Viewers are fleeing cable. Streamers are hemorrhaging billions. Media companies are slashing personnel. I think the sports media gravy train is coming to and end.

hockeyag said:

---

Viewers are fleeing cable. Streamers are hemorrhaging billions. Media companies are slashing personnel. I think the sports media gravy train is coming to and end.

---

Sports media was emphasized to stabilize losses. But it isn't strong enough or maybe Covid lockdowns made us all stir crazy. The loss of interest by the general public in going to ballparks possibly is limiting the number of tv viewers, too.

When I was in college we had ESPN on pretty much 24x7. I can't watch it at all now except live events. So there is that…

(And early ESPN was hardly inspiring…)

But it also wasn't woke either.

hockeyag said:

---

Viewers are fleeing cable. Streamers are hemorrhaging billions. Media companies are slashing personnel. I think the sports media gravy train is coming to and end.

---

said everyone a couple of years ago


how did NFL do on its latest contract negotiation?

BMX Bandit said:

---

hockeyag said:

---

Viewers are fleeing cable. Streamers are hemorrhaging billions. Media companies are slashing personnel. I think the sports media gravy train is coming to and end.

---

said everyone a couple of years ago


how did NFL do on its latest contract negotiation?

---

They did fine. ESPN not so much. Big Ten focused on broadcast networks but Fox partners with them on the BTN so equivalent to our ESPN integration plus CBS and NBC much like NFL…so if you think that is copying the NFL playbook, you might not be wrong…

Sq 17 said:

---

It wasn't about more money per school it was about keeping of the 2 best available programs out of the new B1G

---

I agree with you but who gives a S if they go to the B1G? We should have let them destroy that conference instead of the SEC.

AWP 97 said:

---

Sq 17 said:

---

It wasn't about more money per school it was about keeping of the 2 best available programs out of the new B1G

---

I agree with you but who gives a S if they go to the B1G? We should have let them destroy that conference instead of the SEC.

---

Or, A&M could have voted "no."

Sankey wants to match the $1 billion annually B1G makes. But he needs more money to do that…

33 said:

---

AWP 97 said:

---

Sq 17 said:

---

It wasn't about more money per school it was about keeping of the 2 best available programs out of the new B1G

---

I agree with you but who gives a S if they go to the B1G? We should have let them destroy that conference instead of the SEC.

---

Or, A&M could have voted "no."

---

Oh, really, we're the only SEC team with veto power, and I didn't even know that.

Win At Life said:

---

33 said:

---

AWP 97 said:

---

Sq 17 said:

---

It wasn't about more money per school it was about keeping of the 2 best available programs out of the new B1G

---

I agree with you but who gives a S if they go to the B1G? We should have let them destroy that conference instead of the SEC.

---

Or, A&M could have voted "no."

---

Oh, really, we're the only SEC team with veto power, and I didn't even know that.

---

There was a hypothetical alliance that would vote as a bloc to prevent invitations to second schools in Florida, Georgia, S Carolina, Louisiana, Kentucky, and Arkansas as well as Texas. But as with most mythical beasts of legend it didn't actually exist…

Therefore we should sponsor Ga Tech, Florida State, Clemson, and Tulane???

Win At Life said:

---

Oh, really, we're the only SEC team with veto power, and I didn't even know that.

---

I didn't say you had veto power.

hockeyag said:

---

Viewers are fleeing cable. Streamers are hemorrhaging billions. Media companies are slashing personnel. I think the sports media gravy train is coming to and end.

---

The B10 just signing a $7B media deal tells me there is plenty of money still available for college football. Since ESPN was basically locked out of the B10, I have a feeling the next SEC media deal with ESPN is going to be enormous. Sadly for us, our current deal has us locked in for a long time. If Sanky gets any criticism it's for signing a 10 year deal, not for adding horn ad OU.

rootube said:

---

hockeyag said:

---

Viewers are fleeing cable. Streamers are hemorrhaging billions. Media companies are slashing personnel. I think the sports media gravy train is coming to and end.

---

The B10 just signing a $7B media deal tells me there is plenty of money still available for college football. Since ESPN was basically locked out of the B10, I have a feeling the next SEC media deal with ESPN is going to be enormous. Sadly for us, our current deal has us locked in for a long time. If Sanky gets any criticism it's for signing a 10 year deal, not for adding horn ad OU.

