North Carolina has officially been offered to join the Big Ten

[HungaryGator]

Originally Posted by atlantagator86

The difference is they have the top program in TX, OK, KS and WV and practically a monopoly of the major programs in all those states (except Texas A&M). Iowa is the only exception where they have the 2nd team. And they'd be adding no better than the 2nd team in those new states.

Plus, because they will have all kinds of gaps in their map, it would be a lot harder to sell regional coverage. What I mean is that the SEC Network can easily sell the fact that in Georgia, there aren't just UGA fans but fans of just about every SEC team, so there's going to be strong interest in most games.

The Big-12 is going to have a much tougher time convincing cable operators in WV that there's interest in anything but the WVU programming 1/12 or 1/16th of the programming on a Big-12 network.

Same deal when it comes to network region coverage of football games. The Big-12 is going to have a tough time getting anything but local market game coverage if they have a bunch of one off teams. But if they can get a cluster of say FSU, Clemson, GT and NCSU in contiguous states, they could probably get more regional coverage and even possibly in outer markets they don't have teams if there are teams with regional interest.

They have Kansas and Oklahoma and West Virginia...but those aren't worth much even having the whole thing. They've got less than half of Iowa which isn't worth much even if they had the whole thing. Even having the #2 teams in Florida and North Carolina brings a helluva lot more to the table than than anybody they've got except for Bevo and the Sooners.

All they need to make a conference network get home state coverage and revenues is to have enough fans to make enough of a stink if they weren't picked up by cable carriers in that market that they do get picked up. sow could deliver Florida and Clemson could deliver South Carolina and NC State could deliver North Carolina....Louisville could deliver Kentucky even though those teams obviously are not #1 in any of those markets. The Big 12's footprint is Bevo and a bunch of worthless crap nobody cares about. At least this would give them something. The other members of the conference will definitely want it because as of now, if Bevo were to decide to leave and find away to finagle the contractual issues, they'd be utterly screwed. Nobody wants TCU or Baylor or Kansas or Iowa State or West Virginia...Texas Tech and Okie Light are attractive only in that they are linked to OU and Bevo, otherwise they ain't worth much either.

[atlantagator86]

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

The Big 10 has discussed it with them many times for many years. They have consistently refused.

And once again, it is because the Big-10 will only offer Notre Dame as a full member. Notre Dame has not and will not become a full member of any conference until it has to! Notre Dame has not discussed becoming a full member with ANY conference. It has little if anything to do with the Big-10.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

according to everything we've heard they have. They own it and thus can't help but get a larger share of the cut than they had been getting.

I know and I'm not really sure what that means. What do they own? Who owns the bowls now? The city of Phoenix doesn't really own anything of the Fiesta Bowl, do they? They a huge prize payout to the participants for the right to host the game and make money on hotels, restaurants and attractions. And they make money on the ticket sales, parking and concessions. But I don't think they own anything. I don't think they make any of the TV money.

And I don't know that anything really changes with the SEC/Big-12 owning the Sugar Bowl game. The city of New Orleans is still going pay to host the game and make money the same way. The only thing I can see changing is the SEC/Big-12 take a cut of ticket sales, parking and concessions, but I don't know if New Orleans can really give them a whole without cutting the payouts.

I think the bigger deal with the SEC/Big-12 "owning" the game is control. Particularly control of who gets to the game, where in some cases, teams have gotten bypassed by bowl games because they are more profitable to a city.

I'm not sure who owns the TV rights and gets the TV revenues. Presumedly, the Sugar Bowl is part of the playoff system and those TV rights are negotiated with the BCS, not the cities, so I'm not sure the SEC or Big-12 get that money either.

Somebody else might know more details, but I'm really not sure where all these extra profit is going to come from.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

I think 14 and a holding pattern for ND is possible. The way I think NC State could be possible is if UNC heads to the SEC. The Big 10 wouldn't take NC State due to academic snobbery. The Big 12 would have no such hangups.

Like I said, it's possible, but not likely. If and only if UNC moves would any of the other NC schools likely move.

I think it's unlikely UNC goes to the Big-10 right now. Big-10 probably takes UVA and GT and at least pauses. I also don't think the SEC makes any moves right now unless UNC says they're ready, which I think is unlikely.

I just don't think armageddon is going to happen quite yet. Like I said, I could easily see GT and UVA to Big-10, FSU and Clemson to the Big-12 once the Maryland buyout is finalized. And then Cincy and UConn further weakening the ACC. And then things quiet down for a while.

