BREAKING Sec additions–Texas, Oklahoma inquire about joining SEC per report

[BamaInBham]

Can someone PLEASE explain this one to me?

Why is it "Texas got money" and that does something? I'm asking sincerely.

Texas THINKS that "well, we got all this money, therefore"....I mean WHAT?

What is it about them that adds so much so-called value to whatever?

They have eyeballs. I was not speaking of money or any other type of influence - just eyeballs and some charisma.

Some keep speaking of footprint and how UTx does not expand that. That is 10-year old thinking. A Yahoo article I just read said that it is not now about cable boxes but streaming subscriptions. I.e., it's those who care about the sport and the program, not just someone who has a cable box.

In a previous post I used the analogy of Bama and AU to UTx and A&M. If AU was in a conf that was considering extending an offer to Alabama, how many would make the fallacious argument that since they were in the same state that Alabama would not add great value to the conference?

Hope that helps.

Someone posted above that the top 3 college football markets are:

1- Birmingham
2- Columbus, Oh
3- OKC

This supposedly matters more now.

 

[81usaf92]

They have eyeballs. I was not speaking of money or any other type of influence - just eyeballs and some charisma.

Some keep speaking of footprint and how UTx does not expand that. That is 10-year old thinking. A Yahoo article I just read said that it is not now about cable boxes but streaming subscriptions. I.e., it's those who care about the sport and the program, not just someone who has a cable box.

In a previous post I used the analogy of Bama and AU to UTx and A&M. If AU was in a conf that was considering extending an offer to Alabama, how many would make the fallacious argument that since they were in the same state that Alabama would not add great value to the conference?

Hope that helps.

Someone posted above that the top 3 college football markets are:

1- Birmingham
2- Columbus, Oh
3- OKC

This supposedly matters more now.

But again that is college football… where are their markets during basketball season? Nowhere to be found. The only real advantage of either outside of football is Texas baseball and Oklahoma softball. But neither of those sports are big money makers on TV. Basketball is the king outside of football.

Kansas really keeps the Big XII up at the end of football season.

 

[BamaHoHo]

http://robocoach.discussion.community/post/oklahoma-and-texas-in-talks-to-join-sec-11807075?trail=90

Couple notes to clear up things people have brought up:
LHN would go away. ESPN wants it gone and other than money, Texas doesn't really want it either.

Current conference payouts listed in a previous post do not include Big 12 tier 3 rights. Texas is getting more than the SEC currently. OU is likely around the same amount. It's expected that everyone would get more if OU and Texas join.

OSU and OU are not tied together. Former OU President David Boren was the one trying to keep them together. He used the OSU argument to keep OU $$$ people from pushing for a different conference. Boren was very much a keep the status quo President and did not take many risks which is probably why he had that position for as long as he did.

11 out of 14 yes votes from current SEC members are needed. Only school that has made any real public display to indicate their vote is a no from A&M

One major benefit for ESPN to facilitate all of this is it pulls the rug out from FOX. Fox doesn't have a huge interest in the Big 12 other than OU and Texas.

Grant of Rights (TV Contract) expires after 2025, I think. If this becomes a done deal before then, the move will happen sooner. Both Texas and OU would be willing to pay to get out of the Big 12 and it would likely be in the best interest of the other 8 schools to not have the dark cloud hanging over them for 4 years.

OU has used Fox Sports regional networks for their Tier 3 rights. It sounds like Ballys doesn't want to continue this moving forward at the price OU wants which would force OU to find a new alternative anyways.

OU has been unhappy with the Big 12 refusing to stand up to the TV partners. I'm guessing the move has been in the works before the kick-off time between OU and Nebraska was announced, but in a lot of OU fans and boosters minds, the Big 12's reaction was the slap in the face needed to commit to moving

 

[TexasBama]

I lived in Texas for about 6 months and I think @TexasBama is right in that Texas best resembles Buck Strickland from King of the Hill

Well, they just think they're Buck Strickland. They're actually Dale Gribble.

 

[TideEngineer08]

But again that is college football… where are their markets during basketball season? Nowhere to be found. The only real advantage of either outside of football is Texas baseball and Oklahoma softball.

Yes but doesn’t football revenue dwarf everything, even men’s basketball?

Having said that, I’d be warm to the addition of Kansas due to the basketball they’d bring to the table. But then would Missouri get upset? There is bitterness there but not like UT/A&M.

 

[Power Eye]

You’re operating under the paradigm that new states and state populations mean something in these matters. Worlds have changed in the last ten years.

How many new viewers would Oklahoma bring to the table vs North Carolina or Virginia?

Completely agree. Adding an Oklahoma is a much better choice than adding a UNC or UVA even if the state populations are larger. Oklahoma and Texas are national brands that will draw eyes from all over the country regardless of whether they are fans of those schools. People in North Carolina and Virginia aren't going to just start watching SEC games unless they are football fans of those schools, and frankly, there aren't nearly as many of those as there are fans of Oklahoma and Texas. You don't get sidewalk football fans of those schools. Basketball yes, but not football.

