I missed this last week, but the ACC schools all signed over their media rights for 14 years to the conference. This takes ACC and Big 12 (which did this last year) schools off the table and there really aren't any other desirable targets out there. The SEC is now the only major conference where the schools still retain their media rights if they leave. I guess the only remaining major conference expansion would come from UConn (Big 10 or ACC), Cincinnati (Big 12), or Houston/SMU (Big 12). Not much more out there.
Looks like any future SEC expansion has ended.
- Thread starter patdog
- Start date
Yep, I was shocked to see it unanimously agreed upon by university presidents in the ACC. They must be expecting a significant revenue boost to come from somewhere -- because if not, they are well on their way to "mid major" conference and just basically sealed that fate.
One thing I haven't seen explicitly stated yet... Did they sign over tier 3 rights as well? Or just tier 1 and tier 2? IMO, if they keep tier 3 rights, this is just window dressing -- because that is where the real value lies for the SEC and B1G. Similarly, I have to believe that Texas would have never signed up for a Big12 GOR that it didn't feel that it could easily defeat in court -- or have an obvious loophole to exploit...
One thing I haven't seen explicitly stated yet... Did they sign over tier 3 rights as well? Or just tier 1 and tier 2? IMO, if they keep tier 3 rights, this is just window dressing -- because that is where the real value lies for the SEC and B1G. Similarly, I have to believe that Texas would have never signed up for a Big12 GOR that it didn't feel that it could easily defeat in court -- or have an obvious loophole to exploit...
They're going to start an ACC network. Each of the 5 major conferences will have their own version of the Big 10 network. As I've been saying for the last 3 years, the ACC isn't going anywhere. It's going to be a major conference for a long time. Maryland jumping ship turned out to be a great gift that just fell in their lap.
Sorry, disagree completely. Mizzou is a terrible addition. Their fans don't want to be in the SEC. They publicly said the SEC was their 2nd choice behind the Big Ten. They bring nothing to the table as far as athletics go. They hardly even bring St. Louis and Kansas City.
So yes, we really did screw up. Florida State and Clemson make for better matchups in all sports, which long-term provides a bigger spotlight than just a short-term cable money grab. Absolutely terrible decision.
So yes, we really did screw up. Florida State and Clemson make for better matchups in all sports, which long-term provides a bigger spotlight than just a short-term cable money grab. Absolutely terrible decision.
Yeah it was great. All the Memphis fans were peeing their pants about the Big East and now they try and make reasons for why it's better than CUSA when it's just a lateral move or perhaps worse.
It's not so much about Mizzou being a great addition as it is that Clemson would have been a terrible one. They would bring absolutely nothing to the conference. I could see FSU, but they have their chance 20 years ago and they weren't going to get another one.
What's going to be interesting to me is what happens at the ends of these Grants of Rights in 12-15 years?
There is NOTHING signaling that the SEC is slowing down -- but that we are still speeding up. A 4-team playoff virtually guarantees an SEC team will be on the big stage every year. What happens when these teams look up in 10 years, the SEC has 8-9 more titles, is recruiting with all 14 teams in the top 25, and a tv value 30% higher than the B1G and 50+% higher than everyone else(numbers backed by actual eyeballs watching the games on average)?
I still think we pick off the teams we want from North Carolina and Virginia -- this just hit a pause button. Texas is another curious case -- especially if the trend in that state continues over time.
There is NOTHING signaling that the SEC is slowing down -- but that we are still speeding up. A 4-team playoff virtually guarantees an SEC team will be on the big stage every year. What happens when these teams look up in 10 years, the SEC has 8-9 more titles, is recruiting with all 14 teams in the top 25, and a tv value 30% higher than the B1G and 50+% higher than everyone else(numbers backed by actual eyeballs watching the games on average)?
I still think we pick off the teams we want from North Carolina and Virginia -- this just hit a pause button. Texas is another curious case -- especially if the trend in that state continues over time.
I don't care.....
Still doesn't make it a good decision. Obviously those schools would have voted no in order to keep their little brother down, when has that EVER been a good decision in the history of sports?? Never, is your answer.
Still doesn't make it a good decision. Obviously those schools would have voted no in order to keep their little brother down, when has that EVER been a good decision in the history of sports?? Never, is your answer.
I disagree with that too. Put simply for you, Clemson would have been better than Missouri in my opinion. 20 years from now, more people will watch Texas A&M vs. Clemson than they would Texas A&M vs. Missouri. In pretty much any sport. Probably even in the state of Missouri, St. Louis and Kansas City.
