/11 at 1:26 pm to SunHog
The Big10 is laughing at the SEC.
If we add 14 teams we MIGHT be able to equal their revenue sharing.
The Big10 had 11 teams and no championship last year and they received more money than the SEC with 12 teams, a national championship and an SEC championship game.
The Big10 numbers next year will be large! They now will have 12 teams, one of them a marquee name and a Big10 Championship game.
If we add 14 teams we MIGHT be able to equal their revenue sharing.
The Big10 had 11 teams and no championship last year and they received more money than the SEC with 12 teams, a national championship and an SEC championship game.
The Big10 numbers next year will be large! They now will have 12 teams, one of them a marquee name and a Big10 Championship game.
Posted on 8/26/11 at 1:31 pm to Chitter Chatter
quote:
But yet, Texas doesn't see that they are the problem. They talk high and mighty about their sports prowess but how many national championships in football in the past 40 years? One
Well they do have 3 Big X11 championships to Oklahoma's 7.
Posted on 8/26/11 at 1:47 pm to relapse98
I am new here and I apologize if this is posted elsewhere but does anyone know if there are any SEC entrance fees to join the conference?
Posted on 8/26/11 at 2:12 pm to Yobel
quote:
any SEC entrance fees to join the conference?
Only fee referenced in the bylaws is $50 annual dues.
Dead serious.
Posted on 8/26/11 at 2:14 pm to relapse98
really? wow... supposedly it will take a few years for NU and CU to become full members due to membership fee hit. Strange that SEC wouldnt do something similar
Posted on 8/26/11 at 2:27 pm to Yobel
quote:Yes, post your email and I'll send you instructions on where to send your money.
I am new here and I apologize if this is posted elsewhere but does anyone know if there are any SEC entrance fees to join the conference?
Posted on 8/26/11 at 2:32 pm to NaturalBeam
I dont get that... I guess you are assuming I'm a TAMU fan but you would be wrong
seriously... no entrance fee?
seriously... no entrance fee?
Posted on 8/26/11 at 2:35 pm to Yobel
That's OK, I'll still accept your money. Now about that email....get on with it.
Did I mention I'm the nephew of a Prince?
Did I mention I'm the nephew of a Prince?
Posted on 8/26/11 at 3:13 pm to cjared036
quote:
On the weekend when Texas is playing juggernaut Kansas, ATM/SEC will be sure to schedule Alabama / Auburn / UGA etc. etc.
.....Texas will be in a lot more BCS games and national title games than A&M. That means exponentially more than regular season games.
quote:
even if you beat them, you still had the opportunity to play them. Highlighting your victories over them doesnt lessen the blow that losing them drastically weakens your conference. NU was still Nebraska, beating them means something
We beat Nebraska 90% of the time. We'll beat UofH 90% of the time. Corn didn't matter in the big 12.
quote:
Dr, all you're doing is regurgitating the drivel from Orangebloods and the like on this deal and it's pretty sad.
Is what I said about the TV contracts inaccurate? No. You posted, " the SEC wouldn’t be adding members if it weren’t confident it was getting enough from a new television contract to keep conference distributions at or above current levels." Can you prove that?
quote:
what it states is that if the number of member schools change (increase OR decrease) that after 2012 they agree to sit down and talk about it. Nowhere does it guarantee that the deal must be redone
That is exactly what I posted & GerryDinardo called me out for it.
quote:
And if you think this is all just a in internet message board ego trip move, well you're just wrong...our administrators are making this decision based on what is best for A&M now, and in the future.
I heard Stallings, who is better connected than all of us, on Finebaum say that this exit is all because of the LHN. This is about an inferiority complex. This is about pacifying fans who don't get BCS games and national titles.
Posted on 8/26/11 at 3:22 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
The idea that the SEC adds 2 new teams/markets and does not renegotiate the media deal is absolutely absurd. Secondly, the fact that there are multiple revenue streams in college football besides media is also lost by the NYT arse-clown that wrote this article. A&M will assuredly make more in the SEC..... 
Posted on 8/26/11 at 3:27 pm to SunHog
quote:
The Big10 is laughing at the SEC.
If we add 14 teams we MIGHT be able to equal their revenue sharing.
Why are Arkansas fans so defensive about A&M possibly joining the SEC? It seem like you guys would enjoy finally having a natural rivalry but all I see is defensiveness from Arky fans.
As for the Big Ten, they had the fortune of seeing what the SEC got first and then negotiating. That made it much easier to one up the SEC. I suspect that adding A&M (lots of new TV sets in Texas and someone like say Virginia Tech (lots of new TV sets in Virginia) will have a dramatic effect on the networks when it's time for the SEC to renegotiate. The SEC does have some leverage in that it can threaten to start a network much like the Big Ten's and could threaten to go to another network when the current contract expires if they fail to deal in good faith in any renegotiated contract.