[atlantagator86]

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

They have Kansas and Oklahoma and West Virginia...but those aren't worth much even having the whole thing. They've got less than half of Iowa which isn't worth much even if they had the whole thing. Even having the #2 teams in Florida and North Carolina brings a helluva lot more to the table than than anybody they've got except for Bevo and the Sooners.

Think regionally!!!

Big-12, except for Texas A&M fans now, still has a virtual monopoly on the state of Texas, plus those other states, but the key is they're all clustered in a region. When you have have a cluster of programs like they do, they will have smaller groups of fans from multiple schools pushing for them. For example, there are enough pockets of fans of different Big-12 schools that they may get cable coverage in parts of LA, AR, MO, NE, CO and NM.

Just as an SEC Network would almost surely be picked up in parts of NC and VA, even if we don't add any teams there.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

All they need to make a conference network get home state coverage and revenues is to have enough fans to make enough of a stink if they weren't picked up by cable carriers in that market that they do get picked up. sow could deliver Florida and Clemson could deliver South Carolina and NC State could deliver North Carolina....Louisville could deliver Kentucky even though those teams obviously are not #1 in any of those markets. The Big 12's footprint is Bevo and a bunch of worthless crap nobody cares about. At least this would give them something.

I think we're saying similar things here as I said above, but UL is really mostly a metro city school and I don't know the level of support outside the city.

Also, it's a little more complex. The Longhorn Network still only has 12.9% availability in the city of Austin Texas. You've really got to have programming that appeals to a LOT of people, not just the fans of one school.

Cable operators in NC may not be willing to absorb the cost of network that only appeals to NCSU fans when there are 4 major schools in the state.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

The other members of the conference will definitely want it because as of now, if Bevo were to decide to leave and find away to finagle the contractual issues, they'd be utterly screwed. Nobody wants TCU or Baylor or Kansas or Iowa State or West Virginia...Texas Tech and Okie Light are attractive only in that they are linked to OU and Bevo, otherwise they ain't worth much either.

This actually leads to the reason the Big-12, in my opinion MUST take FSU and Clemson now if they can. I actually think the addition of FSU and Clemson, if they can get them, helps stabilize the conference and takes away power from Texas.

Right now, the Big-12 is TOTALLY dependent on Texas. The Big-12 cannot survive without Texas. Texas knows it and so does every other member. That more than anything else is the power Texas holds over the other Big-12 members and they continually use that power to bully the other members.

If and only if the Big-12 adds additional strong members, like FSU and Clemson, does the rest of the conference have a chance of survival without Texas and at least in my opinion, takes away quite of bit of Texas' power in the conference.

[HungaryGator]

Originally Posted by atlantagator86

And once again, it is because the Big-10 will only offer Notre Dame as a full member. Notre Dame has not and will not become a full member of any conference until it has to! Notre Dame has not discussed becoming a full member with ANY conference. It has little if anything to do with the Big-10.

Every indication I get from both the Big 10 side as well as the ND side is that ND will N-E-V-E-R join the Big 10. They will put off joining any conference until they absolutely have to but when they do, they'd be prepared to go almost anywhere but the Big 10.

I know and I'm not really sure what that means. What do they own? Who owns the bowls now? The city of Phoenix doesn't really own anything of the Fiesta Bowl, do they? They a huge prize payout to the participants for the right to host the game and make money on hotels, restaurants and attractions. And they make money on the ticket sales, parking and concessions. But I don't think they own anything. I don't think they make any of the TV money.

The bowls are separate corporations with their own boards and administrators who get big fat salaries and enjoy all kinds of perks.

And I don't know that anything really changes with the SEC/Big-12 owning the Sugar Bowl game. The city of New Orleans is still going pay to host the game and make money the same way. The only thing I can see changing is the SEC/Big-12 take a cut of ticket sales, parking and concessions, but I don't know if New Orleans can really give them a whole without cutting the payouts.

Since they own it and can hold it wherever they like, they were able to force competitive bidding between New Orleans and Dallas. New Orleans won but presumably had to pay a higher price than they were paying for their own bowl which they owned and which was therefore not subject to market forces.

I think the bigger deal with the SEC/Big-12 "owning" the game is control. Particularly control of who gets to the game, where in some cases, teams have gotten bypassed by bowl games because they are more profitable to a city.

I'm not sure who owns the TV rights and gets the TV revenues. Presumedly, the Sugar Bowl is part of the playoff system and those TV rights are negotiated with the BCS, not the cities, so I'm not sure the SEC or Big-12 get that money either.

