Quote:

---

Its not JUST about TV distributions.

---

Yes it is. If you knew anything about conference alignment dynamics you'd know that.

Which is why the sips will never join the SEC. The economics are not there. Tier I, II and III rights are fully monetized in Texas for the SEC.

wbt5845 said:

---

Quote:

---

Its not JUST about TV distributions.

---

Yes it is. If you knew anything about conference alignment dynamics you'd know that.

Which is why the sips will never join the SEC. The economics are not there. Tier I, II and III rights are fully monetized in Texas for the SEC.

---

Okay.

Tex117 said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

Quote:

---

Its not JUST about TV distributions.

---

Yes it is. If you knew anything about conference alignment dynamics you'd know that.

Which is why the sips will never join the SEC. The economics are not there. Tier I, II and III rights are fully monetized in Texas for the SEC.

---

Okay.

---

You can act like a jerk to him but he's right. It's solely driven by money. You went on some rant about value of Texas and again failed to quantify anything. It's the same every time someone spouts that nonsense. The argument is simply "Texas is worth a fortune, so much so that we can't even tell you. But know that it's a lot. And every conference wants it ". Its absurd and devoid of subjective reason.

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Tex117 said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

Quote:

---

Its not JUST about TV distributions.

---

Yes it is. If you knew anything about conference alignment dynamics you'd know that.

Which is why the sips will never join the SEC. The economics are not there. Tier I, II and III rights are fully monetized in Texas for the SEC.

---

Okay.

---

You can act like a jerk to him but he's right. It's solely driven by money. You went on some rant about value of Texas and again failed to quantify anything. It's the same every time someone spouts that nonsense. The argument is simply "Texas is worth a fortune, so much so that we can't even tell you. But know that it's a lot. And every conference wants it ". Its absurd and devoid of subjective reason.

---

I suppose the question becomes does tu have so much value that adding them will offset the drop in revenue by splitting the pot 15-16 ways instead of 14? Seeing as how the cable packages most prevalent out there are already purchased in the state of Texas already include the SEC network, it becomes HIGHLY unlikely that they would. Adding Baylor in addition would make as much sense as trying to mate with a honey badger.

Add into that the fact that the longhorn network still exists and it becomes way less likely that that happens. Saban or any other self-respecting coach in the SEC wouldn't stand for letting another school have that kind of power.

Add into that that there's a gentlemans agreement that no more in state rivals will be added and there's really nothing more to be said.

tu is not coming to the SEC.

Maybe we'll play them after they sell themselves to another conference that is willing to contract that disease?

Its not going happen.

It shouldnt happen.

& if yall think it should happen. Yall need religion, allah, counseling, or something else to give you peace.

Tex117 said:

---

Oh, regardless of "rules" Id be curious to see how the SEC would react to legitimate Texas interest.

---

The SEC has no options regarding Texas. Again, we did not leave it to a vote.

Being Texas and all, I don't know why they just don't tell USC, UCLA, and Stanford that they are moving them from the PAC to the BDF.

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Tex117 said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

Quote:

---

Its not JUST about TV distributions.

---

Yes it is. If you knew anything about conference alignment dynamics you'd know that.

Which is why the sips will never join the SEC. The economics are not there. Tier I, II and III rights are fully monetized in Texas for the SEC.

---

Okay.

---

You can act like a jerk to him but he's right. It's solely driven by money. You went on some rant about value of Texas and again failed to quantify anything. It's the same every time someone spouts that nonsense. The argument is simply "Texas is worth a fortune, so much so that we can't even tell you. But know that it's a lot. And every conference wants it ". Its absurd and devoid of subjective reason.

---

With regards to getting into the SEC, it's not about how much money a school has, or how much past success they've had, or what kind of clout they have, or what their brand is. It's about how much money they can make for the conference, and if that money is enough to increase everyone's payout. And if the answer to that is yes, it's a matter of if enough current members think they're a good fit for the conference and if enough of those current members will vote them in. Officially, it takes a 3/4 vote, but Slive set the precedent of needing at least a unanimous-1 vote, which no one has said anything about challenging.