---

This takes us to just over $900 million I believe. The Big Ten added other media broadcasters to copy the BFL abd get those numbers up abd agreed to a shorter time frame.

But since Sankey gets paid based on all conference revenue, I suspect he's satisfied with his bump in pay for adding Texas and OU. And if we are lucky he will be gone before the next one…

Sq 17 said:

---

It wasn't about more money per school it was about keeping of the 2 best available programs out of the new B1G

---

It was about espn making more money.

He is Ass My Dude said:

---

Sq 17 said:

---

It wasn't about more money per school it was about keeping of the 2 best available programs out of the new B1G

---

It was about espn making more money.

---

Precisely. By deep sixing their money pit LHN investment and folding it into the already existing SECN owned by Disney. This was not Sankey's doing. He's a conniving POS to be sure. But his hand was forced by Bristol on this one

TexAggie1999 said:

---

This thread is stupid. The contract, which was signed before OU and Texas signed onto the SEC, is believed to include that adding schools increases total payout by the amount each school makes so the total per school is the same. The article says the SEC is trying to get more because it is Texas and OU.

We do NOT yet know what them joining will do to the payout. Why are we complaining before we even know what will happen?

---

what you dont know is jack **** about anything


Snakey dont understand the pandoras box hes opened. I laugh at his every failure.

Sq 17 said:

---

It wasn't about more money per school it was about keeping of the 2 best available programs out of the new B1G

---

If SEC per school revenues don't increase with tu and ou, would it in the B1G?

Maybe we should be less worried about revenue, and more worried about how we're spending it.

BMX Bandit said:

---

there is no new information in the article.

it has been known that by adding marquee teams, the overall payout would increase under the current contract. texas and ou are being added because in the future they will help increase the payout to each school.

you can really tell many here don't follow whats going on at all, just love to whine about Sankey.

---

That's a gamble at best. Adding them now doesn't get anyone anything they didn't already have except tu and ou unless ESPN decides to renegotiate, but they have little incentive to do so beyond locking the SEC into a longer deal that *might* save them money over the long run depending on how the next contract *could* be structured.

The problem is, the landscape has been changing and ESPN is coming off serious cost cutting measures. Trying to lock up conferences or even entire sports with fat, long term deals is what got them in trouble in the first place, so if they've learned their lesson they should say no. What is the SEC going to do, take the SECN somewhere else when the current contract is up? Who's going to beat it with the same exposure as ESPN/ABC? Fox?

It really seems like this was a spur of the moment decision where Sankey saw an opportunity and acted without thinking because he had FOMO and wanted to cement his legacy through expansion like Slive.

AustinAg2K said:

---

So much for Texas being the most valuable college program. ESPN just showed everyone they are no more valuable than Vanderbilt.

---

I believe that ranking is about way more than SEC football money. It's apparel sales etc..., which is why A&M is a much more valuable brand than Vanderbilt.

He is Ass My Dude said:

---

Sq 17 said:

---

It wasn't about more money per school it was about keeping of the 2 best available programs out of the new B1G

---

It was about espn making more money.

---

ESPN getting paid regardless , yes the LHN was a money losing black hole and tu next landing spot would take that into account

AWP 97 said:

---

Sq 17 said:

---

It wasn't about more money per school it was about keeping of the 2 best available programs out of the new B1G

---

I agree with you but who gives a S if they go to the B1G? We should have let them destroy that conference instead of the SEC.

---

Obviously the SEC HQ cared , this is about being the undisputed pre-eminent conference in America.
If the B1G picks up the USC , UCLA tu and the land thieves they could challenge for being the pre eminent conference

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

there is no new information in the article.

it has been known that by adding marquee teams, the overall payout would increase under the current contract. texas and ou are being added because in the future they will help increase the payout to each school.

you can really tell many here don't follow whats going on at all, just love to whine about Sankey.

---

That's a gamble at best. Adding them now doesn't get anyone anything they didn't already have except tu and ou unless ESPN decides to renegotiate, but they have little incentive to do so beyond locking the SEC into a longer deal that *might* save them money over the long run depending on how the next contract *could* be structured.