My understanding is that since they own it, they get that revenue too. They can monetize the game any way they see fit just like the corporations which own/run the bowl games now do.

I think it's unlikely UNC goes to the Big-10 right now. Big-10 probably takes UVA and GT and at least pauses. I also don't think the SEC makes any moves right now unless UNC says they're ready, which I think is unlikely.

I agree with the first part. I disagree with the 2nd. If the Big 10 makes that move, the SEC will try hard for Va Tech and will approach UNC...and an ACC that has just lost UVA, Va Tech and Ga Tech and which has thus lost the states of Virginia and Georgia looks a whole lot different and a whole lot weaker than the current ACC. Of their Maryland-Virginia-North Carolina heartland, they would have then lost Maryland and Virginia entirely and lost Georgia which though they had the distant 2nd team in that state is still a good sized state. Ouch. UNC would have to think hard in that case.

Then there is the possibility that fsu and Clemson may head for the exits (ie the Big 12). What then if you're UNC? The conference is torpedoed at that point and I think all of them will be looking for the lifeboats.

I just don't think armageddon is going to happen quite yet. Like I said, I could easily see GT and UVA to Big-10, FSU and Clemson to the Big-12 once the Maryland buyout is finalized. And then Cincy and UConn further weakening the ACC. And then things quiet down for a while.

I don't think the SEC would just sit there doing nothing when there is a good possibility of getting some of the schools/markets it wants and when other conferences are strengthening themselves.

[HungaryGator]

Originally Posted by atlantagator86

Think regionally!!!

Big-12, except for Texas A&M fans now, still has a virtual monopoly on the state of Texas, plus those other states, but the key is they're all clustered in a region. When you have have a cluster of programs like they do, they will have smaller groups of fans from multiple schools pushing for them. For example, there are enough pockets of fans of different Big-12 schools that they may get cable coverage in parts of LA, AR, MO, NE, CO and NM.

Just as an SEC Network would almost surely be picked up in parts of NC and VA, even if we don't add any teams there.

Its about having enough of a pull to get as part of the regular cable package in a state. Yes, obviously SEC games would be shown in North Carolina and Virginia even if we do not have a school in either state BUT...its about $0.10 per month in those states as opposed to $1.00 per month in a state where the conference network IS on the regular cable package. The way you get that much higher payout is to have enough people in the state who will raise a stink if you're not on the regular cable package and that only comes when you've got a team in that state. The difference in payout is 10X for states in the network as opposed to states not in the network.

I think we're saying similar things here as I said above, but UL is really mostly a metro city school and I don't know the level of support outside the city.

Could they raise enough of a stink...could they beyotch enough that the cable providers would add them at the cost of $1/month on everybody's cable bill in that state? I'd guess yes.

Also, it's a little more complex. The Longhorn Network still only has 12.9% availability in the city of Austin Texas. You've really got to have programming that appeals to a LOT of people, not just the fans of one school.

I agree here....IMO it takes a whole conference worth of content to make a viable network. I don't know the details of their contract with ESPN though. I was under the impression they got their $15 mil per year from ESPN no matter what. If they really only got $3.9 mil then that is an exceptionally crappy deal...far worse than UF's $10 mil per year or UGA's $11 mil per year or Bama's $9 mil per year, etc etc. You really think Texas didn't even pull in a measely $4 mil for their Tier III rights this past season?

Cable operators in NC may not be willing to absorb the cost of network that only appeals to NCSU fans when there are 4 major schools in the state.

Wake is not a major school. Duke is in North Carolina. It is not of North Carolina as I post this to you from Charlotte. They are small and their students come from everywhere (like my sister who came from Florida, graduated from Duke and now lives in Georgia...and doesn't care in the least about college sports) and then disperse. They've got no pull in North Carolina. NC State? They've probably got enough alums and fans to raise enough hell to get a conference network carried in this state.

This actually leads to the reason the Big-12, in my opinion MUST take FSU and Clemson now if they can. I actually think the addition of FSU and Clemson, if they can get them, helps stabilize the conference and takes away power from Texas.[

Right now, the Big-12 is TOTALLY dependent on Texas. The Big-12 cannot survive without Texas. Texas knows it and so does every other member. That more than anything else is the power Texas holds over the other Big-12 members and they continually use that power to bully the other members.

If and only if the Big-12 adds additional strong members, like FSU and Clemson, does the rest of the conference have a chance of survival without Texas and at least in my opinion, takes away quite of bit of Texas' power in the conference.

