Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
22 minutes ago, Zeus said:

Florida > tech

Arkansas > Baylor

Kentucky > TCU 

Vandy > Houston/cinci

Mississippi state > Okie lite

Georgia > all of em

 aggy more fun to play than k state or Iowa state or any of em

especially now they’ve watered down the conference so bad, the SEC is just better every week. 

Three of those are just wrong, not to mention using Cincinnati and Houston is absurd because they wouldn't be in the Big 12 if Texas and OU didn't leave.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
13 hours ago, markstanco said:


How can both of them get out of that contract though. Apparently it really does have teeth.

FSU's lawyers have said ESPN could end it in June 2027

https://news.fsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/198512536-Amended-Complaint-1.pdf

Quote

The following spring, the ACC and ESPN renegotiated key terms, which generated the May 9, 2012, ACC-ESPN Amendment (the “2012 ACC-ESPN Amendment”), which was to expire June of 2027.

Quote

 It is a widely repeated misconception that the ACC’s multi-media rights agreement expires in 2036. As explained below, in truth, the multi-media rights agreement expires in 2027 unless ESPN chooses to exercise its unilateral option.

I think all of these lawsuits are smoke and mirrors.

If we've learned anything in this era of never-going-away-realignment talk, it's this: if the big cigars and ESPN think it will be good for business, any team can go to any conference.

Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, markstanco said:


How can both of them get out of that contract though. Apparently it really does have teeth.

I thought I read that if enough ACC teams agree to leave, the ACC GOR has no teeth.

 

i wouldn’t be shocked if North Carolina was offered a spot in the SEC for basketball reasons.

Edited by lilMAC25
Posted
2 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

I thought I read that if enough ACC teams agree to leave, the ACC GOR has no teeth.

 

i wouldn’t be shocked if North Carolina was offered a spot in the SEC for basketball reasons.

Belichick in shambles. Can he handle coaching in a conference that Just Means More? I don't see him thriving in high-stakes environments.

  • Haha 1
  • 5 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

Observation- neither CFP finalist played in a conference CG. As a matter of fact, Ohio State, eliminated from the B1G CG by their loss to Michigan, and motivated by that same loss to re-evaluate everything, used their three weeks off before the first CFp game against Tennessee to re-engineer their run game to a more counter-based scheme, and to redo their DL substitution philosophy. These changes have a lot to do with their dominance in the CFP- they were always this talented, but they really used their three weeks off, in a way that counterparts Indiana and Tennessee didn’t (or couldn’t). 
 
Teams in conference CGs didn’t have the time for such prep work. They had to plan for the CGs, and then had two weeks for the CFP. (UGA lost their two year starter at QB in the SEC CG). 
 
What does that have to do with the SEC schedule length? There is a lot of talk that the teams that were in favor of a nine game schedule (the stronger teams) might be less so, seeing how the CFP is such a weekly grind. I would argue that the SEC CG is a greater hindrance to a CFP run than a ninth league game. 
 
Who does the SEC CG really benefit, other than the teams that aren’t in it (they get a share of media money). 
 
I think we are seeing that, while the BCS and four team CFP were just natural extensions of the regular season, the 12 team CFP tournament is almost a a different season. 
 
Would the SEC be best off if it told the network (ABC/ESPN is the only SEC media partner?) “you can have a nine game league schedule, and no conference CG, for the money that the B1G gets (or more, I guess, if that can be negotiated)”? I ask that, because although I was a big proponent of the nine game league schedule, I’m wavering now that we see the impact of a tougher regular season schedule, a CG, and then the CFP. 

Edited by statsman
  • 3 months later...
Posted

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6340696/2025/05/07/sec-football-nine-game-schedule-espn-money/

ESPN open to paying SEC more to add ninth conference football game to schedule: Sources
Seth Emerson, Andrew Marchand
5–6 minutes

May 7, 2025Updated 6:59 pm EDT

ESPN has indicated a willingness to increase its payment to the SEC if the conference adds a ninth game to its league football schedule, sources briefed on the matter told The Athletic.