 

[TideEngineer08]

From @NicoleAuerbach on Twitter:

Neither Oklahoma nor Texas are on the Big 12 call tonight, source confirms to @TheAthletic. All 10 schools were invited to attend.

 

[81usaf92]

Yes but doesn’t football revenue dwarf everything, even men’s basketball?

Having said that, I’d be warm to the addition of Kansas due to the basketball they’d bring to the table. But then would Missouri get upset? There is bitterness there but not like UT/A&M.

Yes but what is really being added in terms of subscriptions with this move. Getting Texas is basically like getting Florida St. At some point we have to look at improving other sports that generate money. Right now Kentucky is our only true basketball school.

I don’t think Missouri would be as against Kansas. It’s not as deep as it is with Texas and A&M. I think Kentucky may have more issues with it.

 

[BamaInBham]

I will state again: basketball and obviously all other collegiate sports have almost no influence on the TV decisions. So programs like NC, Kansas, Virginia, et al. have less cache than many think in these discussions. That's why OU and UTx carry far more weight, not because of money or other sports but because of the football cache. I'm not one who cares for these likely additions because it will be tougher on Alabama, but I have to admit that the additional marquee games are exciting to consider. ESPN is likely slobbering over themselves.

Alabama-OU every 4 years or so
Alabama-UTx every 4 years or so
Alabama-UGA annual rather than every 6 years
Alabama-UF annual rather than every 6 years
(less Alabama-LSU, just every 4 years or so)

LSU-OU annually
LSU-UTx annually
LSU-UGA every 4 years or so
(less LSU-UF, LSU-Alabama, just every 4 years or so)

UGA-Alabama annually
UGA-OU, UTx, LSU every 4 years

UF-Alabama annually
UF-OU, UTx, LSU every 4 years

UTx and A&M

and so on

That's not counting when the good program has the occasional great year or at least great start. Like A&M, AU (who appears to be in decline), UTn (currently dead), Missouri, Ark.

Much more potential for great matchups every weekend.

Plus the potential for Bama vs OU or UTx or LSU in the SECC game.

For those who say the UTx is not what they were, that is true, but for a few years just the name will be fun. And if they don't recover, punching that soft belly will still be satisfying and if they do recover, they can join in the fun.

 

[BamaInBham]

But again that is college football… where are their markets during basketball season? Nowhere to be found. The only real advantage of either outside of football is Texas baseball and Oklahoma softball. But neither of those sports are big money makers on TV. Basketball is the king outside of football.

Kansas really keeps the Big XII up at the end of football season.

But according to everything I read basketball has almost no influence in important discussions. I do know that the TV and attendance money from football dwarfs basketball money - even at Kentucky. This was true at least a couple of years ago when I researched it. I would assume the gap has widened since. But whether it is wise or not, at least according to everything I have ever read about this, football is the only sport of consequence in these talks.

 

[81usaf92]

I will state again: basketball and obviously all other collegiate sports have almost no influence on the TV decisions. So programs like NC, Kansas, Virginia, et al. have less cache than many think in these discussions. That's why OU and UTx carry far more weight, not because of money or other sports but because of the football cache. I'm not one who cares for these likely additions because it will be tougher on Alabama, but I have to admit that the additional marquee games are exciting to consider. ESPN is likely slobbering over themselves.

Alabama-OU every 4 years or so
Alabama-UTx every 4 years or so
Alabama-UGA annual rather than every 6 years
Alabama-UF annual rather than every 6 years
(less Alabama-LSU, just every 4 years or so)

LSU-OU annually
LSU-UTx annually
LSU-UGA every 4 years or so
(less LSU-UF, LSU-Alabama, just every 4 years or so)

UGA-Alabama annually
UGA-OU, UTx, LSU every 4 years

UF-Alabama annually
UF-OU, UTx, LSU every 4 years

UTx and A&M

and so on

That's not counting when the good program has the occasional great year or at least great start. Like A&M, AU (who appears to be in decline), UTn (currently dead), Missouri, Ark.

Much more potential for great matchups every weekend.

Plus the potential for Bama vs OU or UTx or LSU in the SECC game.

For those who say the UTx is not what they were, that is true, but for a few years just the name will be fun. And if they don't recover, punching that soft belly will still be satisfying and if they do recover, they can join in the fun.

You are assuming that is the way it happens. If they keep divisions With 8 teams per division then it could be every 6-7 years before we would play Oklahoma or Texas.

 

[Power Eye]

Much more potential for great matchups every weekend.

Exactly. Just adding those two teams will mean a guaranteed 2-3 marquee games of national importance every week. Once ESPN has the exclusive rights to air SEC games in a couple of years, anyone who cares about college football will be watching these games regardless of whether they are SEC fans or not.