Agree Wholeheartedly. I will say this...if they did take fsu and Clemson, when the day comes that they must decide, it would be a lot easier for ND to go to a Big 12 that was not confined merely to Texas and a few sparsely populated Great Plains states only along with West Virginia which doesn't really matter either. Having Florida and South Carolina (and North Carolina?) in the footprint makes it a whole lot more attractive for ND in its aspiration to a "national" school. That, and the other members will be in favor of anything that weakens Bevo's hand so bringing in say a NC State and a Louisville would be more attractive to them than you might otherwise think.

[gatorev12]

Hungary is right about ND: they will likely never join the Big 10 for a litany of reasons...but primarily due to the bad blood between their fans/alumni/administration and the historical powers of the Big 10. And yes, with all the talk of expansion in college football--it's pretty clear ND was going to do everything they could to keep their current arrangement intact and the ACC was willing to put up with it. Nevertheless, ND's signed-on to series with several Big 12 schools over the last few years (including a 4 game series with Texas starting in a couple seasons...and the most recent series with OU). They are keeping the pokers in the fire, as it were.

[atlantagator86]

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

Every indication I get from both the Big 10 side as well as the ND side is that ND will N-E-V-E-R join the Big 10. They will put off joining any conference until they absolutely have to but when they do, they'd be prepared to go almost anywhere but the Big 10.

The point about which conference Notre Dame eventually joins is moot because they aren't going anywhere any time soon.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

The bowls are separate corporations with their own boards and administrators who get big fat salaries and enjoy all kinds of perks.

Since they own it and can hold it wherever they like, they were able to force competitive bidding between New Orleans and Dallas. New Orleans won but presumably had to pay a higher price than they were paying for their own bowl which they owned and which was therefore not subject to market forces.

My understanding is that since they own it, they get that revenue too. They can monetize the game any way they see fit just like the corporations which own/run the bowl games now do.

It should be noted that the current organizations behind the Sugar, Fiesta and Orange Bowl are non-profit organizations, or what is really more of a not-for-profit. That meaning they are more facilitators of the bowls as opposed to a profitable corporation. They don't really generate revenue to themselves to the best of my knowledge. These organizations are mostly funded by the states.

That doesn't mean there isn't some revenue to the organization, but it's not a lot. I'm not sure the SEC or Big-12, which I think are also really non-profit/not-for-profit, would be able to change that model or receive revenue, or any revenue would be redistributed to the member institutions. I really don't know the answers.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

I agree with the first part. I disagree with the 2nd. If the Big 10 makes that move, the SEC will try hard for Va Tech and will approach UNC...and an ACC that has just lost UVA, Va Tech and Ga Tech and which has thus lost the states of Virginia and Georgia looks a whole lot different and a whole lot weaker than the current ACC. Of their Maryland-Virginia-North Carolina heartland, they would have then lost Maryland and Virginia entirely and lost Georgia which though they had the distant 2nd team in that state is still a good sized state. Ouch. UNC would have to think hard in that case.

Then there is the possibility that fsu and Clemson may head for the exits (ie the Big 12). What then if you're UNC? The conference is torpedoed at that point and I think all of them will be looking for the lifeboats.

I don't think the SEC would just sit there doing nothing when there is a good possibility of getting some of the schools/markets it wants and when other conferences are strengthening themselves.

We've been over this. VT isn't going anywhere and will likely be there if/when the SEC calls. No need for the SEC to panic and make a move until it wants/needs to.

We've both stated our positions. You think there will be a total armageddon now and I don't think it's quite at that point ... yet. With the Big East pretty much completely dead as a football conference as of last night, the ACC can add UConn, Cincy and even USF and survive. Yes it will be weaker and a collapse is pretty much imminent in my opinion, but I think they can probably hold the conference together for another year or two. We'll just have to wait and see how it all shakes out.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

Its about having enough of a pull to get as part of the regular cable package in a state. Yes, obviously SEC games would be shown in North Carolina and Virginia even if we do not have a school in either state BUT...its about $0.10 per month in those states as opposed to $1.00 per month in a state where the conference network IS on the regular cable package. The way you get that much higher payout is to have enough people in the state who will raise a stink if you're not on the regular cable package and that only comes when you've got a team in that state. The difference in payout is 10X for states in the network as opposed to states not in the network.

I agree here....IMO it takes a whole conference worth of content to make a viable network.

You kind of lost me here. Is there a rule that if there isn't a team in the state, the carriage fee is only 1/10th?!?! I wasn't aware of that.