There is no formal offer yet, those sources added, and the exact amount of the increase still needs to be fully negotiated. But the sources said the additional money would likely be in the range of $50-80 million annually on top of the current deal, in which ESPN pays the conference $811 million per year to broadcast its sporting events. Both ESPN and the SEC declined to comment.

A change in ESPN’s stance doesn’t mean the SEC will definitely move to playing nine conference games. Now the main hurdle to expanding the league schedule may be the future College Football Playoff format, which isn’t likely to be determined until at least June. That makes it less likely — though not impossible — that the SEC makes a decision on a schedule format at its spring meetings later this month in Destin, Fla.

Still, ESPN’s willingness to up its ante is an important development, as it has been one of the main sticking points among enough SEC members to resist the push for nine games. When the SEC announced the addition of Oklahoma and Texas in July 2021, momentum toward a nine-game schedule increased instantly, with commissioner Greg Sankey among those privately in favor. (Sankey finally went public with his preference earlier this year.)

But for the past four years, members have expressed enough opposition that the conference instead went with a temporary fix of eight-game football schedules for 2024 and ’25, the first two seasons with Oklahoma and Texas. Some of the concern was competitive, especially among teams worried about reaching the six-win bowl eligibility threshold. Some of the concern was economic: A nine-game schedule means schools could play one fewer home game every two years, and they wanted ESPN to help make up the difference.

“One of the issues in the room for our athletics directors is what seemed to matter most, is the number to the right, the number of losses, and how do we understand what that means for our schedule moving forward?” Sankey said in March during an appearance on the Paul Finebaum Show. “I’m one who said I really think we ought to be trying to move towards a nine-game conference schedule. I think that can be positive for a lot of reasons. You watch the interest around conference games. But not if that causes us to lose opportunities.”

One reason Sankey and the SEC went with the temporary eight-game schedule was the hope that the success of the inaugural season with Oklahoma and Texas would encourage ESPN. And that appears to be exactly what happened.

The two new SEC schools were part of memorable, highly rated games, including their annual Red River rivalry and Texas’ two losses to Georgia on national stages. The SEC championship game between the Bulldogs and Longhorns was the highest-rated non-Playoff game of the college football season, and at least one SEC team was involved in eight of the 10 most highly rated games of college football’s regular season.

Another consideration for the league is the games that would not happen regularly if the SEC stayed with an eight-game schedule. The eight-game format would include only one permanent opponent for every team, so some highly rated rivalries would only be played twice every four years, including Texas-Texas A&M, Alabama-Tennessee, Alabama-LSU and Auburn-Georgia.

If the SEC went to a nine-game schedule, all those games would be played annually. Those matchups are all part of the 2024 and 2025 schedules, an unsubtle way for the SEC to show ESPN what it could be missing. (The eight-game schedule format could always be changed to account for those games, but the conference has made no move toward doing that.)

As for the CFP format, the SEC has been waiting to see whether the postseason field will expand to 14 or 16 teams and whether any automatic bids will be installed in the new format; the SEC and Big Ten have discussed pushing for as many as four bids apiece. When the SEC only got three teams in the 2024-25 Playoff field, concern over further snubs immediately boosted leaguewide sentiment about staying at eight games. The introduction of automatic bids may address those concerns, but momentum for their addition to the CFP structure may have stalled.

Another factor in a potential move off of eight-game slates: The SEC has been working closely with the Big Ten, which plays a nine-game conference schedule, and the leagues’ consideration of future scheduling partnerships may hinge on playing the same number of league opponents. The SEC could also just settle for a stronger assurance that schedule strength will matter to the CFP selection committee and assume the risk of an extra conference game in order to reap the financial benefits. The new money that would head each school’s way from ESPN would likely not even account for half of the more than $20 million schools will be allowed to distribute to athletes under a new revenue sharing system starting this summer, but it would still help.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)

Just move to 9 games. No one wants to see SEC teams play shitty FBS and FCS opponents. 9 conference games ensures at least 4 SEC teams in playoff because the SOS of all the SEC teams increases instantly. It's better for ESPN. It's better for the fans who have to shell out $$$ to watch home games. You might lose a home game one year but you gain it back the next season. 

