Jump to content

O.T. Conference Shuffle ( OU and Texas inquire about joining SEC)


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, BilliesBy40 said:

I guess I don't understand how that strategy would definitely benefit ESPN beyond the current contract period. Creating a separate post-season basketball tournament to compete with the NCAA tournament would damage excluded teams and conferences, some of whom ESPN relies upon for programming. Maybe I am missing something, but I don't expect the upcoming changes to be nearly as huge as others are speculating.

Because you get enough big names and those other schools without the same level of clout will have to acquiesce.   March Madness ceases to exist but March Mania emerges.  Different name same thing now not controlled by CBS.  It's some judo, ninja [email protected]   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 343
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

23 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

Exactly old school thinking with Cable was concerned about regional markets because those companies were regional.   That still matters to a degree but streaming is the future and you need brands whether it's Star Wars or the evil empire of Texas Athletics.  ESPN is getting in front of Amazon Prime,  Apple TV, Peacock and Hulu (maybe they own Hulu not sure).  Also you're right they could steal March Madness judo style from CBS.  Live Sports is the only reason I've kept cable. 

Hulu is owned by comcast which also owns Peacock. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

Because you get enough big names and those other schools without the same level of clout will have to acquiesce.   March Madness ceases to exist but March Mania emerges.  Different name same thing now not controlled by CBS.  It's some judo, ninja [email protected]   

Except in the described scenario it would be controlled by ESPN. And for how long? Why would the schools want to give away more control, including their ability to receive bids from other networks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

Exactly old school thinking with Cable was concerned about regional markets because those companies were regional.   That still matters to a degree but streaming is the future and you need brands whether it's Star Wars or the evil empire of Texas Athletics.  ESPN is getting in front of Amazon Prime,  Apple TV, Peacock and Hulu (maybe they own Hulu not sure).  Also you're right they could steal March Madness judo style from CBS.  Live Sports is the only reason I've kept cable. 

I mean I agree that Texas Athletics is a big college brand, but you seem to be making an argument that it is a national brand not a regional one.  IMO you're way off there.  As a dude in St. Louis, MO I don't give two sh*ts about Texas Athletics.  They're the same to me as USC, Oregon, Florida, Alabama, etc.  College fanbases are by pretty much by their nature regional & alumni based.  Texas has a huge # of alums and the state of Texas is huge so it is a big brand, but very few people outside of those 2 care about it enough for it to influence their buying decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RUBillsFan said:

I mean I agree that Texas Athletics is a big college brand, but you seem to be making an argument that it is a national brand not a regional one.  IMO you're way off there.  As a dude in St. Louis, MO I don't give two sh*ts about Texas Athletics.  They're the same to me as USC, Oregon, Florida, Alabama, etc.  College fanbases are by pretty much by their nature regional & alumni based.  Texas has a huge # of alums and the state of Texas is huge so it is a big brand, but very few people outside of those 2 care about it enough for it to influence their buying decisions.

You just proved my point by naming Texas amongst other top "brands".  If you're not a college football fan then this doesn't matter.   A generic college football fan would rather watch Texas vs. Georgia than Ga Tech vs Pitt.  1 match up is bigger brands.   You can disagree with me but the evidence supports my case,  biggest Nike college contract -Texas,  move to SEC speculation is that next ESPN deal is $1.3bil nearly double current SEC ESPN deal.   Also just think about how this move has dominated sports reporting.  Hell even internal issues about Texas Alma mater was national news.  Texas AD revenue is over $200mil/yr, St. Louis Cardinals revenue is estimated $254mil per year.  You are entitled to not caring but your bias is contrary to evidence.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, BilliesBy40 said:

Except in the described scenario it would be controlled by ESPN. And for how long? Why would the schools want to give away more control, including their ability to receive bids from other networks?

Football is driving the train on realignment.   Factors that are feeding this are

NIL $ 

College Football Playoff is not run by NCAA

Expansion of CFP

NCAA not leading, in fact abdicated leadership on COVID and NIL

So football power is aggregated, they no longer need NCAA and break away.  What happens to NCAA basketball?  