The bottom line is that cable operators don't have the cushion to absorb the cost of adding new programming. There has to be something really overwhelmingly popular for them to want to add it to the basic cable tier, because to add it, they pretty much have to raise rates to everyone, which is never popular.

It's not enough to have 10% of the subscribers beg for it if 90% are going to complain if their bill goes up or cancel their service. The number has to be almost overwhelming. Even in the case of LHN, the demand hasn't been high enough in the city of Austin for most cable operators to bite.

The cable operators would prefer to have people subscribe to programming, but of course anything subscription based is going to greatly reduce the revenue, so that's not what the conferences want.

That's why, as we both agree, it's important for the network to cover a conference as opposed to just a team. But at the same time, in any given market, you still have to have interest in more than one school to make it work and why the Big-12 map becomes problematic.

If the Big-12 creates a network and adds Clemson and FSU, would there be enough demand in Clemson/Big-12 programming that every cable subscriber across the state, or even just in Greenville area, would be willing for their cable bill to increase? I think there would be more backlash from Carolina fans and others who don't care about Clemson to keep it from happening.

That's why I say to think more regionally or clusters. If hypothetically instead of just Clemson, the Big-12 could also add GT and UNC (unlikely), even though the number of fans for those 2 schools is smaller in SC, there would probably be enough fans of those 3 schools to support it, plus it takes away the perception that a cable operator is favoring just one school.

The same think could happen in Florida if the Big-12 adds FSU. How do you think Gator fans and non-FSU fans would feel about their cable bills increasing $1 a month for a Big-12 network? Especially since outside of FSU there would be almost zero viewership for the Big-12. Even if the Big-12 adds FSU and Clemson, I'm not really sure a Big-12 Network would be added as a basic channel anywhere East of their current footprint.

By comparison, because there are multiple teams of regional interest, the SEC would probably have no problem getting statewide carriage fees from every single cable operator in the states they reside and even some outside.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

Wake is not a major school. Duke is in North Carolina. It is not of North Carolina as I post this to you from Charlotte. They are small and their students come from everywhere (like my sister who came from Florida, graduated from Duke and now lives in Georgia...and doesn't care in the least about college sports) and then disperse. They've got no pull in North Carolina. NC State? They've probably got enough alums and fans to raise enough hell to get a conference network carried in this state.

They may not have the level of support of UNC or NCSU, but they still have decent support, not just of alumni but people in the state who have adopted them.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

Agree Wholeheartedly. I will say this...if they did take fsu and Clemson, when the day comes that they must decide, it would be a lot easier for ND to go to a Big 12 that was not confined merely to Texas and a few sparsely populated Great Plains states only along with West Virginia which doesn't really matter either. Having Florida and South Carolina (and North Carolina?) in the footprint makes it a whole lot more attractive for ND in its aspiration to a "national" school. That, and the other members will be in favor of anything that weakens Bevo's hand so bringing in say a NC State and a Louisville would be more attractive to them than you might otherwise think.

Again, we'll agree to disagree. No matter what happens, the Big-12 is going to fall further behind the other conferences in revenues because their media map is likely going to suck.

Unless if/when Notre Dame decides to join a conference, they are willing to take what will probably be the lowest revenue model possible or if nobody but the Big-12 will have them, I just don't see them picking the Big-12. But we'll see what happens.

[HungaryGator]

Originally Posted by atlantagator86

The point about which conference Notre Dame eventually joins is moot because they aren't going anywhere any time soon.

Yeah I pretty much agree. It would take something unforeseen to change that.

It should be noted that the current organizations behind the Sugar, Fiesta and Orange Bowl are non-profit organizations, or what is really more of a not-for-profit. That meaning they are more facilitators of the bowls as opposed to a profitable corporation. They don't really generate revenue to themselves to the best of my knowledge. These organizations are mostly funded by the states.

That doesn't mean there isn't some revenue to the organization, but it's not a lot. I'm not sure the SEC or Big-12, which I think are also really non-profit/not-for-profit, would be able to change that model or receive revenue, or any revenue would be redistributed to the member institutions. I really don't know the answers.

They may officially be nonprofit but there is a huge amount of fat in the form of huge salaries for admins as well as all kinds of perks they dole out that are not necessary and which could easily be profit for the conferences. Did you see the big expose' on the Fiesta Bowl several months ago?

We've been over this. VT isn't going anywhere and will likely be there if/when the SEC calls. No need for the SEC to panic and make a move until it wants/needs to.