The CFP just needs to say everyone plays 9 conference games to qualify and at least one other power 4 conference foe in the OOC. Make home and homes mean something. If they expand to 14 or 16 then who cares about worrying about not getting in. The Big 10 and SEC will take most of those spots. 

Edited by mdmost
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, gatormarc said:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6340696/2025/05/07/sec-football-nine-game-schedule-espn-money/

ESPN open to paying SEC more to add ninth conference football game to schedule: Sources
Seth Emerson, Andrew Marchand
5–6 minutes

May 7, 2025Updated 6:59 pm EDT

ESPN has indicated a willingness to increase its payment to the SEC if the conference adds a ninth game to its league football schedule, sources briefed on the matter told The Athletic.

There is no formal offer yet, those sources added, and the exact amount of the increase still needs to be fully negotiated. But the sources said the additional money would likely be in the range of $50-80 million annually on top of the current deal, in which ESPN pays the conference $811 million per year to broadcast its sporting events. Both ESPN and the SEC declined to comment.

A change in ESPN’s stance doesn’t mean the SEC will definitely move to playing nine conference games. Now the main hurdle to expanding the league schedule may be the future College Football Playoff format, which isn’t likely to be determined until at least June. That makes it less likely — though not impossible — that the SEC makes a decision on a schedule format at its spring meetings later this month in Destin, Fla.

Still, ESPN’s willingness to up its ante is an important development, as it has been one of the main sticking points among enough SEC members to resist the push for nine games. When the SEC announced the addition of Oklahoma and Texas in July 2021, momentum toward a nine-game schedule increased instantly, with commissioner Greg Sankey among those privately in favor. (Sankey finally went public with his preference earlier this year.)

But for the past four years, members have expressed enough opposition that the conference instead went with a temporary fix of eight-game football schedules for 2024 and ’25, the first two seasons with Oklahoma and Texas. Some of the concern was competitive, especially among teams worried about reaching the six-win bowl eligibility threshold. Some of the concern was economic: A nine-game schedule means schools could play one fewer home game every two years, and they wanted ESPN to help make up the difference.

“One of the issues in the room for our athletics directors is what seemed to matter most, is the number to the right, the number of losses, and how do we understand what that means for our schedule moving forward?” Sankey said in March during an appearance on the Paul Finebaum Show. “I’m one who said I really think we ought to be trying to move towards a nine-game conference schedule. I think that can be positive for a lot of reasons. You watch the interest around conference games. But not if that causes us to lose opportunities.”

One reason Sankey and the SEC went with the temporary eight-game schedule was the hope that the success of the inaugural season with Oklahoma and Texas would encourage ESPN. And that appears to be exactly what happened.

The two new SEC schools were part of memorable, highly rated games, including their annual Red River rivalry and Texas’ two losses to Georgia on national stages. The SEC championship game between the Bulldogs and Longhorns was the highest-rated non-Playoff game of the college football season, and at least one SEC team was involved in eight of the 10 most highly rated games of college football’s regular season.

Another consideration for the league is the games that would not happen regularly if the SEC stayed with an eight-game schedule. The eight-game format would include only one permanent opponent for every team, so some highly rated rivalries would only be played twice every four years, including Texas-Texas A&M, Alabama-Tennessee, Alabama-LSU and Auburn-Georgia.

If the SEC went to a nine-game schedule, all those games would be played annually. Those matchups are all part of the 2024 and 2025 schedules, an unsubtle way for the SEC to show ESPN what it could be missing. (The eight-game schedule format could always be changed to account for those games, but the conference has made no move toward doing that.)

