More teams doesn't mean more money or a better product. We already have the best product and adding tu/OU is enough.
Does adding 4 other teams just to have 20 make SEC better..?
Bringing in Okie St or FSU/Clemson UNC/UVA what does that do add a few more viewers in Carolinas..? Right now doesn't matter the region SEC produces the best matchups and the country watches.
Watering down the SEC will make weaker uninteresting matchups.
I thought quality over quantity..?!!

Quote:

---

More teams doesn't mean more money or a better product. We already have the best product and adding tu/OU is enough.
Does adding 4 other teams just to have 20 make SEC better..?

---

12 football games a season, for each team, 14 weeks.

This year, just for A&M, 25% of that is Sam Houston, App State, and UMass. ESPN wants that to be vaporized, and replaced with Clemson, FL State, Miami. And is willing to pay more money to do it. FOX is about to pay the Big 10.

So there is more money, it's being spread differently.

And, what they are trying to do is a better product. Because no one ever wanted to watch those stupid games anyway.

Coryhub said:

---

More teams doesn't mean more money or a better product. We already have the best product and adding tu/OU is enough.
Does adding 4 other teams just to have 20 make SEC better..?
Bringing in Okie St or FSU/Clemson UNC/UVA what does that do add a few more viewers in Carolinas..? Right now doesn't matter the region SEC produces the best matchups and the country watches.
Watering down the SEC will make weaker uninteresting matchups.
I thought quality over quantity..?!!

---

I'd argue many of the team's you mention would be an upgrade to some of our current members... so threat of watering down the SEC is minimal...

The next few moves by SEC and BIG10 will be interesting... Right now BIG10 is the national brand. Oregon is gonna be on an island if they stay PAC so more to come...

20ag07 said:

---

Quote:

---

More teams doesn't mean more money or a better product. We already have the best product and adding tu/OU is enough.
Does adding 4 other teams just to have 20 make SEC better..?

---

12 football games a season, for each team, 14 weeks.

This year, just for A&M, 25% of that is Sam Houston, App State, and UMass. ESPN wants that to be vaporized, and replaced with Clemson, FL State, Miami. And is willing to pay more money to do it. FOX is about to pay the Big 10.

So there is more money, it's being spread differently.

And, what they are trying to do is a better product. Because no one ever wanted to watch those stupid games anyway.

---

The fact that we have a 14 team conference forces us to schedule SHSU? There are 13 potential games against conference opponents now yet we have SHSU and App. State on the schedule. How the heck does having 19 potential conference games change anything. Answer is it doesn't. Nor does it necessarily increase our payout. All it will do is increase the chances that we get screwed on scheduling (i.e. only playing Bama every 4 years in which case they may as well not even be in our "conference").

"12 football games a season, for each team, 14 weeks"

Then why not just play all games within the current conference like we did during the COVID year?

Quote:

---

"12 football games a season, for each team, 14 weeks"

Then why not just play all games within the current conference like we did during the COVID year?

---

Thats what I'm trying to tell you is about to happen. All games will be in conference (the new expanded one). And ESPN will pay more money per team to get it.

Because college football is on a collision course to two mega conferences that will make lots of money for their members (and broadcasters).

SEC is very close to being in a position where it has to keep up with the Big Ten, from a product perspective (not a talent perspective).

I'm not convinced the cupcake games will go away. They've been increasing in the last 20 years. Coaches like them because they are easy wins to bloat their records.

It sure would be nice to get rid of them though. The November cupcake games really get to me. Many times they end up being the last home game of the year.

Quote:

---

I'm not convinced the cupcake games will go away. They've been increasing in the last 20 years. Coaches like them because they are easy wins to bloat their records.

---

Bloated records mattered in the BCS system, where only 2 teams played for the prize. In the current one, where 4 teams play for it. When it's 12 or 16, out of about 40 playing for it, the cupcake games will not exist in any fashion.

It's happening.

Frok said:

---

I'm not convinced the cupcake games will go away. They've been increasing in the last 20 years. Coaches like them because they are easy wins to bloat their records.

It sure would be nice to get rid of them though. The November cupcake games really get to me. Many times they end up being the last home game of the year.