I don't think panic is the right term....its more like acquire a program they already wanted when the opportunity presents itself.

We've both stated our positions. You think there will be a total armageddon now and I don't think it's quite at that point ... yet. With the Big East pretty much completely dead as a football conference as of last night, the ACC can add UConn, Cincy and even USF and survive. Yes it will be weaker and a collapse is pretty much imminent in my opinion, but I think they can probably hold the conference together for another year or two. We'll just have to wait and see how it all shakes out.

I'm not sure. I do think it possible though.

You kind of lost me here. Is there a rule that if there isn't a team in the state, the carriage fee is only 1/10th?!?! I wasn't aware of that.

The bottom line is that cable operators don't have the cushion to absorb the cost of adding new programming. There has to be something really overwhelmingly popular for them to want to add it to the basic cable tier, because to add it, they pretty much have to raise rates to everyone, which is never popular.

It's not enough to have 10% of the subscribers beg for it if 90% are going to complain if their bill goes up or cancel their service. The number has to be almost overwhelming. Even in the case of LHN, the demand hasn't been high enough in the city of Austin for most cable operators to bite.

The cable operators would prefer to have people subscribe to programming, but of course anything subscription based is going to greatly reduce the revenue, so that's not what the conferences want.

Spot on. I have a buddy in Nashville. They get the Big 10 Network but it only costs something like $0.10/month. In Big 10 states its a buck a month. That's why in the SEC's, Big 10's, PAC's and ACC's expansion choices, every single one of them has acquired a team in a new state every single time. The only exception is the Big 12 taking TCU but the Big 12 was desperate and just looking for members.

[quote]That's why, as we both agree, it's important for the network to cover a conference as opposed to just a team. But at the same time, in any given market, you still have to have interest in more than one school to make it work and why the Big-12 map becomes problematic.

If the Big-12 creates a network and adds Clemson and FSU, would there be enough demand in Clemson/Big-12 programming that every cable subscriber across the state, or even just in Greenville area, would be willing for their cable bill to increase? I think there would be more backlash from Carolina fans and others who don't care about Clemson to keep it from happening.[/quote

I think the Big 12 Network would get added. Let's face it...rivals watch each other. For example, every single time it looks like sow or scUM is gonna lose a game, if I'm not already watching it, I make a point to switch over and savor their defeat. Of course if they're winning I switch away. I have no interest in watching evil triumph.

They may not have the level of support of UNC or NCSU, but they still have decent support, not just of alumni but people in the state who have adopted them.

I went to high school in Asheville. I've lived in Raleigh. I am currently in Charlotte. My sister graduated from Duke. I'm tellin' ya, their support within North Carolina is minimal.

Anyhoo, I've enjoyed getting your perspective on things. Always good to get a different take.

[atlantagator86]

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

They may officially be nonprofit but there is a huge amount of fat in the form of huge salaries for admins as well as all kinds of perks they dole out that are not necessary and which could easily be profit for the conferences.

But the money for those salaries and perks are mostly coming from state subsidies, which will go away. Surely there is a lot of under the table money moving around though. Not sure if that becomes profit or if the corruption goes away.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

I don't think panic is the right term....its more like acquire a program they already wanted when the opportunity presents itself.

VT and NCSU would probably join the SEC right now if they were offered, regardless of what GT and UVA do. That opportunity is probably already there whenever the SEC wants it.

Now the opportunity that might arise by the Big-10 taking GT and UVA is that could be the catalyst for the SEC to talk to UNC, since with UVA and UMD gone, that would be 2/3 of the primary power structure gone. And UNC is what I have said I believe would be the catalyst that might make the SEC expand sooner than later.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

I'm not sure. I do think it possible though.

I tend to think the big thing that would set of the expansion armageddon is the Pac-12 destabilizing the Big-12.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

Spot on. I have a buddy in Nashville. They get the Big 10 Network but it only costs something like $0.10/month. In Big 10 states its a buck a month.

My question would be whether that 1/10 rule goes for everybody of just the Big-10. The Big-10 Network took advantage of some major loophopes when it set up it's network that forced cable operators throughout the entire region to pick them up as part of the basic package. Those loopholes have been closed.

I don't recall the specifics or what they were charged, but I know that no other conference network is going to get that same deal.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

I think the Big 12 Network would get added. Let's face it...rivals watch each other. For example, every single time it looks like sow or scUM is gonna lose a game, if I'm not already watching it, I make a point to switch over and savor their defeat. Of course if they're winning I switch away. I have no interest in watching evil triumph.