All speculation but dominoes continue to fall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

Because you get enough big names and those other schools without the same level of clout will have to acquiesce.   March Madness ceases to exist but March Mania emerges.  Different name same thing now not controlled by CBS.  It's some judo, ninja [email protected]   

You know who is loving this right now?  The Big 10 who has their deals expiring in 2024.  Their payday has just increased massively, because the if you aren't ESPN and want some top college athletics inventory, the Big Ten is going to be your only option.  If the Big Ten plays their cards right, Big Ten members will still make more money in conference revenue than those in any other conference.

Yes, the Big Ten has a demographics problem going forward, but that can be largely fixed by adding AAU programs from the west and the south.  An 18 program Big Ten with USC, Washington, Texas A&M and another SEC school (maybe Florida or Vandy) is probably more attractive than the SEC to media companies.  The SEC has no granting of rights and no exit fee.  A SEC program that is pissed (A&M) or just wants more money can leave the SEC for free whenever it wants to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, brianstl said:

You know who is loving this right now?  The Big 10 who has their deals expiring in 2024.  Their payday has just increased massively, because the if you aren't ESPN and want some top college athletics inventory, the Big Ten is going to be your only option.  If the Big Ten plays their cards right, Big Ten members will still make more money in conference revenue than those in any other conference.

Yes, the Big Ten has a demographics problem going forward, but that can be largely fixed by adding AAU programs from the west and the south.  An 18 program Big Ten with USC, Washington, Texas A&M and another SEC school (maybe Florida or Vandy) is probably more attractive than the SEC to media companies.  The SEC has no granting of rights and no exit fee.  A SEC program that is pissed (A&M) or just wants more money can leave the SEC for free whenever it wants to.

Another thing, the big 10 schools have higher enrollment, and quality degrees, than other conferences’ schools. Bigger alumni base that makes more money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, willie said:

Hulu is owned by comcast which also owns Peacock. 

 

51 minutes ago, brianstl said:

Disney actually owns Hulu.

Little bit of both. Disney agreed to buy Comcast's 1/3 stake in Hulu in 2019, but it won't close until 2024. It was originally a joint venture between four companies but has consolidated over time into these two companies at the helm. I am curious to see how this evolves with another three years until it closes, a much different value of that stake in the meantime (definitely more than $5.8B now), and Disney+ having been launched successfully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, brianstl said:

You know who is loving this right now?  The Big 10 who has their deals expiring in 2024.  Their payday has just increased massively, because the if you aren't ESPN and want some top college athletics inventory, the Big Ten is going to be your only option.  If the Big Ten plays their cards right, Big Ten members will still make more money in conference revenue than those in any other conference.

Yes, the Big Ten has a demographics problem going forward, but that can be largely fixed by adding AAU programs from the west and the south.  An 18 program Big Ten with USC, Washington, Texas A&M and another SEC school (maybe Florida or Vandy) is probably more attractive than the SEC to media companies.  The SEC has no granting of rights and no exit fee.  A SEC program that is pissed (A&M) or just wants more money can leave the SEC for free whenever it wants to.

That's only considering it from a Big 10 perspective. The teams interested are the teams left out. The SEC schools for example aren't interested in leaving the SEC. I can see the ACC trying to merge with the SEC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, courtside said:

That's only considering it from a Big 10 perspective. The teams interested are the teams left out. The SEC schools for example aren't interested in leaving the SEC. I can see the ACC trying to merge with the SEC. 

Money drives this whole thing and if the Big Ten offers someone like Texas A&M more money, Texas A&M will listen.  I'm not a Big Ten fan (I actually prefer the SEC), but they have huge cards they can still play.  The Big Ten knows the dollar price they have to pay to steal members of other conferences away and they offer any university that joins an ability to claim they are doing it for academic prestige and not the money they are actually doing it for.  It would actually make for the perfect FU from A&M to the SEC and Texas to join the Big Ten.

I think the Big Ten waits for the financials of the SEC deal to come out in public records over the next few weeks, talks to potential media partners (like Fox, Amazon, Apple and ESPN) and then decides what they are going to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, courtside said:

That's only considering it from a Big 10 perspective. The teams interested are the teams left out. The SEC schools for example aren't interested in leaving the SEC. I can see the ACC trying to merge with the SEC. 