Regardless of the SEC's cut of any TV contract, A&M and the prospective ACC team will add enough value to the SEC's market that any new renegotiated deal will likely increase each SEC team's financial slice of the pie.
Posted on 8/26/11 at 3:31 pm to LSUtah
LSUtah, the PAC12 negotiated their contract because the expansion coincided with the end of their current contract. The Big10 did not renegotiate their contract by adding Nebraska and a conference championship game. There is no guarantee that CBS or ESPN are looking to open up the bidding again. Matter of fact, it works against their interest to do so.
Posted on 8/26/11 at 4:13 pm to Yobel
quote:
The Big10 did not renegotiate their contract by adding Nebraska and a conference championship game. There is no guarantee that CBS or ESPN are looking to open up the bidding again. Matter of fact, it works against their interest to do so.
The big10 didn't renegotiate because they would have been laughed out of the room. NU doesn't bring anything to the table except for prestige. Now, their revenue will increase because there will simply be more Big10 games on TV. Plus, the BTN has increased in their profits every single year.
Sure, there is no guarantee CBS or ESPN will renegotiate with the SEC after adding two top 10 media markets. There is also no guarantee a bear will shite in the woods tonight, but I like my chances.
Posted on 8/26/11 at 4:17 pm to Bob Ag
quote:
There is also no guarantee a bear will shite in the woods tonight
I thought it was the Pope shitting in the woods
Posted on 8/26/11 at 4:28 pm to Bob Ag
"NU doesn't bring anything to the table except for prestige."
BobAg, What does TAMU bring? they dont commmand ANY markets in Texas. Last year was a good year for A&M and they still barely covered expenses, had a hard time selling out their stadium, and were behind Missu, Arkansas, and LSU in merchandise sold. Arkansas and LSU have a better presence in east Texas than A&M does.
BobAg, What does TAMU bring? they dont commmand ANY markets in Texas. Last year was a good year for A&M and they still barely covered expenses, had a hard time selling out their stadium, and were behind Missu, Arkansas, and LSU in merchandise sold. Arkansas and LSU have a better presence in east Texas than A&M does.
Posted on 8/26/11 at 4:45 pm to Yobel
quote:
BobAg, What does TAMU bring? they dont commmand ANY markets in Texas. Last year was a good year for A&M and they still barely covered expenses, had a hard time selling out their stadium, and were behind Missu, Arkansas, and LSU in merchandise sold. Arkansas and LSU have a better presence in east Texas than A&M does.
Dude, really? I mean, really? Its not about, "commanding markets." Its about how many eyes are drawn to a television set. If just 10 percent of people in texas are A&M fans that would give A&M more fans than Alabama, Auburn, Arkansas, and both mississippi schools. ITs all about tv ratings (number of eyes) NOT "commanding a market."
Posted on 8/26/11 at 4:50 pm to secfan123
secfan123, there is NO way TAMU attracts 10% of the Texas market. they dont attract any major markets. Outside of their alumni, they dont have a large fan base. Matter of fact, they make fun of T-shirt fans, which is what we are talking about. They have a niche market in Texas and that is about it.
Posted on 8/26/11 at 4:56 pm to Yobel
quote:
Last year was a good year for A&M and they still barely covered expenses
I'll answer that one.
One of only 22 public Division 1 schools that turned a profit ($6,832,207) in 2009-2010 and 1 of only 7 schools whose athletic department did not receive a subsidy from the university. That 6 million puts us #13 in terms of profit.
Posted on 8/26/11 at 5:26 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
Is what I said about the TV contracts inaccurate? No. You posted, " the SEC wouldn’t be adding members if it weren’t confident it was getting enough from a new television contract to keep conference distributions at or above current levels." Can you prove that?
What you said about the TV contracts is unprovable. The facts are that the contracts are not in the public domain, therefore you cannot "prove" anything about the contracts without the verbiage from said contracts.
However, during the SEC media days, there were talks about the SEC renegotiating during this "peek in" that has been discussed. Note that this was said excluding the addition of A&M to the conference. Mike Slive stated this during the media days:
quote:
Obviously when we did our deal we set the pace, and in our contract we have a concept called look-ins," Slive said. "At periodic points during the life of the contract, we can sit down with ESPN and take a look-in and look at the status of television, technology, all aspects of television, and at that point make adjustments that the parties agree are appropriate to make sure that everything that we intended to achieve with the contracts would in fact be available to us.
Of course, he didn't say "we are going to renegotiate the contract." But from that statement and even without the addition of A&M to the conference it would appear that the SEC intends to get more money from these contracts.
CBS sports chairmen Sean McManus said:
quote:
“When there is expansion, we’ll sit down and talk to the SEC,” McManus said. “If something materially changes in the conference, we’ll sit down and talk to them.”
To be logical for a minute, do you honestly believe the SEC would vote to expand the conference if it meant less money for them? Really think about that before answering.
This post was edited on 8/26/11 at 5:44 pm
Popular
Back to top


1