We'll see. In TX, OK, and KS, yes. Outside of that, I think it could be iffy that they can get it on a non-subscription tier in any new non-adjacent state markets.

Originally Posted by HungaryGator

I went to high school in Asheville. I've lived in Raleigh. I am currently in Charlotte. My sister graduated from Duke. I'm tellin' ya, their support within North Carolina is minimal.

Anyhoo, I've enjoyed getting your perspective on things. Always good to get a different take.

Most of Wake's support is concentrated in the Greensboro, Winston Salem area. Not a huge market but it's there.

I enjoy it too. It's fun to try and figure out what these guys will do.

[tilly]

Originally Posted by atlantagator86

Most of Wake's support is concentrated in the Greensboro, Winston Salem area. Not a huge market but it's there.

Its a top 50 market, but It comes with State, Duke or UNC. Wake is big there, but so are the other schools on Tobacco Rd.

Bring any NC school and get 3 of the top 50 TV markets. (Charlotte, Raleigh, Greensboro) Plus Wilmington and Greenville bring you a half million pop. as well.

[Swampmaster]

when will UNC make the decision about moving to the Big 10?

[oragator1]

Originally Posted by Swampmaster

when will UNC make the decision about moving to the Big 10?

At a minimum it will be after the MD case gets resolved, but even then they won't leave unless they feel they don't have s choice.

[tilly]

Originally Posted by Swampmaster

when will UNC make the decision about moving to the Big 10?

First it will have to actually be offered to them...and then they will decide... if it is ever actually offered to them.

[BobK89]

Originally Posted by tilly

First it will have to actually be offered to them...and then they will decide... if it is ever actually offered to them.

Actually offered? Come on, Tilly, it's a done deal!!

Sent from my iPhone using GatorCountry

[rpmGator]

There is a big difference in being in a state and taking over its fan base when it may have several teams in that base.

aTm was about as close as it comes to taking over as it gets. Mizzoo doesn't have the same problem as its a one horse state.

aTm brought a lot of fans with it based on the quality of the opponents. Which made fans of other schools watch the games to see how their state did against ours.

Take all the teams outside the SEC, count their crystal balls and then count ours, and you understand that the best college football is played in the SEC.

Quality sells. Texas watched their guys play against our guys. NC won't drag as many fans toward the big 10 as they would in our direction.

The new SEC network will make a lot of teams sorry they didn't wait on an offer from us.

[ACCecil]

Right now conferences want to expand to add TV markets and TV footprints. Okay. That makes sense if you can add revenue in TV deals with ESPN, FOX and/or CBS and if you can monitize a cable deal like the LHN or Big-10 Network (which I have and pay for and do not want). So conferences are at 14, most of them, and heading to 16 or 18 or 20.

Okay.

Now what happens, in a few years, when you can pay for the TV channels you want instead of having to buy packages of channels with basically 4-5 choices? Suddenly the consumer is not forced to pay for crap channels they do not want. It would take me less than a freaking nanosecond to cancel the Big-10 Network if I could do it without losing channels I like.

Will 14, 16, 18 or even 20 teams in a conference still make economic sense? I hope not. I hope the whole dame thing comes crashing down and conferences go back to 12 regionally sensible programs and suddenly schools like Duke and UNC go back to being in the same conference despite the TV money that could be made by splitting them up.

It might take 50 years for all that to happen but I hope we go back to 12 programs all geographically close to each other one of these days. I won't hold my breath and the SEC will dominate under any TV arrangement. The SEC is a money printing machine. It is beautiful and sickening to me at the same time.

I hate each and everyone of you :-).

[atlantagator86]

Originally Posted by ACCecil

Now what happens, in a few years, when you can pay for the TV channels you want instead of having to buy packages of channels with basically 4-5 choices? Suddenly the consumer is not forced to pay for crap channels they do not want. It would take me less than a freaking nanosecond to cancel the Big-10 Network if I could do it without losing channels I like.

I don't know that this will ever happen through any sort of TV feed coming into your home by some form of provider (cable/satellite or whatever there is in 50 years).

What I believe you may ultimately see down the road is a that networks like ESPN and Fox will consolidate their programming into a single service that offers more On Demand programming.

So for example if you subscribe to ESPN, then you have a menu that allows you choose exactly which live ESPN game you want to watch, or replays of games from a library, or live SportCenter, of from the library of non-live programs (OTL etc). Not completely unlike the ESPN3 online model.

The result of that would be that regional coverage might effectively go away. You can pick any game in any region the network has the rights to show.