As for the CFP format, the SEC has been waiting to see whether the postseason field will expand to 14 or 16 teams and whether any automatic bids will be installed in the new format; the SEC and Big Ten have discussed pushing for as many as four bids apiece. When the SEC only got three teams in the 2024-25 Playoff field, concern over further snubs immediately boosted leaguewide sentiment about staying at eight games. The introduction of automatic bids may address those concerns, but momentum for their addition to the CFP structure may have stalled.

Another factor in a potential move off of eight-game slates: The SEC has been working closely with the Big Ten, which plays a nine-game conference schedule, and the leagues’ consideration of future scheduling partnerships may hinge on playing the same number of league opponents. The SEC could also just settle for a stronger assurance that schedule strength will matter to the CFP selection committee and assume the risk of an extra conference game in order to reap the financial benefits. The new money that would head each school’s way from ESPN would likely not even account for half of the more than $20 million schools will be allowed to distribute to athletes under a new revenue sharing system starting this summer, but it would still help.

"tu ruins every conference they touch!"

- aggy

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
  • Drool 1
Posted
12 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

ESPN’s number seems low, right? 

$80 million is probably about right.  $50 million is way low. Live sport TV rights still have not plateaued so I’d still take the over.

If ESPN truly doesn’t value most OOC games (which is debatable) then $811 million divided by the 8 current conference games would be roughly $101 million.  The SEC is under contract so this is still being negotiated without any outside bidders. I assume the price will not be a straight proportional increase since ESPN has most of the control.

Would be curious to see the aggregated financials when half the conference loses an annual home game and likely they can pencil in a team or two being removed from bowl eligibility as well. Not to mention the potential cost of not making the CFP cut line by adding that extra loss. Are those negatives offset by the increase with their TV rights?

Posted
1 hour ago, TKthunder2 said:

$80 million is probably about right.  $50 million is way low. Live sport TV rights still have not plateaued so I’d still take the over.

If ESPN truly doesn’t value most OOC games (which is debatable) then $811 million divided by the 8 current conference games would be roughly $101 million.  The SEC is under contract so this is still being negotiated without any outside bidders. I assume the price will not be a straight proportional increase since ESPN has most of the control.

Would be curious to see the aggregated financials when half the conference loses an annual home game and likely they can pencil in a team or two being removed from bowl eligibility as well. Not to mention the potential cost of not making the CFP cut line by adding that extra loss. Are those negatives offset by the increase with their TV rights?

ESPN clearly does not value the FCS games that all but one SEC team plays. They're all relegated to dogshit channels and times, if not only on something like ESPN+. They leaked their range. I'm sure this could clear at $100M with caveats about the FCS games going away or limited to X times per every Y years or something. Fixing that also removes an annual cost for every program to host one of those dogshit programs. You don't have to pay an additional SEC team to create a home and home each cycle.

There is a zero percent chance that losing one home game, often the most poorly attended, every other season, is equal to or greater than in value to the additional $6.25M-ish each year, plus improved attendance and concessions every other year for that extra home game. The bounty of $6.25M + $.5M (additional ticket sales, sponsorships and concessions) + $1-$3M in not paying for the FCS game = $7.75M-$9.75M in new annual money seems like a no brainer, even for the biggest SEC pussies. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
8 hours ago, closetojumping said:

ESPN clearly does not value the FCS games that all but one SEC team plays. They're all relegated to dogshit channels and times, if not only on something like ESPN+. They leaked their range. I'm sure this could clear at $100M with caveats about the FCS games going away or limited to X times per every Y years or something. Fixing that also removes an annual cost for every program to host one of those dogshit programs. You don't have to pay an additional SEC team to create a home and home each cycle.

There is a zero percent chance that losing one home game, often the most poorly attended, every other season, is equal to or greater than in value to the additional $6.25M-ish each year, plus improved attendance and concessions every other year for that extra home game. The bounty of $6.25M + $.5M (additional ticket sales, sponsorships and concessions) + $1-$3M in not paying for the FCS game = $7.75M-$9.75M in new annual money seems like a no brainer, even for the biggest SEC pussies. 