Mmm hmm, and I can see the SEC saying: “how about we just merge with Clemson, Miami, FSU, and VT.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, brianstl said:

Money drives this whole thing and if the Big Ten offers someone like Texas A&M more money, Texas A&M will listen.  I'm not a Big Ten fan (I actually prefer the SEC), but they have huge cards they can still play.  The Big Ten knows the dollar price they have to pay to steal members of other conferences away and they offer any university that joins an ability to claim they are doing it for academic prestige and not the money they are actually doing it for.  It would actually make for the perfect FU from A&M to the SEC and Texas to join the Big Ten.

I think the Big Ten waits for the financials of the SEC deal to come out in public records over the next few weeks, talks to potential media partners (like Fox, Amazon, Apple and ESPN) and then decides what they are going to do.

You mention TAMU here. But previously you mentioned some other SEC schools. Obviously TAMU is unhappy and will keep its options open. But other SEC schools are happy in the SEC now, with its current and, upcoming $ contracts. They certainly wouldn’t want to leave by choice. I don’t see the Big 10 being able to draw interest from SEC schools. Merging with other schools in other leagues perhaps, but not the SEC. It reminds me a little bit of past discussions of Notre Dame to the Big 10. Notre Dame isn’t interested in the Big 10. The money is good enough elsewhere to add to the fact they aren’t interested in joining the Big 10. I can see the Big 10 trying to add Big 12 teams, non power 5 teams, and perhaps take a run at the Pac 12, etc..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, AnkielBreakers said:

Mmm hmm, and I can see the SEC saying: “how about we just merge with Clemson, Miami, FSU, and VT.”

No doubt about it, the Catamounts are on the rise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheA_Bomb said:

You just proved my point by naming Texas amongst other top "brands".  If you're not a college football fan then this doesn't matter.   A generic college football fan would rather watch Texas vs. Georgia than Ga Tech vs Pitt.  1 match up is bigger brands.   You can disagree with me but the evidence supports my case,  biggest Nike college contract -Texas,  move to SEC speculation is that next ESPN deal is $1.3bil nearly double current SEC ESPN deal.   Also just think about how this move has dominated sports reporting.  Hell even internal issues about Texas Alma mater was national news.  Texas AD revenue is over $200mil/yr, St. Louis Cardinals revenue is estimated $254mil per year.  You are entitled to not caring but your bias is contrary to evidence.   

I'm not a college football fan, so you've got me there.  I understand Texas is more valuable than Ga Tech or Pitt.  I just don't think they are a national brand along the likes of Star Wars (your comparison), Marvel or Pixar (to name other brands that Disney has snatched up).  Star Wars franchise has generated an estimated $68.7 BILLION in revenue (per Wikipedia).  I'll give you that's over 45 years, but still at $200 million / yr it would take Texas AD over 300,000 years to generate as much as Star Wars has in 45.  

I'd also argue the Cardinals aren't a really national brand either.  They're mostly regional too.  Relatively few baseball fans outside the traditional Cardinals region care about them.  MLB like college athletics is extremely regional (& really most sports to a lesser degree).  That doesn't mean Texas or the Cardinals aren't tremendously valuable and popular enough in their regions to be forced upon a national audience regularly, they just aren't nationally appealing like Star Wars.

I'm biased as a non-college football fan, but you are even more biased as a Texas fan (who I believe lives in and/or is from Texas which kinda proves my point).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pistol said:

 

Little bit of both. Disney agreed to buy Comcast's 1/3 stake in Hulu in 2019, but it won't close until 2024. It was originally a joint venture between four companies but has consolidated over time into these two companies at the helm. I am curious to see how this evolves with another three years until it closes, a much different value of that stake in the meantime (definitely more than $5.8B now), and Disney+ having been launched successfully.

Brian Roberts,CEO of Comcast was on CNBC this morning. He said they may merge Hulu into Peacock in the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, courtside said:

You mention TAMU here. But previously you mentioned some other SEC schools. Obviously TAMU is unhappy and will keep its options open. But other SEC schools are happy in the SEC now, with its current and, upcoming $ contracts. They certainly wouldn’t want to leave by choice. I don’t see the Big 10 being able to draw interest from SEC schools. Merging with other schools in other leagues perhaps, but not the SEC. It reminds me a little bit of past discussions of Notre Dame to the Big 10. Notre Dame isn’t interested in the Big 10. The money is good enough elsewhere to add to the fact they aren’t interested in joining the Big 10. I can see the Big 10 trying to add Big 12 teams, non power 5 teams, and perhaps take a run at the Pac 12, etc..