It's impossible to imagine tu ever getting a 3/4 vote, with or without the LHN, let alone a unanimous-1.

Does the conference get a cut of a university's licensing deal though?

technoviking said:

---

Bayside Tiger Ag said:

---

Tex117 said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

Quote:

---

Its not JUST about TV distributions.

---

Yes it is. If you knew anything about conference alignment dynamics you'd know that.

Which is why the sips will never join the SEC. The economics are not there. Tier I, II and III rights are fully monetized in Texas for the SEC.

---

Okay.

---

You can act like a jerk to him but he's right. It's solely driven by money. You went on some rant about value of Texas and again failed to quantify anything. It's the same every time someone spouts that nonsense. The argument is simply "Texas is worth a fortune, so much so that we can't even tell you. But know that it's a lot. And every conference wants it ". Its absurd and devoid of subjective reason.

---

I suppose the question becomes does tu have so much value that adding them will offset the drop in revenue by splitting the pot 15-16 ways instead of 14? Seeing as how the cable packages most prevalent out there are already purchased in the state of Texas already include the SEC network, it becomes HIGHLY unlikely that they would. Adding Baylor in addition would make as much sense as trying to mate with a honey badger.

Add into that the fact that the longhorn network still exists and it becomes way less likely that that happens. Saban or any other self-respecting coach in the SEC wouldn't stand for letting another school have that kind of power.

Add into that that there's a gentlemans agreement that no more in state rivals will be added and there's really nothing more to be said.

tu is not coming to the SEC.

Maybe we'll play them after they sell themselves to another conference that is willing to contract that disease?

---

The thing with that is that tu's value is to themselves and not to the conference as a whole. Their large alumni base and big donors and "brand name" just give them value. The fact that TV contract values are based on footprint alone and not necessarily the value of the team contained within that footprint means that the state of Texas is already contributing its maximum value to the SEC with just A&M in the league.

And the bigger point- the SEC already has the upper hand in the status quo. There is no reason to blow up the status quo, unless strongly threatened.

So many good quotes in that article. Even 5 years ago, that writer got it.

Quote:

---

If the Big 12 blows up, suddenly the TTU's and Baylor's of the world are demanding they be included wherever Texas or A&M winds up because those schools are essentially worthless on their own.

---

Quote:

---

Because you don't get a good deal when you're in a conference with Texas unless you're Texas.

---

Quote:

---

If they choose to operate like this by using their power to get themselves the best deal possible while not caring about anyone else, then they can't be surprised when disgruntled members take better deals when they can find them.

---

Quote:

---

As long as the status quo is kept, which the SEC and Texas A&M are trying to do, the big time schools don't have a reason to move.

---

I think that it would be good to play t.u. again in a bowl game, but they've got to be able to win 6 games first to be bowl eligible. Gig'em.

Tex117 said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

Quote:

---

Its not JUST about TV distributions.

---

Yes it is. If you knew anything about conference alignment dynamics you'd know that.

Which is why the sips will never join the SEC. The economics are not there. Tier I, II and III rights are fully monetized in Texas for the SEC.

---

Okay.

---

Also I can't name a school that wants them, but several that don't want them...

it is always about the money...

A&M basically double SEC payout out once we joined them from <$20 million to $40. million.

So let Texas into SEC if they can double that to $80 million in few year... could they? of course not. so they have no value to SEC, none.

if you can't monetize it, it is worthless.

Why are you giving this article attention?

Working on a mobile device right now, but if the current SEC payout is x dollars for each of y teams, how much value would any given team z have to add for y+1 teams to at least reach the current payout level?

You math guys, what is the formula?

Plus, even if the SEC expanded it wouldn't take just one new team, would it? Most probably takes two.

Squadron7 said:

---

You math guys, what is the formula?

---

You serious Clark? I'm not a math guy but it's just +"whatever the current payout" is to cover your addition. Currently it would just be about $30m annually.

Now there is a lot more than that to consider when making an expansion decision though.