Greg Sankey SEC Commissioner Not focused on expansion

[Spurman54]

We are a super conference at 16 teams.

Greg Sankey outlines where SEC stands in expansion landscape

Greg Sankey has kept a pulse on expansion talks.

www.saturdaydownsouth.com

 

[Horseshoe04]

Wait for another conference to die & create

SEC jr

 

[18IsTheMan]

People treat this expansion stuff like the Cold War. When did it all become so serious?

 

[Spurman54]

Just for infornation only. That is all.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

"Sankey, the SEC commissioner, said he’s not focused on expanding the SEC at this time."

Hmmm.

 

[atl-cock]

Wish that had been stated in 2010 and followed through to this day. 12 members is more than enough.

 

[KingWard]

From Berry Tramel - The Oklahoman
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Arkansas or Missouri? Florida or Louisiana State? Any way to get Vanderbilt? Any way to avoid Alabama?
Lots of questions, lots of angst, over the Southeastern Conference schedule as OU and Texas prepare to join the league in 16 months. Three permanent football opponents for each school will be necessary if the SEC adopts a nine-game conference schedule.
And the nine-game format has been cast as the likely SEC decision. But hold your Boomer and Sooner.
Both OU and Texas sources say the eight-game schedule could emerge as the SEC decision.
“I don’t think we’ll have a definitive direction until we go to those meetings and figure out specifics,” UT athletic director Chris Del Conte said of SEC spring meetings, which come in May at Destin, Florida.

SEC commissioner Greg Sankey confirmed that belief with his comments Friday in Nashville, during the SEC basketball tournament.
Sankey said the debate revolves around fairness and balance. Not all rivalries are equal. The SEC will consider eliminating the likes of Alabama-Tennessee and Georgia-Auburn in the name of equity.
“There are a number of factors,” Sankey said. “One certainly is competitive. We want to be respectful there.”
The decision will have massive ramifications for both the Sooners and Longhorns.
Mainly this. Instead of four SEC home games each year, OU and Texas would alternately have three or four home games each season, thanks to their century-long tradition of playing each other in Dallas every October.
Seven SEC home games, instead of eight, over each two-year period is no small thing.
An enhanced home schedule is the second-biggest reason behind the SEC’s allure. The lucrative television contract is No. 1; the season-ticket value is No. 2.
“You want more teams coming to your place,” Del Conte said. “You should want variety.”

I'm more concerned about this. A horrible mistake is being contemplated as a possibility.

 

[Uscg1984]

"Sankey, the SEC commissioner, said he’s not focused on expanding the SEC at this time."

Hmmm.

Yes, it sounds similar to what every head coach says . . . the day before they are announced as the new head coach somewhere else.

Does it mean he isn't thinking right now about expanding? Or does it mean he isn't thinking about expanding right now. Two different things.

 

[Prestonyte]

"Sankey, the SEC commissioner, said he’s not focused on expanding the SEC at this time."

Hmmm.

Public speak vs private speak

 

[TN-Gamecock]

If we do expand, it's almost a given it will be:

UNC and UVA or
NCSU and VT.

For football purposes, I hope we'd take NCSU and VT. I could not imagine UNC being in the SEC...oh got it makes me sick to stomach whenever I think that's a possibility.

 

[BetaLiberalCock1]

I'm pretty pissed and pessimistic. The SEC already has 492 teams as it is....

Adding TX and OU and frankly TAMU and Mizzou was just dumb. They don't belong in any reality. Ultimately I think it will weaken the SEC in general.

 

[KingWard]

The per-school payout will determine further expansion. The SEC won't do anything that cuts the payouts to conference schools. That could mean that the SEC waits until the end of the coming deal to explore whether or not additional schools would generate more money PER SCHOOL. Reducing per-school payouts will never fly.

I'm pretty pissed and pessimistic. The SEC already has 492 teams as it is....

Adding TX and OU and frankly TAMU and Mizzou was just dumb. They don't belong in any reality. Ultimately I think it will weaken the SEC in general.

You mean, as was the case when they added us. And using that rationale, we are essentially equal to Texas, Oklahoma, and A&M? Riiiiiight.

 

[KingWard]

If we do expand, it's almost a given it will be:

UNC and UVA or
NCSU and VT.

For football purposes, I hope we'd take NCSU and VT. I could not imagine UNC being in the SEC...oh got it makes me sick to stomach whenever I think that's a possibility.

I hate three of the four teams you mentioned. Those are all odious to me. But despite my abhorrence, I know which of them adds the most value - and so does Sankey.

