Home
Forums
New Posts
Illini Basketball
Illini Football
Sports Talk
Log in
Register
What's new
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Sports
Illini Football
Big Ten Media Rights / Conference Realignment
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Second and Chalmers" data-source="post: 1230858" data-attributes="member: 527609"><p>True, though I think you're perceiving my value as on the CURRENT SEC, not what the SEC would hypothetically become. Adding Texas and OU is not the same thing as adding Rutgers and Maryland. It pretty drastically changes what the conference is. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No it won't. In a world where the SEC adds Texas and OU, they are a higher division of football permanently. Only a nation-spanning breakaway superconference of Michigan, Ohio State, USC, Florida State, Clemson, etc would be able to compete, and even in that unlikely scenario it would be debatable.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>We're talking about 2025 here. This B1G TV deal will be long over. We will be living in an entirely new media paradigm by then. I've bored you all to death with my rants about cable bubbles and the like, but suffice it to say that a conference with a multitude of marquee football games every single weekend should have every reason to expect to draw more money from any given arrangement than a conference that cannot offer that.</p><p></p><p>It's my opinion that the Big Ten's financial strength reflects Jim Delany's mastery of inside baseball and smoke and mirrors and that his actions for short term gain are rotting out the inherent strength of the conference. Reasonable people can disagree. But what is a fact is that the conference revenue game is a fluid, dynamic system. Today's winners aren't necessarily tomorrow's.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There's a lot of truth to this, admittedly. If this move spurred a 4X16 world with a de-facto 8 team playoff (with the conference title games being round 1) in which any given team only has access to one of the eight spots, that's a heck of an advantage to anyone in a weak division, and a huge disadvantage to this proposed SEC.</p><p></p><p>But you could envision a world of a postseason 8-team playoff where the 4 big conference champions get bids, and then the new SEC soaks up 3 of the other 4 at larges most years. That could be a very nice position for Texas football-wise.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Lol'd at the bolded. Texas can call it whatever they like, it's a bribe. Just like the Longhorn Network deal was a bribe by ESPN to prevent a FOX-contracted Pac 16 from happening. No shame in calling a spade a spade. Texas has a lot of leverage and they know how to use it. It wouldn't surprise me if you're absolutely right about the ACC swooping in.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I've made my point here. What is best for athletics will be sold as what's best for academics.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Second and Chalmers, post: 1230858, member: 527609"] True, though I think you're perceiving my value as on the CURRENT SEC, not what the SEC would hypothetically become. Adding Texas and OU is not the same thing as adding Rutgers and Maryland. It pretty drastically changes what the conference is. No it won't. In a world where the SEC adds Texas and OU, they are a higher division of football permanently. Only a nation-spanning breakaway superconference of Michigan, Ohio State, USC, Florida State, Clemson, etc would be able to compete, and even in that unlikely scenario it would be debatable. We're talking about 2025 here. This B1G TV deal will be long over. We will be living in an entirely new media paradigm by then. I've bored you all to death with my rants about cable bubbles and the like, but suffice it to say that a conference with a multitude of marquee football games every single weekend should have every reason to expect to draw more money from any given arrangement than a conference that cannot offer that. It's my opinion that the Big Ten's financial strength reflects Jim Delany's mastery of inside baseball and smoke and mirrors and that his actions for short term gain are rotting out the inherent strength of the conference. Reasonable people can disagree. But what is a fact is that the conference revenue game is a fluid, dynamic system. Today's winners aren't necessarily tomorrow's. There's a lot of truth to this, admittedly. If this move spurred a 4X16 world with a de-facto 8 team playoff (with the conference title games being round 1) in which any given team only has access to one of the eight spots, that's a heck of an advantage to anyone in a weak division, and a huge disadvantage to this proposed SEC. But you could envision a world of a postseason 8-team playoff where the 4 big conference champions get bids, and then the new SEC soaks up 3 of the other 4 at larges most years. That could be a very nice position for Texas football-wise. Lol'd at the bolded. Texas can call it whatever they like, it's a bribe. Just like the Longhorn Network deal was a bribe by ESPN to prevent a FOX-contracted Pac 16 from happening. No shame in calling a spade a spade. Texas has a lot of leverage and they know how to use it. It wouldn't surprise me if you're absolutely right about the ACC swooping in. I've made my point here. What is best for athletics will be sold as what's best for academics. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Sports
Illini Football
Big Ten Media Rights / Conference Realignment
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…