---

They may not go away, but they might get reduced to only 1 or 2 per team. Once you have two super leagues if 20 teams or more, I could see a 10 game conference schedule with only 2 OOC games, both cupcake games

We are already sing a reduction in these cupcake games. Many schools are no longer playing FCS teams. In the long run, when the new "super division" of college football is formed I don't think the A&M v McNeese games survive.

The new "cupcakes" will be the once P5 schools that got left behind, like Colorado or Kansas State

Quote:

---

Which would be a shame because those cupcake schools need the games vs the power schools in order to fund their athletic departments

---

It's sad.

But why is it our job to subside that? I spend $2K on season tix a year, 25% of games which I can't even give away for free. I'm sure my new price is about to be $3K+. Is that preferable, if they're all useable? Probably. Sorry Sam Houston. But why do we need to pay for their football program to exist?

those athletic departments all functioned just fine before the cupcake era began.

my freshman year, our out of conference was lsu, ou, mizzou and louisville. somehow the sam houstons of the world survived.

20ag07 said:

---

I spend $2K on season tix a year, 25% of games which I can't even give away for free.

---

Your choice. And you make that choice knowing that Sam is part of the deal.

BMX Bandit said:

---

those athletic departments all functioned just fine before the cupcake era began.

my freshman year, our out of conference was lsu, ou, mizzou and louisville. somehow the sam houstons of the world survived.

---

When that schedule was made, we were Sam Houston State.

Wait... we've never played all of those teams in one season...

A raise for Snakey.

Quote:

---

When that schedule was made, we were Sam Houston State.

---

Dumb.

We were #4 ranked to start season, ended #9

I would like to see 5 16-team conferences, all playing a 9-game, 3/6/6, conference schedule. Two of the 3 non-conference games must be against teams from the other 4 conferences.

Quote:

---

Your choice. And you make that choice knowing that Sam is part of the deal.

---

Obviously I do that math. Every year when I renew. So does ESPN. Who spends way more than me on product they don't think they can sell for as much as they can sell something better. How we got here.

And I'm bout to have to spend more for the next phase. And as I said previously, that's probably preferable.

Just watch.

Sam, App, UMass, and all those brethren won't be on our schedule by 2026. If a "cupcake" game appears, it will be Texas Tech by then.

nbaker2022 said:

---

Money

---

It's also about being the most high profile conference.
Right now the SEC is the top conference. We took the horns and OU to prevent them from joining another conference. SEC will add teams if needed to make sure another conference does not pass it.

Sq 17 said:

---

nbaker2022 said:

---

Money

---

It's also about being the most high profile conference.
Right now the SEC is the top conference. We took the horns and OU to prevent them from joining another conference. SEC will add teams if needed to make sure another conference does not pass it.

---

And ultimately, that is a dumb reason to expand. Playing keep away.

Does it really matter if Georgia Tech is in the ACC or the B1G?

Georgia still rules the Atlanta college football market.

Quote:

---

Does it really matter if Georgia Tech is in the ACC or the B1G?

Georgia still rules the Atlanta college football market.

---

"Markets" don't matter anymore, but keep saying it.

20ag07 said:

---

Quote:

---

Does it really matter if Georgia Tech is in the ACC or the B1G?

Georgia still rules the Atlanta college football market.

---

"Markets" don't matter anymore, but keep saying it.

---

Stop being so obtuse. Markets for TV revenue don't matter as much anymore because ESPN can't force cable, Dish/Direct to pay more obviously.

But the point remains, whether it is the ACC or the B1G, it doesn't matter. The SEC doesn't need to play keep away from the B1G. Bad reason on its own for more expansion.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

When that schedule was made, we were Sam Houston State.

---

Dumb.

We were #4 ranked to start season, ended #9

---

What year was this?

Quote:

---

Stop being so obtuse. Markets for TV revenue don't matter as much anymore because ESPN can't force cable, Dish/Direct to pay more obviously.

But the point remains, whether it is the ACC or the B1G, it doesn't matter. The SEC doesn't need to play keep away from the B1G. Bad reason on its own for more expansion.

---

Stop being so obtuse.

The SEC is about to replace 3 games a year, per team. And people don't want the same "marquee, but not" matchups every year. So, because they are going to replace the 3 cupcake games, they are and should, snatching the best they can get their hands on.