 

Notre Dame isn't interested in the Big Ten because the Big Ten does nothing for them when it comes to recruiting kids from the south.  Notre Dame doesn't need increased exposure in the midwest and northeast to attract students from those regions.  Notre Dame does need increased exposure in the south to attract students willing to pay the high tuition to attend Notre Dame, especially given the percentage of people under 18 that now call the south home.  More people under 18 live in the south now than live in the midwest and northeast combined.  That is why Notre Dame partnered with the ACC.  

Big southern public universities don't face the same demographic issues Notre Dame does when it comes to attracting students and are free to partner with schools outside of their home region for more money and academic prestige without worrying about attracting students from the region they are already in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, brianstl said:

Notre Dame isn't interested in the Big Ten because the Big Ten does nothing for them when it comes to recruiting kids from the south.  Notre Dame doesn't need increased exposure in the midwest and northeast to attract students from those regions.  Notre Dame does need increased exposure in the south to attract students willing to pay the high tuition to attend Notre Dame, especially given the percentage of people under 18 that now call the south home.  More people under 18 live in the south now than live in the midwest and northeast combined.  That is why Notre Dame partnered with the ACC.  

Big southern public universities don't face the same demographic issues Notre Dame does when it comes to attracting students and are free to partner with schools outside of their home region for more money and academic prestige without worrying about attracting students from the region they are already in.

I can see the Big 10 trying to merge with the ACC more so than trying to pluck individual SEC schools besides TAMU. I can see the ACC trying to merge with the SEC. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, brianstl said:

 Notre Dame does need increased exposure in the south to attract students willing to pay the high tuition to attend Notre Dame, especially given the percentage of people under 18 that now call the south home. 

Notre Dame's fall 2021 incoming class admitted 3,446 from a pool of 23,639 for 14.5 percent acceptance rate.  

The 2021 tuition & fees of University of Notre Dame (ND) are $57,699 for their students and the 2021 graduate school tuition & fees are $57,522.  61% of enrolled undergraduate students have received grants or scholarship aid and the average grant amount is $37,676.

Having two sons recently apply to state universities across the country, the tuition numbers are in line with most state schools for out of state tuition.  Their financial grants are actually better than many state schools, making them cheaper.

There are no issues here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, HoosierPal said:

Notre Dame's fall 2021 incoming class admitted 3,446 from a pool of 23,639 for 14.5 percent acceptance rate.  

The 2021 tuition & fees of University of Notre Dame (ND) are $57,699 for their students and the 2021 graduate school tuition & fees are $57,522.  61% of enrolled undergraduate students have received grants or scholarship aid and the average grant amount is $37,676.

Having two sons recently apply to state universities across the country, the tuition numbers are in line with most state schools for out of state tuition.  Their financial grants are actually better than many state schools, making them cheaper.

There are no issues here.

Notre Dame is in its current situation because it works for them.

They get NBC money plus ACC money plus CFP money plus other, and, all of that combined allows them to remain independent in football while having a preferred landing spot for its many Olympic Sports. And this allows Notre Dame to schedule how they want, which includes games all over the country in the markets they choose.

If something changed with any of that, they would look to join a league for football, the ACC being the likely landing spot. As conferences change, they will re-examine as needed to see if and when they need to change that approach.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

I'm not a college football fan, so you've got me there.  I understand Texas is more valuable than Ga Tech or Pitt.  I just don't think they are a national brand along the likes of Star Wars (your comparison), Marvel or Pixar (to name other brands that Disney has snatched up).  Star Wars franchise has generated an estimated $68.7 BILLION in revenue (per Wikipedia).  I'll give you that's over 45 years, but still at $200 million / yr it would take Texas AD over 300,000 years to generate as much as Star Wars has in 45.  