 

[BetaLiberalCock1]

The per-school payout will determine further expansion. The SEC won't do anything that cuts the payouts to conference schools. That could mean that the SEC waits until the end of the coming deal to explore whether or not additional schools would generate more money PER SCHOOL. Reducing per-school payouts will never fly.

You mean, as was the case when they added us. And using that rationale, we are essentially equal to Texas, Oklahoma, and A&M? Riiiiiight.

You clearly need a geography lesson.

What part of *SOUTH* *EAST* is tripping you up chief? Just about can't get anymore *SOUTH* and *EAST* than Columbia, SC.....

The name of the conference is The *SOUTH EASTERN CONFERENCE* ....... No part of Texas, Oklahoma or Missouri is in the *SOUTH* or the *EAST* - this is not complicated.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

If we do expand, it's almost a given it will be:

UNC and UVA or
NCSU and VT.

For football purposes, I hope we'd take NCSU and VT. I could not imagine UNC being in the SEC...oh got it makes me sick to stomach whenever I think that's a possibility.

One of those could be the primary target, and perhaps the target for another conference.
Stay tuned.

 

[SILVERSPUR-rier]

I hate three of the four teams you mentioned. Those are all odious to me. But despite my abhorrence, I know which of them adds the most value - and so does Sankey.

What about adding UNC and Notre Dame....

 

[18IsTheMan]

IF it comes down to taking teams from the ACC, Clemson will be at the top of the list. Just makes too much sense. They are the biggest football brand in the conference.

 

[Lurker123]

IF it comes down to taking teams from the ACC, Clemson will be at the top of the list. Just makes too much sense. They are the biggest football brand in the conference.

I would tend to agree, putting FSU right there, maybe a little below them.

I do admit to confusion when we discuss which acc teams we should raid, and teams brought up are the same teams we make fun of clemson for playing on a weekly basis. (In small, half filled stadiums with uninterested fanbases)

I do get that TV markets are the reason why some of those "weak" choices would be elevated. I'm just not sold on TV markets being a better deal than intriguing matchups.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I would tend to agree, putting FSU right there, maybe a little below them.

I do admit to confusion when we discuss which acc teams we should raid, and teams brought up are the same teams we make fun of clemson for playing on a weekly basis. (In small, half filled stadiums with uninterested fanbases)

I do get that TV markets are the reason why some of those "weak" choices would be elevated. I'm just not sold on TV markets being a better deal than intriguing matchups.

Yeah, I know TV markets factor into it, but there's such a disparity between Clemson and any of the NC schools on the football field. I simply can't see the SEC picking the likes of NC State over Clemson for the reasons you note.

 

[KingWard]

What about adding UNC and Notre Dame....

Money outweighs repugnance - at least in this matter. But Notre Dame is positioned to remain an independent for a long time to come. They consider that status a claim to distinction and they have their own deal.

 

[KingWard]

You clearly need a geography lesson.

What part of *SOUTH* *EAST* is tripping you up chief? Just about can't get anymore *SOUTH* and *EAST* than Columbia, SC.....

The name of the conference is The *SOUTH EASTERN CONFERENCE* ....... No part of Texas, Oklahoma or Missouri is in the *SOUTH* or the *EAST* - this is not complicated.

You clearly need an economics lesson. That's not complicated, either. Assimilate the lesson.

 

[Spinal Tap]

You clearly need a geography lesson.

What part of *SOUTH* *EAST* is tripping you up chief? Just about can't get anymore *SOUTH* and *EAST* than Columbia, SC.....

The name of the conference is The *SOUTH EASTERN CONFERENCE* ....... No part of Texas, Oklahoma or Missouri is in the *SOUTH* or the *EAST* - this is not complicated.

Maybe we can change our conference name to something that accommodates future growth. Problem solved.

 

[SILVERSPUR-rier]

Maybe we can change our conference name to something that accommodates future growth. Problem solved.

How about 'The USC"... for the Ultimate Sports Conference...

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

What about adding UNC and Notre Dame....

That would be the B1G's option.
ND is not going to consider joining a conference unless there is simply no other option, and if that was to happen, it would be several years down the road.
ND will not join the SEC.

 

[BetaLiberalCock1]

You clearly need an economics lesson. That's not complicated, either. Assimilate the lesson.

Oh well hell, if it's about $$$, let's make sure we get Notre Dame and Michigan and Ohio St and Penn St and Wisconsin & Nebraska in....... because obviously they clearly belong in the *SOUTH EASTERN* conference. Then we'd have the top 15 in revenue in.

Top Schools by CFB Revenue

Maybe we can change our conference name to something that accommodates future growth. Problem solved.

Perhaps. At least *THAT* makes sense.....