 

[81usaf92]

But according to everything I read basketball has almost no influence in important discussions. I do know that the TV and attendance money from football dwarfs basketball money - even at Kentucky. This was true at least a couple of years ago when I researched it. I would assume the gap has widened since. But whether it is wise or not, at least according to everything I have ever read about this, football is the only sport of consequence in these talks.

Maybe, but you have to look at other sports at sometime. We already have the best football, baseball, and softball conference. Basketball is where the SEC is weakest. It’s the second biggest sport in college athletics and March madness is biggest money maker in college athletics.

But at this point what does it really matter. I would prefer the SEC to give these two the “ sorry we don’t need ya” and let their conference burn with bad tv deals. Both deserve it. But Sankey is about the worst SEC commissioner since Roy Kramer and it looks like he is ready to allow the burnt orange cow into the pen.

 

[TideEngineer08]

For those who say the UTx is not what they were, that is true, but for a few years just the name will be fun. And if they don't recover, punching that soft belly will still be satisfying

Too many of us are overlooking this possibility here

 

[81usaf92]

Exactly. Just adding those two teams will mean a guaranteed 2-3 marquee games of national importance every week. Once ESPN has the exclusive rights to air SEC games in a couple of years, anyone who cares about college football will be watching these games regardless of whether they are SEC fans or not.

Yeah Texas vs Mississippi St, Arkansas, Missouri, and Ole Miss are real marquee games. The only addition to this is the OU-TX game and TX vs aTm.

 

[KrAzY3]

In a previous post I used the analogy of Bama and AU to UTx and A&M. If AU was in a conf that was considering extending an offer to Alabama, how many would make the fallacious argument that since they were in the same state that Alabama would not add great value to the conference?

It's all relative though isn't it? If for instance you already were stuck with Auburn, would Alabama be the best possible addition from a purely financial standpoint? It doesn't seem all that likely to me.

If this was a matter of weighing whether or not it is best to add A&M+Missouri or Texas+Oklahoma it would be an entirely different discussion. It isn't though. It is the idea of adding Texas and Oklahoma having already added A&M and Missouri (making major inroads into the same markets) and not moving into other markets.

There is also just the general silliness that if you keep stacking football powers on top of of football powers something good will happen.

 

[TideEngineer08]

Maybe, but you have to look at other sports at sometime. We already have the best football, baseball, and softball conference. Basketball is where the SEC is weakest. It’s the second biggest sport in college athletics and March madness is biggest money maker in college athletics.

But at this point what does it really matter. I would prefer the SEC to give these two the “ sorry we don’t need ya” and let their conference burn with bad tv deals. Both deserve it. But Sankey is about the worst SEC commissioner since Roy Kramer and it looks like he is ready to allow the burnt orange cow into the pen.

They are not going to burn. If the SEC doesn’t take them, the Big Ten probably would. They would hold their noses over Oklahoma to get Texas. Or, the PAC 12 would probably pay them extra to join.

Texas and Oklahoma are going to land on their feet. The question is, and it’s more difficult to answer than any of us realize, if the SEC balks at OU/UT, do they get left behind when the dust settles? It’s easy to laugh that off and say hell no. But…I’m not sure reality follows.

It’s not that I think the SEC needs to be desperate at all. Shrewd, though. And I have mixed feelings about Sankey. The media seems to love him. And that’s not a plus in my book.

 

[81usaf92]

Too many of us are overlooking this possibility here

Yeah but I also remember folks on here thought Nebraska was going to be a powerhouse in the B1G.

RJ Young (an Oklahoma homer) said from a football sense it is the dumbest decision by both. Having to face aTm and LSU every year is going to seriously humble both programs who have been feasting on the Kansas’s and Iowa St’s of the world

 

[81usaf92]

They are not going to burn. If the SEC doesn’t take them, the Big Ten probably would. They would hold their noses over Oklahoma to get Texas. Or, the PAC 12 would probably pay them extra to join.

Texas and Oklahoma are going to land on their feet. The question is, and it’s more difficult to answer than any of us realize, if the SEC balks at OU/UT, do they get left behind when the dust settles? It’s easy to laugh that off and say hell no. But…I’m not sure reality follows.

It’s not that I think the SEC needs to be desperate at all. Shrewd, though. And I have mixed feelings about Sankey. The media seems to love him. And that’s not a plus in my book.

Well let them. We are killing the LHN and we don’t have bad partners.

Also The B1G won’t take Oklahoma but they will take Texas. AAU stipulation.

 

[TideEngineer08]

Yeah but I also remember folks on here thought Nebraska was going to be a powerhouse in the B1G.

RJ Young (an Oklahoma homer) said from a football sense it is the dumbest decision by both. Having to face aTm and LSU every year is going to seriously humble both programs who have been feasting on the Kansas’s and Iowa St’s of the world

Oh I’m saying my hope is they turn into the equivalent of the Big Ten’s Nebraska.