Expansion is happening. That's not "keep away". That's grabbing the best, bc you're gonna end up doing it anyway.

Money.

Looks like money will also be reason college football implodes. Just when things look like they may be turning good for Aggie football we are on verge of collapse of entire system. Seems about right.

aggiehawg said:

---

Sq 17 said:

---

nbaker2022 said:

---

Money

---

It's also about being the most high profile conference.
Right now the SEC is the top conference. We took the horns and OU to prevent them from joining another conference. SEC will add teams if needed to make sure another conference does not pass it.

---

And ultimately, that is a dumb reason to expand. Playing keep away.

Does it really matter if Georgia Tech is in the ACC or the B1G?

Georgia still rules the Atlanta college football market.

---

I think there are bigger pieces in play than Georgia Tech. It's an arms race to maximize TV revenue if you want the biggest prize you gobble up valuable teams until there is no team left that brings in more revenue than they take out.

Quote:

---

Money.

Looks like money will also be reason college football implodes. Just when things look like they may be turning good for Aggie football we are on verge of collapse of entire system. Seems about right.

---

That would be a sad thing for us…if…money wasn't absolutely on our side?

Quote:

---

I think there are bigger pieces in play than Georgia Tech. It's an arms race to maximize TV revenue if you want the biggest prize you gobble up valuable teams until there is no team left that brings in more revenue than they take out.

---

Who is "valuable" and who is "not valuable"??

The B1G clearly didn't think the sips or sooners would be of much value to them. And that goes back to 2010, when Delaney was hell bent on expansion. Why do you think that is?

aggiehawg said:

---

20ag07 said:

---

Quote:

---

Does it really matter if Georgia Tech is in the ACC or the B1G?

Georgia still rules the Atlanta college football market.

---

"Markets" don't matter anymore, but keep saying it.

---

Stop being so obtuse. Markets for TV revenue don't matter as much anymore because ESPN can't force cable, Dish/Direct to pay more obviously.

But the point remains, whether it is the ACC or the B1G, it doesn't matter. The SEC doesn't need to play keep away from the B1G. Bad reason on its own for more expansion.

---

See my recent topic post.

Watch the BIG scoop up Notre Dame, Clemson, North Carolina, Miami, Oregon, Washington. Then see the market share of the BIG vs SEC. And that's not even including what that'll do for football recruiting for all those schools.

Quote:

---

The B1G clearly didn't think the sips or sooners would be of much value to them. And that goes back to 2010, when Delaney was hell bent on expansion. Why do you think that is?

---

Bahaha. So. After the past week. You think TX/OU were not an option Kevin Warren was taking, if he could.

Monday of last week, Kevin would have told you he'd take USC/TX before he even finished the answer.

You are supposed to smart enough to know that TX certainly talked to the Big10. They talked to the SEC. They took their best deal.

After everything that's transpired, what tells you the Big10 looked at Texas, and said "you have no value", but "UCLA you have value".

No logical person, except one with the hurt feelings, would do that?!?!

20ag07 said:

---

Quote:

---

The B1G clearly didn't think the sips or sooners would be of much value to them. And that goes back to 2010, when Delaney was hell bent on expansion. Why do you think that is?

---

Bahaha. So. After the past week. You think TX/OU were not an option Kevin Warren was taking, if he could.

Monday of last week, Kevin would have told you he'd take USC/TX before he even finished the answer.

You are supposed to smart enough to know that TX certainly talked to the Big10. They talked to the SEC. They took their best deal.

After everything that's transpired, what tells you the Big10 looked at Texas, and said "you have no value", but "UCLA you have value".

No logical person, except one with the hurt feelings, would do that?!?!

---

When do the sips join the Big 10?

Quote:

---

When do the sips join the Big 10?

---

Obviously never, but anyone who thinks they didn't call last year, and then took the best deal they got, is blind. And anyone who now thinks "they got offered nothing" by the Big10, who then turned around and offered UCLA, who will be making more than any school in the SEC until the next deal, is lying to themselves.

Texas took the SEC situation bc it will be bigger. Not because the Big10 said "no you have no value", then chose UCLA.

Cmon.