I don’t understand your math here. That seems like the math for the year you don’t lose a home game- the other year you lose a home game worth roughly  4 or 5M net bringing that down to something like an extra 1M is all every other year, right?  Or am I being dumb and missing something?  
so/ it averages out to an extra 4M a year is all. I could see plenty of schools thinking that wasn’t worth the chance at. It making a bowl. This is a conference full of morons that talk shit and are actually pussies. They should have welcomed aggy better than they did because that’s certainly their MO. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

What about a split? Keep 8 as per standard, lower 2/3s play lighthouse of the blind, and let the top 25% play OOC from BIgxPACc? Both top level teams and mid to lower SEC3 get bowl eligibility because of “W” or top 25 (good loss)!!1!

Posted
2 hours ago, General Specific said:

What about a split? Keep 8 as per standard, lower 2/3s play lighthouse of the blind, and let the top 25% play OOC from BIgxPACc? Both top level teams and mid to lower SEC3 get bowl eligibility because of “W” or top 25 (good loss)!!1!

Why make things so complicated? Why treat schools differently?

Terrible idea. 

Posted
3 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

I don’t understand your math here. That seems like the math for the year you don’t lose a home game- the other year you lose a home game worth roughly  4 or 5M net bringing that down to something like an extra 1M is all every other year, right?  Or am I being dumb and missing something?  
so/ it averages out to an extra 4M a year is all. I could see plenty of schools thinking that wasn’t worth the chance at. It making a bowl. This is a conference full of morons that talk shit and are actually pussies. They should have welcomed aggy better than they did because that’s certainly their MO. 

They’d be getting $6.25 every year. They’d be not paying the extra $1M-$3M every year. What the fuck are you missing? 

Posted
35 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

They’d be getting $6.25 every year. They’d be not paying the extra $1M-$3M every year. What the fuck are you missing? 

Half the years they miss out on an extra home game. 
the biggest sec pussies right now play 8 home games. Those home games are probably worth somewhere around 5 or 6M dollars a game in tix and another couple million in concessions and other shit. That’s offset by paying 2 million or so to the sacrificial lamb. So/ if you go to 9 games then some years you have 8 home games (3 OOC and 5 of the 9 on conference) but some years you only have 7 home games (3 out of conference and only 4 out of 9 ion conference) 

you treated every year the same (and that’s true on getting the extra 6M in tv money, but in the years where they have one less home games they lose a net 4M on gate and concessions, meaning it’s only an extra million or two that year, while the year they have 8 home games in a 9 game SEC schedule it’s more like 10M windfall. 
I think that’s right but I didn’t say you are wrong, as I might be missing something in my calculations or being dumb. 

Posted
13 hours ago, closetojumping said:

new annual money seems like a no brainer, even for the biggest SEC pussies. 

not for our friends east of lexington

+$6m cash means nothing to them when they are feasting on the auf payments (i.e. our money)

they go from a guaranteed win every year to not just 1 but possibly 2 fewer wins and depending on the schedule that year, every 4-5 years they are done before we play 0u

the ministry of information does not abide

Posted
14 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

I think that’s right but I didn’t say you are wrong, as I might be missing something in my calculations or being dumb. 

your math reads true but aggy is honey badger on this

fucks given about less $$ = 0

9 conference games = eternal annual exposure

Posted

It all boils down to the “lesser” SEC conference members being willing to give up their November “cupcake” home victory built in annually.  One less potential home game $$$ generation (even against FCS), versus a potential road loss to a conference foe.  
 

For those mediocre programs, looking for that 6-7th win for bowl eligibility, those are the ones that have to “agree” to vote for that 9th conference game.  Fans, public eyes, and voters be damned!  Their system of November “cupcake” had built in for more than a decade, as everyone in the SEC “should” win that weekend, while 50% of the nation loses that weekend.  For rankings purposes/team rest alone in November.

Hook’em!!!

  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...