The college sports networks may prefer to stay independent, but my guess is they would merge into the the sports network they're aligned with to get national exposure, so for example the SEC Network and Pac-12 would be part of the ESPN package and Big-10 Network and Big-12 would be part of the Fox Sports package.

Since there would be a lot more programming available, the cost to subscribe to ESPN may be high ($10-$20 a month) and that may be the only way to get the SEC Network programming.

These sports networks will probably have a lot of programming available and stuff you'll never watch. But that $10-$20 a month you pay will still be subsidizing smaller sports and smaller conferences you don't care about or never watch. They'll want to add essential programming on each network that makes you almost have to subscribe, like MNF on ESPN. Bottom line is that if you're any kind of sports fan, you're probably going to have to subscribe to ESPN and Fox.

The reason I point this out is that the idea that you will be able to only choose to pay for the sports teams or conferences you want is probably never going to happen. You will likely always be paying to subsidize weaker sports and conferences and stuff you don't care about. If you subscribe to the ESPN package, you'll still be paying for the Pac-12 Network programming whether you want it or not.

[RattlerGator]

The reason I point this out is that the idea that you will be able to only choose to pay for the sports teams or conferences you want is probably never going to happen. You will likely always be paying to subsidize weaker sports and conferences and stuff you don't care about. If you subscribe to the ESPN package, you'll still be paying for the Pac-12 Network programming whether you want it or not.

I'm not sure about that at all. I'm certain that's the way the current entities would like it to evolve but seriously doubtful it will. Technology will likely surprise us in ways we just can't quite fathom. And that will likely make what now seems patently absurd not absurd at all but quite probable.

[ACCecil]

I'm hoping Apple does to TV what it has done to other industries. If that happens, the economics that support all this conference expansion are going to look about as smart as the people who were selling securities based on real estate values always going up from 2002-2008 until reality set in.

I'm thinking hat eventually the computer and TV merge and you "stream" whatever sports programming you desire. If my thinking is right you NOT be supporting any smaller sports or peripheral programming you do not want. I might buy the whole season of a TV show I like, like 2 and a Half Men, and watch it on my tablet or smart phone and never need my TV. If I acquire content that way I sure as hell don't need my cable bill each month.

I hope it works that way.

I could be wrong.

But I'd love to see all these $40 and $50 mil per program per year projections to turn out to be horse manure. Conferences make more sense when they are regional.

It sucks that UNC and MYD are not in the same conference anymore since MYD bolted for the Big-10. I can't blame them. More money. But if the economics of sports changes it could realign things once again, at least I hope so.

One last thought, atlantagator and hungrygator have had a good healthy discussion on this issue and atlantagator has been an encycledpedia on this topic for well over a year now. It is best to listen on what these guys are posting because they do their homework. For what it is worth, not much I suppose, I honestly don't think the Pac-12 is limited to only poaching Big-12 teams if the Big-12 implodes.

I think TX in the Pac-12 is retarded.

AzCatfan knows the Pac-12 as well as anyone here but I have to hope that the Pac-12 could hold their nose long enough to add decent programs like BYU politics and religion and snooty elitism aside. Fresno St. would make sense even though they are not academically elite. Okay. I still think they could add to the Pac-12 one of these days. It makes as much sense as WVU in the Big-12 which is stupid.

Boise deserves a shot as well.

Oh well, we will see.

[AzCatFan]

PAC-12 schools won't ever hold their collective noses and invite BYU. Just can't see the Council of Elders ever discussing joining the PAC-12 with the Chancellor at CAL Berkeley!

As far as tv programming goes, a la carte pricing isn't the panacea people make it out to be. Why? Because even the most popular programming (sports), are only in demand by half the population at most. Right now, ESPN gets money from just about every cable subscriber, whether or not that person watches. If a la carte prices were to take effect, ESPN would instantly lose half its revenue! Which means in order to pay the leagues ESPN caters to, the World-Wide Leader would have to charge subscribers double!

It's even worse for other popular channels that have decent ratings, but don't have the appeal of sports. In a la carte pricing, they could lose 2/3 of the people now paying for the channel. In the end, a la carte pricing would mean people actually paying more for less channels! Seems counter-intuitive, but the reality is, us sports watchers are supplementing HDTV and Food Network watchers, whom are in turn, supplementing the cost for us watching sports.

And personally, I don't think Apple TV is going to change things because in the end, people aren't going to accept less for more. Even now, Apple TV and the like are struggling to gain market share because people don't want to pay the same or more for less content.