Clemson, Fla St., Oregon and Washington to Big 10 ?
- Thread starter Prestonyte
- Start date
Correct. The teams needs to add some value to the conference.
Believe they also realize brands come and go. Clemson wasn’t a brand 15 - 20 years ago and Penn State was huge….similar to FSU.
They add academically and bring research funding and a lot of it….which is why I believe Duke will eventually be in the B1G as they do massive amounts of cancer research similar to TOSU and Minnesota and Johns Hopkins (who is a academic member).
How valuable have Maryland and Rutgers been to the Big 10? I suppose Big 10 alumni living in those areas get to pull for their teams when they visit, but what percentage of the NY and DC viewing audiences could they comprise? And what competitive value have those two programs added? I mean, really?
They simple bring a large group of alumni and academics and research money. Interesting that one big issue of the writers and directors strike is the failure of these streaming companies to release the streaming numbers....and one proposed explanation for them not doing so is that those who stream do not change their viewing habits that much....just a different way of receiving what they were previously watching. This could easily be true in college sports, which would mean that the B1G and the Big 12 is betting right in expanding their territory rather than relying solely on branding.
In the SEC. When you have a $1B+ annually in research funding to distribute to member schools, academics and what you can add to that research funding drives the ship.
I think that branding will prove more durable over time, though. I remember how excited the ACC was to get Miami and Virginia Tech. Syracuse was once (a long time ago) a big brand in the East. Had the brands held up, the ACC would have been golden. They haven't. Brands attract eyeballs more reliably than anything else, I think. True college football fans are going to watch Ohio State/ Michigan and the Iron Bowl regardless of where they live. But if the teams were to suck multiple years, interest would wane. I remember huge Oklahoma/Nebraska games that dominated the Nielsen ratings.
I agree with you on a select few teams. Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma, TOSU, Meatchigan, SoCal, Penn State, UND and a few others will always maintain there brands and they don't fall off for a long enough period of time to lose that brand. Some of the newcomers though....if they fall off for 5-10 years I believe their brands will decline precipitously and others will step into their place.
Yea, and shortly afterward both conferences increased their per school payout on media deals.
So? I didn’t say anything about revenue.
The whole landscape has changed since then. Nothing from then is paradigmatic for now.
Last edited:
Traction might be gathering for FSU to move. https://www.sportskeeda.com/amp/col...-2x-profits-program-joins-big-ten-sec-reports
isn’t this just a regular budget meeting planned for a while?? I read that somewhere.
Last edited:
I find it hard to believe they will move alone. So who goes with? Miami or Clemson?
To where do they move? I cannot believe the SEC will stand still for a Big 10 incursion down South. It would be a terrible development because there's no way the SEC could reciprocate geographically.
That is very true. Makes one wonder if officials at the B1G have had the same thought. Hmmm
If they have and if this is a result of that strategy, then it represents a preemptive strike against the SEC in order to establish Big 10 supremacy forever.
They’ve wanted to get into Florida for a while. With Miami earning its AAU membership and FSU getting close, they finally have an opportunity. Wouldn’t be shocked if UNC and UVA aren’t far behind.
I think the ACC just lost its last remaining life line with the poor PAC TV deal just announced and schools seemingly scrambling to jump into a life raft off that sinking ship.
If this is happening, the SEC will need to insinuate itself decisively. Sankey, who has recently been viewed as the most influential man in college athletics, will have to prove it again. Otherwise , he'll be remembered as the man who lost his grip on the steering wheel, and oversaw the marginalization of the SEC.
Be honest, if you were a member of the board of the B1G conference, isn't that the exact strategy you would employ.
Last edited:
I think Clemson would give anything to be in the SEC.
That development has now presented a new strategy for several prominent programs within the ACC. A misconception is that the ACC owns the GOR rights, but it is actually actually a condition of ESPN broadcasting. Do not be surprised ,if not now then later it is revealed, that part of the new negotiation strategy will be, either ESPN renegotiate the terms, or they bolt to their pre determined landing spots leaving ESPN without a product.
3 programs are now playing serious hardball.
At some point, the stark realization will have to come to Sankey,
"I no longer control the circumstances, the circumstances control me"
I don't really see the SEC ever being marginalized. When you've got Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Texas, Oklahoma, Auburn, LSU, Texas A&M it's gonna be awful hard to be marginalized. Maybe the Big 10 will have slightly higher revenue, but it's not like the SEC will be panhandling.
This is where I am. The B10 could go coast to coast with some good teams added, but I just don't see it as hurting the SEC that much as to call it marginalized.
Maybe I am not looking far enough down the road.
The best conference ought to have the best revenue. If it doesn't, someone in charge has messed up.
They get teams down here and it opens up more recruiting inroads for all their teams. It would be catastrophic over time. As I said, we don't have any good way of getting back at them. SEC supremacy is weighed in the balances right now if this happens.