The problem is, the landscape has been changing and ESPN is coming off serious cost cutting measures. Trying to lock up conferences or even entire sports with fat, long term deals is what got them in trouble in the first place, so if they've learned their lesson they should say no. What is the SEC going to do, take the SECN somewhere else when the current contract is up? Who's going to beat it with the same exposure as ESPN/ABC? Fox?

It really seems like this was a spur of the moment decision where Sankey saw an opportunity and acted without thinking because he had FOMO and wanted to cement his legacy through expansion like Slive.

---

If presented with the same choice right now the SEC would make the exact same decision in a heartbeat. People like to watch horn and OU play football (even when they suck). That fact is not debatable and why they are a valuable commodity. Calling this a failure before they even join is dumb.

Quote:

---

It really seems like this was a spur of the moment decision where Sankey saw an opportunity and acted without thinking because he had FOMO and wanted to cement his legacy through expansion like Slive.

---

Without thinking about what? A few butthurt Aggies' feelings? He saw the opportunity to add more inventory, at a minimum breakeven, and in all likelihood, come out ahead financially in the long run?


There was no downside for the conference, and only upside, which is why he took it. The imaginary downside that "Texas just ruins everything" is not how big boys make business decisions for multibillion dollar enterprises.

At least it will be entertaining to watch how the sips destroy their new conference, to see if they use their old tried and true methods or try something new.

I'll go to my grave believing that ESPN basically went to Sankey and told him that they were taking Texas and Oklahoma--how he was to handle that was up to him. He obviously earned the Snakey nickname from how it got handled.

I would still be on the phone with the B1G. This is a war and the B1G needs some southern representation from a giant AAU research school in a huge state. Mizzou would probably go, too. The SEC does nothing for the Ags going forward. No recruiting advantage, diluted state viewership now, and increased competition from two schools with a lot of resources.

In the end, A&M did way more for the SEC than the SEC ever has done for A&M.

rootube said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

there is no new information in the article.

it has been known that by adding marquee teams, the overall payout would increase under the current contract. texas and ou are being added because in the future they will help increase the payout to each school.

you can really tell many here don't follow whats going on at all, just love to whine about Sankey.

---

That's a gamble at best. Adding them now doesn't get anyone anything they didn't already have except tu and ou unless ESPN decides to renegotiate, but they have little incentive to do so beyond locking the SEC into a longer deal that *might* save them money over the long run depending on how the next contract *could* be structured.

The problem is, the landscape has been changing and ESPN is coming off serious cost cutting measures. Trying to lock up conferences or even entire sports with fat, long term deals is what got them in trouble in the first place, so if they've learned their lesson they should say no. What is the SEC going to do, take the SECN somewhere else when the current contract is up? Who's going to beat it with the same exposure as ESPN/ABC? Fox?

It really seems like this was a spur of the moment decision where Sankey saw an opportunity and acted without thinking because he had FOMO and wanted to cement his legacy through expansion like Slive.

---

If presented with the same choice right now the SEC would make the exact same decision in a heartbeat. People like to watch horn and OU play football (even when they suck). That fact is not debatable and why they are a valuable commodity. Calling this a failure before they even join is dumb.

---

I didn't say it was a failure, I said it was poorly executed and thought through. Snakey jumped at the chance to add them, but it seems like it was only with some vague plan and the idea that the conference would be more valuable with them added so why not.

Ultimately it's a question of viewership and content value, and Snakey's bet seems to be that adding tu and ou will increase overall viewership substantially and not cannibalize from other games. As it is, tu and ou increase the number of schools by 15%, so total contract needs to increase by more in order for it to be worth more on a per school basis. That means conference viewership overall needs to go up beyond 15% in order to justify the increased context value. Oddly enough, tu and ou's viewership last year was just under 15% of the SEC total.

Unless ESPN renegotiates before 2024, and I'm not sure why they would, they're going to get a solid look at conference viewership with expansion figured in and value it accordingly. There's no getting them to pay a premium for potential and guaranteeing a per school bump regardless of the viewership outcome. Snakey is basically showing his hand early by jumping on tu and ou to keep them from the BIG.

JWinTX said:

---

In the end, A&M did way more for the SEC than the SEC ever has done for A&M.