 

[KingWard]

Oh well hell, if it's about $$$, let's make sure we get Notre Dame and Michigan and Ohio St and Penn St and Wisconsin & Nebraska in....... because obviously they clearly belong in the *SOUTH EASTERN* conference. Then we'd have the top 15 in revenue in.

Top Schools by CFB Revenue



Perhaps. At least *THAT* makes sense.....

As long as all states are somehow contiguous and most of them are in the Southeast, there won't be any need. The neophytes WANT that brand.

 

[TN-Gamecock]

To me, schools like NCSU and VT are in a pickle. If UNC and UVA are added to the SEC, where does that leave State & Tech?

B10 would not take either State or Tech. Clemson and FSU would also be in a pickle as both would not be invited to the B10.

After all that has been done to us from our ACC days, I say let the ACC flop. Clemson, UNC, NCSU, Duke can flitter away for all I care.

If I remember correctly, the only friendly schools to us in the ACC were Maryland and Wake. Can someone verify this?

 

[BetaLiberalCock1]

As long as all states are somehow contiguous and most of them are in the Southeast, there won't be any need. The neophytes WANT that brand.

understood

 

[BetaLiberalCock1]

As long as all states are somehow contiguous and most of them are in the Southeast, there won't be any need. The neophytes WANT that brand.

Hell, I'm still pissed they (whoever they are) STILL cannot get replay right....... seriously.

I could be wrong but I believe it was the game against Bama (and we won) and Alshon caught a pass on the sideline and the entire country / announcers were talking about if his feet were in or not.......

They eventually ruled his feet were indeed in and I believe they were.............. literally no one mentioned he was bobbling the ball the whole freakin' time. = No catch in real life. Ruling on the field stood as a catch. No one in the replay booth even bothered to look at the ball and it was clearly moving all around. It's incompetence.

 

[KingWard]

Hell, I'm still pissed they (whoever they are) STILL cannot get replay right....... seriously.

I could be wrong but I believe it was the game against Bama (and we won) and Alshon caught a pass on the sideline and the entire country / announcers were talking about if his feet were in or not.......

They eventually ruled his feet were indeed in and I believe they were.............. literally no one mentioned he was bobbling the ball the whole freakin' time. = No catch in real life. Ruling on the field stood as a catch. No one in the replay booth even bothered to look at the ball and it was clearly moving all around. It's incompetence.

Received as information. I will say this: your anecdote is all the more reason not to take up so much time doing something they mess up anyway. Limit that and leave the rest of the game the H alone.

 

[BetaLiberalCock1]

Received as information. I will say this: your anecdote is all the more reason not to take up so much time doing something they mess up anyway. Limit that and leave the rest of the game the H alone.

Agreed. There really does need to be a "timer" on the instant replay. My argument is that if you have to review something for two minutes, by definition it becomes subjective and if it's subjective, it's not clear and conclusive. Give the booth a 30 second window period. If they can't make a decision in 30 seconds, the call on the field stands.

On a positive note, I am glad they are clearly not calling as many targeting penalties as in the past and I'm even more happy that a lot of the targeting calls are being overturned upstairs. It's almost like the NCAA enforced that harsh penalty for 2 generations of players to give it enough time to be taught correctly and now they are leaning a little more back towards good, solid hits football. We both are old enough to know that the college game hasn't seen any *REAL* head hunting since the 90's / early 2000's. It's been out of the game for a good while.

 

[Dod Rangerfield]

To me, schools like NCSU and VT are in a pickle. If UNC and UVA are added to the SEC, where does that leave State & Tech?

B10 would not take either State or Tech. Clemson and FSU would also be in a pickle as both would not be invited to the B10.

After all that has been done to us from our ACC days, I say let the ACC flop. Clemson, UNC, NCSU, Duke can flitter away for all I care.

If I remember correctly, the only friendly schools to us in the ACC were Maryland and Wake. Can someone verify this?

Only the graduates of these universities should decide.

 

[Mauze1]

IF it comes down to taking teams from the ACC, Clemson will be at the top of the list. Just makes too much sense. They are the biggest football brand in the conference.

Does Clemson bring more to the SEC than the cost of their share? If they do it is not much more. Would they bring more than 76 million, the projected number after Texas and OK come in? When the SEC and Big10 gobble up all the good teams won’t we have to kiss those inter conference rivalries goodbye. State governments have already passed laws requiring their state schools to play each other. If enforced SC would have to choose between being an SEC member or playing Clemson. I doubt SC wants give give up the school’s #1 overall source of revenue. Ga Tech, FSU, Miami, Louisville, Clemson and Ok St, are all inside the current SEC footprint. None of the other expansion teams have been, except Texas.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Does Clemson bring more to the SEC than the cost of their share? If they do it is not much more. Would they bring more than 76 million, the projected number after Texas and OK come in? When the SEC and Big10 gobble up all the good teams won’t we have to kiss those inter conference rivalries goodbye. State governments have already passed laws requiring their state schools to play each other. If enforced SC would have to choose between being an SEC member or playing Clemson. I doubt SC wants give give up the school’s #1 overall source of revenue. Ga Tech, FSU, Miami, Louisville, Clemson and Ok St, are all inside the current SEC footprint. None of the other expansion teams have been, except Texas.

