- 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
The SEC and Unequal Revenue Sharing
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:03 am
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:03 am
This is a purely hypothetical exercise; just something I was thinking about while bored at work.
If the SEC didn't share revenue equally, but rather followed a Big-12'ish model of distribution, how would it look today? Would it even exist, or would it have collapsed in the same way the Big-12 appears to be at least on the verge of doing? Would the, for lack of better terms, "haves" and "have nots" still be the same teams?
Having been a part of the SEC for pretty much the entirety of my(sports-cognizant)lifetime, doing it any other way doesn't make much sense to me.
I suppose the inherent question is, is the SEC's success predicated on the fact that this is how it operates? Is there something else at work? If the response is "yes" to the first question, hypothetically speaking, aren't there some lessons that could, and by now, should have been taken by the Big-12, at the very least?
Just curious what others think about it.
If the SEC didn't share revenue equally, but rather followed a Big-12'ish model of distribution, how would it look today? Would it even exist, or would it have collapsed in the same way the Big-12 appears to be at least on the verge of doing? Would the, for lack of better terms, "haves" and "have nots" still be the same teams?
Having been a part of the SEC for pretty much the entirety of my(sports-cognizant)lifetime, doing it any other way doesn't make much sense to me.
I suppose the inherent question is, is the SEC's success predicated on the fact that this is how it operates? Is there something else at work? If the response is "yes" to the first question, hypothetically speaking, aren't there some lessons that could, and by now, should have been taken by the Big-12, at the very least?
Just curious what others think about it.
5
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:05 am to thespork
In my opinion, the SEC's stability is in large part a product of the fact that it does share revenue equally. The lesson could have been taken by the Big XII and applied to their conference, but the schools that were receiving the lion's share of the revenue distribution wanted no part of that.
This post was edited on 9/7/11 at 10:06 am
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:07 am to thespork
quote:
how would it look today?
Tier 1- Big 6
Tier 2- Arky, USCe, Kentucky
Tier 3- Ole Miss, State, Vandy
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:10 am to Draconian Sanctions
I think it would look like this:
Tier 1 - Florida
Tier 2 (in order) - Georgia, Tennessee, LSU, Alabama, Auburn
Tier 3 - Arky, USCe, Kentucky
Tier 4 - Ole Miss, State, Vandy
Tier 1 - Florida
Tier 2 (in order) - Georgia, Tennessee, LSU, Alabama, Auburn
Tier 3 - Arky, USCe, Kentucky
Tier 4 - Ole Miss, State, Vandy
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:12 am to mre
That was my initial thought as well; and obviously, realistically speaking, it's not hard to see that even the promise of conference stability could fall on deaf ears when large sums of revenue is involved.
Not that I'm personally invested in the Big-12 in any way, but it's somewhat sad, in the grand scheme of things.
Somewhat related, this is also why I'm actually a fan of the whole concept of "conference pride". I know not everyone is.
Not that I'm personally invested in the Big-12 in any way, but it's somewhat sad, in the grand scheme of things.
Somewhat related, this is also why I'm actually a fan of the whole concept of "conference pride". I know not everyone is.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:33 am to GerryDiNardo
I think ur a retard. What makes Florida so special? They can jump off a cliff
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:34 am to LSU Rules07
quote:
I think ur a retard. What makes Florida so special? They can jump off a cliff
Florida garners the largest television market...
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:36 am to thespork
I think the comparisons between the NFL and MLB are very accurate to showing the difference between the two models.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:42 am to thespork
Of course it would be a source of instability in any conference. Fortunes go up and down and those media contracts are pretty long term. If members felt the need to bring up negotiation at every swing in popularity or ratings, it would never stop. Imagine if LSU was locked into their "percentage" pre-Saban/Miles. They would be jumping up and down to renegotiate.
Auburn would be all over the place in contribution. Just look at the last ten years. That would be a mess.
On the other hand, having tier three rights and paying a little differently based on SECCG and bowl births would be fine. As long as it is all agreed to in principle, things remain stable.
Auburn would be all over the place in contribution. Just look at the last ten years. That would be a mess.
On the other hand, having tier three rights and paying a little differently based on SECCG and bowl births would be fine. As long as it is all agreed to in principle, things remain stable.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:43 am to GerryDiNardo
quote:
Florida garners the largest television market...
Florida was nothing prior to Spurrier.
The rest of the SEC carried their arse every year.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:44 am to GerryDiNardo
quote:
I think it would look like this:
Tier 1 - Florida
Tier 2 (in order) - Georgia, Tennessee, LSU, Alabama, Auburn
Tier 3 - Arky, USCe, Kentucky
Tier 4 - Ole Miss, State, Vandy
Dumb
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:47 am to LSUAfro
(no message)
This post was edited on 9/7/11 at 10:49 am
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:47 am to GerryDiNardo
quote:
Florida garners the largest television market...
Television market is irrelevant under the Big XII model of revenue distribution. The Big XII distributes all of its non-television revenue evenly among the schools, distributes half of its television revenue evenly, and the other half of the television revenue is distributed according to television appearances as well as post-season appearances in football and basketball.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:52 am to mre
quote:
Television market is irrelevant under the Big XII model of revenue distribution. The Big XII distributes all of its non-television revenue evenly among the schools, distributes half of its television revenue evenly, and the other half of the television revenue is distributed according to television appearances as well as post-season appearances in football and basketball.
Interesting. I thought it was a set distribution percentage. Regardless, it pretty much is.. It's not like Iowa State is going to play a nationally televised game.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:53 am to GerryDiNardo
quote:
I think it would look like this:
Tier 1 - Florida
Tier 2 (in order) - Georgia, Tennessee, LSU, Alabama, Auburn
FYI LSU and Nebraska are the only two Division 1 schools that have self sufficient athletic programs that do not take any state funding. So LSU is most definitely a Tier 1. With 2 National Championships in football since 2000 and 6 in baseball since 1990 there is no doubt about it.
This post was edited on 9/7/11 at 10:57 am
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:56 am to thespork
unequal sharing always has to be readjusted to keep harmony. readjustment creates winners and losers and further disrupts the member harmony. it's not sustainable for college sports.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:58 am to Run DMC
quote:
FYI LSU and Nebraska are the only two Division 1 schools that have self sufficient athletic programs that do not take any state funding. So LSU is most definitely a Tier 1. With 2 National Championships in football since 2000 and 6 in baseball since 1990 there is no doubt about it.
Clearly that doesn't matter..
As the post mentions above, teams would be paid based on television appearances in basketball and football only.
LINK
quote:
Big 12 schools share half of their television revenue, with the other portion set aside. That money is then distributed -- with the schools that play in more televised men's basketball and football games, receiving a greater share of the pot.
Schools also earn a greater share of funding for participating and advancing in the NCAA basketball tournaments.
This post was edited on 9/7/11 at 10:59 am
Posted on 9/7/11 at 10:58 am to mre
quote:
In my opinion, the SEC's stability is in large part a product of the fact that it does share revenue equally
I agree. It has made the conference stronger, as a whole.
Posted on 9/7/11 at 11:26 am to Run DMC
quote:
FYI LSU and Nebraska are the only two Division 1 schools that have self sufficient athletic programs that do not take any state funding. So LSU is most definitely a Tier 1. With 2 National Championships in football since 2000 and 6 in baseball since 1990 there is no doubt about it.
UF is a self-sufficient athletic department through the UAA and has been for decades. UF gives $6 to 10 million every year back to the university.
This post was edited on 9/7/11 at 11:32 am
Posted on 9/7/11 at 11:32 am to bgator85
The TAF is worth $200+ million. That's top tier to me.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News