I'd also argue the Cardinals aren't a really national brand either.  They're mostly regional too.  Relatively few baseball fans outside the traditional Cardinals region care about them.  MLB like college athletics is extremely regional (& really most sports to a lesser degree).  That doesn't mean Texas or the Cardinals aren't tremendously valuable and popular enough in their regions to be forced upon a national audience regularly, they just aren't nationally appealing like Star Wars.

I'm biased as a non-college football fan, but you are even more biased as a Texas fan (who I believe lives in and/or is from Texas which kinda proves my point).

 

Yes I'm biased, I live in Texas and I have a degree from Texas.  I'm not sure why Star Wars is the benchmark for a National Brand, if that's the standard no sports team is a national brand.   I guess because I made a joke about Texas being the evil empire is why you seized onto that comparison.   That's a joke because they're villianized by Nebraska, aTm, CU, etc because it's the 800lbs gorilla.

All I offered up was facts that I thought supported Texas is a national brand and compared it to one of the most successful MLB baseball teams in terms of revenue which is an objective benchmark.

If you are a college football fan Texas is a name team.  It is one of the biggest brands in College Sports Learfield IMG Directors Cup winner (only school not named Stanford to win it, I think).  Is it national?  Just ask yourself these questions...do you know the colors, the mascot, the location, maybe a player or 2?  Most even passive sports fans do.  That's what a brand is, whatever you think the people putting up the $ think it's more valuable than the other alternatives.

 

National Brand or not the move is most likely impacting college sports as you know it.  That's not just me saying that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^They're definitely up there with the likes of Ohio State, Michigan, LSU, Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, Penn State, USC, Alabama, UCLA, Indiana, Notre Dame and other 800 lb gorilla "name" brands in college sports. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

Yes I'm biased, I live in Texas and I have a degree from Texas.  I'm not sure why Star Wars is the benchmark for a National Brand, if that's the standard no sports team is a national brand.   I guess because I made a joke about Texas being the evil empire is why you seized onto that comparison.   That's a joke because they're villianized by Nebraska, aTm, CU, etc because it's the 800lbs gorilla.

All I offered up was facts that I thought supported Texas is a national brand and compared it to one of the most successful MLB baseball teams in terms of revenue which is an objective benchmark.

If you are a college football fan Texas is a name team.  It is one of the biggest brands in College Sports Learfield IMG Directors Cup winner (only school not named Stanford to win it, I think).  Is it national?  Just ask yourself these questions...do you know the colors, the mascot, the location, maybe a player or 2?  Most even passive sports fans do.  That's what a brand is, whatever you think the people putting up the $ think it's more valuable than the other alternatives.

 

National Brand or not the move is most likely impacting college sports as you know it.  That's not just me saying that...

Gotcha.  I did think your post was putting Texas Athletics & Star Wars on the same level in terms of "brands".  If that was a joke, I missed it.  I'm glad we can agree that equating the two is bonkers.

I started typing out a bigger response, but this is a bit like debating @billiken_roy about some random metro Illinois player.  We aren't going to get anywhere.  You seem to think Texas stands alone as the pinnacle of college athletics brands on a national level and I agree with @Compton that they're up there with a dozen or two other schools - all of which have greater national recognition than most college brands, but are still only big draws regionally.  I can't walk into a St. Louis Target and buy Texas gear (or USC or Florida, etc.).  We aren't going to change each other's minds and seem to have differing definitions of what a national brand is.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

Gotcha.  I did think your post was putting Texas Athletics & Star Wars on the same level in terms of "brands".  If that was a joke, I missed it.  I'm glad we can agree that equating the two is bonkers.

I started typing out a bigger response, but this is a bit like debating @billiken_roy about some random metro Illinois player.  We aren't going to get anywhere.  You seem to think Texas stands alone as the pinnacle of college athletics brands on a national level and I agree with @Compton that they're up there with a dozen or two other schools - all of which have greater national recognition than most college brands, but are still only big draws regionally.  I can't walk into a St. Louis Target and buy Texas gear (or USC or Florida, etc.).  We aren't going to change each other's minds and seem to have differing definitions of what a national brand is.

 

 

The truth is it's somewhere in between standing alone and 1-2 dozen other schools and this is after a 10+ year run of less than normal results. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...