Most any other ACC team would bring less than their share.

 

[Anon1658788697]

Does Clemson bring more to the SEC than the cost of their share? If they do it is not much more. Would they bring more than 76 million, the projected number after Texas and OK come in? When the SEC and Big10 gobble up all the good teams won’t we have to kiss those inter conference rivalries goodbye. State governments have already passed laws requiring their state schools to play each other. If enforced SC would have to choose between being an SEC member or playing Clemson. I doubt SC wants give give up the school’s #1 overall source of revenue. Ga Tech, FSU, Miami, Louisville, Clemson and Ok St, are all inside the current SEC footprint. None of the other expansion teams have been, except Texas.

I don't but that just because a school is inside the footprint they are automatically thrown out as a possibility. I think FSU and Clemson are at the top of the acc list when you don’t let blind hate get in the way. I’ll ask leave you with this. Who are the two most well known brands in the ACC? Football is king and matters the most. So which teams bring in the most revenue for that sport. It’s those two teams. They will be the first to be grabbed by the big 10 or sec.

 

[atl-cock]

Does Clemson bring more to the SEC than the cost of their share? If they do it is not much more. Would they bring more than 76 million, the projected number after Texas and OK come in? When the SEC and Big10 gobble up all the good teams won’t we have to kiss those inter conference rivalries goodbye. State governments have already passed laws requiring their state schools to play each other. If enforced SC would have to choose between being an SEC member or playing Clemson. I doubt SC wants give give up the school’s #1 overall source of revenue. Ga Tech, FSU, Miami, Louisville, Clemson and Ok St, are all inside the current SEC footprint. None of the other expansion teams have been, except Texas.

1. Schools, not teams.
2. As has been mentioned on other FGF threads, there is no current state legislation requiring USC and Clemron play each other in any sport during the sport's season. There was a one-off in 1952 which the General Assembly passed requiring USC & Clemron to play during Big Thursday as a response to the SoCon's banning Clemron & Maryland from playing other SoCon schools (except each other) because contrary to SoCon rules, the Taters and Terps accepted Bowl Bids following the 1951 season.

Re: #2. Too many people misunderstand that the legislation passed was a one-off which applied to the 1952 season only.

 

[atl-cock]

I don't but that just because a school is inside the footprint they are automatically thrown out as a possibility. I think FSU and Clemson are at the top of the acc list when you don’t let blind hate get in the way. I’ll ask leave you with this. Who are the two most well known brands in the ACC? Football is king and matters the most. So which teams bring in the most revenue for that sport. It’s those two teams. They will be the first to be grabbed by the big 10 or sec.

Matters only regarding school visibility. The volleyball player and the football player each work hard at their craft. Both matter intrinsically.

 

[Lurker123]

Matters only regarding school visibility. The volleyball player and the football player each work hard at their craft. Both matter intrinsically.

Agreed, but I think we all understand that he meant that certain sport(s) matter more when it comes to tv contracts, and money.

 

[KingWard]

Does Clemson bring more to the SEC than the cost of their share? If they do it is not much more. Would they bring more than 76 million, the projected number after Texas and OK come in? When the SEC and Big10 gobble up all the good teams won’t we have to kiss those inter conference rivalries goodbye. State governments have already passed laws requiring their state schools to play each other. If enforced SC would have to choose between being an SEC member or playing Clemson. I doubt SC wants give give up the school’s #1 overall source of revenue. Ga Tech, FSU, Miami, Louisville, Clemson and Ok St, are all inside the current SEC footprint. None of the other expansion teams have been, except Texas.

I don't see UPC as fitting into the SEC expansion philosophy, present or past, in any way, shape, form, or fashion. That's not being disrespectful, it's just an honest assessment based upon what the SEC has always looked for when it moved to expand.

 

[Anon1658788697]

Matters only regarding school visibility. The volleyball player and the football player each work hard at their craft. Both matter intrinsically.

I disagree, this is about money. There are only 2 sports that even come close to breaking even or making money. Football and to a lesser degree basketball. Everything else is a drag. Decisions are not made on money losing sports. They are made on the money Makers. Those are the ones that control the decisions.

Look no further than ND for an example.