Good. 14 is better than 16 anyway. Hell, I think 12 is ideal but adding A&M was worth it. The bigger you get, the more unbalanced it is. What's the point of a being in a conference if you don't play half of the teams? More tv markets are not worth losing the conference's identity.
I'd say waiting 12-15 years is a HUGE slowdown over what a lot of you guys were expecting. I never said the SEC would stop at 14. But I've said since the beginning that it was probably going to be a lot longer than you guys were saying before the SEC expanded again. It took 35 years to go from 10 back to 12 again, and then 20 more to get to 14.
I'm not hinting anything. I just know their fans are f'n pissed that little brother is flipping the script on them and are powerless to stop it right now. If it proves to be an actual trend instead of a flash-in-the-pan, and they continue losing the majority of Texas recruits to aTm -- and start losing them to LSU -- they are going to become restless and want change. Nevermind that aTm's tv deal with the SECnetwork is expected to be more lucrative than the Big12+LHN for Texas...
And if we ever took them, they wouldn't get to make any demands about bringing anyone or any of that other bs. They would have to accept a place at the table like everyone else and no longer expect the head of the table. For that reason, I see them as a bad SEC fit -- but 12 more years like last year would obviously go a long way toward humbling them.
Bottom line, I don't know if they would get the votes to get in. They will need 80% -- and rumor has it aTm has already joined the group with Florida, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Georgia to block a second team from any state from ever getting into the conference.
Or more likely, used the threat of taking NC State to get North Carolina, which would have been as good of an addition as Texas A&M (arguably even better). But I think the SEC was pretty adamant about not being seen as the conference that raided another conference and only took new members that first approached the SEC.
No doubt Texas has been ***** slapped back into the real world. The way they've handled all this is going to cost them hundreds of millions of dollars over the next 20 years. They're realizing that now (which is why they compromised to salvage what was left of the Big 12), but it's too late for them to do anything more about it.
It took extreme measures by the ACC to prevent us from being at 16 within a couple of years -- and it's still not a foregone conclusion that it's over, although this is the only measure they could take that would adequately address the possibility of being raided -- no money figure was ever going to do the trick. But I keep going back to -- would Texas sign a "Grant of Rights"(where they still get all their LHN revenue) that they couldn't get out of with legal maneuvering? There are lawyers all over the country lining up to take on these actual grant of rights agreements anyway.
Signing up for this GOR -- in the case of the more attractive teams in the ACC -- was stupid in the first place. 12 years from now, unless they get their crap together in a real big hurry, they will be minnows swimming in a pond full of sharks -- where MSU and Ole Miss have made $200+ million more in tv revenue than FSU and North Carolina have...
I agree that North Carolina and VA Tech may have made a mistake. They could have both gotten into the SEC if they had wanted to and wound up with a lot more money, exposure, and better athletic programs over the next 20+ years than they will get now. FSU took the best deal that was available to them, and that was the ACC. There was a funny post on a UNC message board about the cliff notes of why FSU signed the rights agreement. Basically it was that their big crush (the SEC) told them, it's not me, it's you. Then when they met the hot girl they found on the Internet (the Big 12) they found those pictures weren't of her at all. Then they decided the wife they had at home (the ACC) wasn't so bad after all since she still loved them because they used to be good at sports back in high school.
All correct...
Also, today, we have this from aTm, to likely be officially announced Wednesday to the tune of almost a half billion. http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/...esday-205338281.html?mobile=yes&device=iphone
We are going to live to regret the day we opened the door to them...at least in terms of wins and losses on a football field...
Also, today, we have this from aTm, to likely be officially announced Wednesday to the tune of almost a half billion. http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/...esday-205338281.html?mobile=yes&device=iphone
We are going to live to regret the day we opened the door to them...at least in terms of wins and losses on a football field...
Texas tried to get in the PAC-12 and were turned down flat. Then the ACC wouldn't even talk to them. They knew better than to even try to approach the SEC, so they decided to cave and salvage what was left of the Big 12. A&M is quickly becoming what Texas once was. And the SEC isn't going to be interested in adding the #2 school in any state.
Ha, yeah right. Big difference between being turned down and a TV network disagreement.
BWA HA HA HA HA
Again, BWA HA HA HA HA. All these conferences would LOVE to have them as an equal partner. Big 12 is the only big conference that lets them run the show.
Texas won't stand by and idly let that happen. Just like any other rivalry between similar sized schools.
As I've said already, that TV footprint idea is dumb. I know it's the reality, but that doesn't make it right. Short-term.
Let's revisit this in a few years when Texas A&M doesn't exactly live up to the hype. Perhaps after Tennessee/Auburn gets its act together. You heard of that school just east of Atlanta???