---

Wow! I don't think you should share this with the rest of the SEC.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

rootube said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

there is no new information in the article.

it has been known that by adding marquee teams, the overall payout would increase under the current contract. texas and ou are being added because in the future they will help increase the payout to each school.

you can really tell many here don't follow whats going on at all, just love to whine about Sankey.

---

That's a gamble at best. Adding them now doesn't get anyone anything they didn't already have except tu and ou unless ESPN decides to renegotiate, but they have little incentive to do so beyond locking the SEC into a longer deal that *might* save them money over the long run depending on how the next contract *could* be structured.

The problem is, the landscape has been changing and ESPN is coming off serious cost cutting measures. Trying to lock up conferences or even entire sports with fat, long term deals is what got them in trouble in the first place, so if they've learned their lesson they should say no. What is the SEC going to do, take the SECN somewhere else when the current contract is up? Who's going to beat it with the same exposure as ESPN/ABC? Fox?

It really seems like this was a spur of the moment decision where Sankey saw an opportunity and acted without thinking because he had FOMO and wanted to cement his legacy through expansion like Slive.

---

If presented with the same choice right now the SEC would make the exact same decision in a heartbeat. People like to watch horn and OU play football (even when they suck). That fact is not debatable and why they are a valuable commodity. Calling this a failure before they even join is dumb.

---

I didn't say it was a failure, I said it was poorly executed and thought through. Snakey jumped at the chance to add them, but it seems like it was only with some vague plan and the idea that the conference would be more valuable with them added so why not.

Ultimately it's a question of viewership and content value, and Snakey's bet seems to be that adding tu and ou will increase overall viewership substantially and not cannibalize from other games. As it is, tu and ou increase the number of schools by 15%, so total contract needs to increase by more in order for it to be worth more on a per school basis. That means conference viewership overall needs to go up beyond 15% in order to justify the increased context value. Oddly enough, tu and ou's viewership last year was just under 15% of the SEC total.

Unless ESPN renegotiates before 2024, and I'm not sure why they would, they're going to get a solid look at conference viewership with expansion figured in and value it accordingly. There's no getting them to pay a premium for potential and guaranteeing a per school bump regardless of the viewership outcome. Snakey is basically showing his hand early by jumping on tu and ou to keep them from the BIG.

---

I'm not going to pretend to understand how the media contracts work but A&M and Mizzou added significantly to the overall value of the SEC and I'm confident horn and OU will do the same. It wasn't a risky bet if you look at the ratings numbers for Horn and OU.

So your take is that adding tu and ou won't add viewership for the conference on a percentage basis?
That's one of the worst takes I've ever read, my guy.

Quote:

---

I didn't say it was a failure, I said it was poorly executed and thought through. Snakey jumped at the chance to add them, but it seems like it was only with some vague plan and the idea that the conference would be more valuable with them added so why not.

---

Only seems that way if you don't take a big picture view.

A 16 team SEC probably gets an extra at-large bid in the 12 team CFP over a 14 team league. 1 if not 2 March Madness bids, etc. All that equals more money to spread around. Marquee matchups will drive the next media deal, and a 9 game conference schedule is possible with the additions, which creates tons of extra marquee matchups.

What about any of it was poorly executed or thought through? The fact that some butthurt Aggies got their feelings hurt? The speed with which it happened was impressive you compare it to the embarrassing drawn-out CF that was our own admission into the league.

JWinTX said:

---

I'll go to my grave believing that ESPN basically went to Sankey and told him that they were taking Texas and Oklahoma--how he was to handle that was up to him. He obviously earned the Snakey nickname from how it got handled.

I would still be on the phone with the B1G. This is a war and the B1G needs some southern representation from a giant AAU research school in a huge state. Mizzou would probably go, too. The SEC does nothing for the Ags going forward. No recruiting advantage, diluted state viewership now, and increased competition from two schools with a lot of resources.

In the end, A&M did way more for the SEC than the SEC ever has done for A&M.

---

#TexasAM has done more for the #SEC than the SEC has done for Texas A&M. Time to move to the #B1G! pic.twitter.com/rZkthYIyPE

— Message Board Geniuses (@BoardGeniuses) May 8, 2023

Your problem is that you are looking at this and critically thinking. The better style is to just post based on your emotional response to your teetee being hurt by mean ole Snakey and the Tsips.