- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
WVU= 2 seasons of lost revenue
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:43 am
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:43 am
I have made my opinion of WVU perfectly clear and many of you disagree and have made that perfectly clear.
But lets say the SEC is really weighing out the options when it comes to WVU. According to Big east by laws WVU couldnt leave the Big east for 27 monthes. This means the earlist they can join the SEC is for the 2014 football season.
Thats 2 loss seasons of additional revenue. Lets assume that the 14th team is going to add 1 million per year for each school. That means the SEC will have lost 26 million over that time. That is less then the 20 million buyout for ACC teams. So why would the SEC settle for WVU when it would be cheaper for the SEC in the short term to pay the buyout? If you add the right school, it would also be better in the longterm.
This is one reason I feel ACC teams are not out of the equation yet. Also with FSU and Maryland voting against raising the ACC buyout to 34 million there are still questions regarding that conferences stability.
Multiple sports writers including McMurphy, Barhart etc have mentioned that sources inside the SEC office have said that ACC teams are still on the table. McMurphy also said that sources inside the ACC offices say they expect to lose atleast 1 team and the power grab of Cuse and Pitt was about that as much as anything and that the ACC wont feel comfortable until the SEC adds the 14th team.
My point is that the SEC should be in no hurry and should not just settle on WVU because they are begging to get in. Slive needs to take his time and work on his first choices before taking a fall back option like WVU. No matter when we ask WVU to join they will say yes. They are in a bad spot and are desperate.
But lets say the SEC is really weighing out the options when it comes to WVU. According to Big east by laws WVU couldnt leave the Big east for 27 monthes. This means the earlist they can join the SEC is for the 2014 football season.
Thats 2 loss seasons of additional revenue. Lets assume that the 14th team is going to add 1 million per year for each school. That means the SEC will have lost 26 million over that time. That is less then the 20 million buyout for ACC teams. So why would the SEC settle for WVU when it would be cheaper for the SEC in the short term to pay the buyout? If you add the right school, it would also be better in the longterm.
This is one reason I feel ACC teams are not out of the equation yet. Also with FSU and Maryland voting against raising the ACC buyout to 34 million there are still questions regarding that conferences stability.
Multiple sports writers including McMurphy, Barhart etc have mentioned that sources inside the SEC office have said that ACC teams are still on the table. McMurphy also said that sources inside the ACC offices say they expect to lose atleast 1 team and the power grab of Cuse and Pitt was about that as much as anything and that the ACC wont feel comfortable until the SEC adds the 14th team.
My point is that the SEC should be in no hurry and should not just settle on WVU because they are begging to get in. Slive needs to take his time and work on his first choices before taking a fall back option like WVU. No matter when we ask WVU to join they will say yes. They are in a bad spot and are desperate.
7
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:46 am to lsu777
I support this thread.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:49 am to TheSandman
good but you still dont get to go east bitch. you have to stay over here with us 
I mean i dont think WVU is a terrible choice especially if you look at just the athletic department in a vaccuum, but there are much much better options out there and I dont want slive to rush this just to rush it. Hell it may be quicker to wait on the big east to dissolve then to give them fore warning so they can go grab another team to stabilize the conference.
I mean i dont think WVU is a terrible choice especially if you look at just the athletic department in a vaccuum, but there are much much better options out there and I dont want slive to rush this just to rush it. Hell it may be quicker to wait on the big east to dissolve then to give them fore warning so they can go grab another team to stabilize the conference.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:50 am to lsu777
quote:Why don't you just let it go and let it play out as it will, regardless of what you or I think personally. Neither of us has a red phone to Slive's office, and he hasn't emailed me in a long time (like in never). But for the sake of it, maybe, maybe the $20 million buyout is not a barrier for one or two possible ACC teams to come into the SEC. Fine, I can accept that. But to suggest the ACC is unstable is a real stretch. Your argument lost ground on that one point, IMO.
I feel ACC teams are not out of the equation yet. Also with FSU and Maryland voting against raising the ACC buyout to 34 million there are still questions regarding that conferences stability.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 8:58 am to lsu777
There really is no reason to accept WVU. I would rather buyout an ACC contract than take that garbage.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:07 am to General13
quote:Instead of trashing this ranked opponent LSU just beat on their home ground, and calling them garbage, it would make far more sense to praise their program and build up the image that LSU just beat "somebody big" instead of all the negating of their accomplishments.
I would rather buyout an ACC contract
That's a page from the Bear Bryant playbook of smart good sportsmanship. If you think about it, beating WVU at home is how LSU could jump Oklahoma this week and come out #1. We didn't do that when we beat Northwestern or MSU, did we?
This post was edited on 9/28/11 at 9:12 am
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:13 am to JawjaTigah
Congrats on the win. The WVU program is garbage. They would bring nothing to the table. They are a small market in a weak area. This is about dollars and exposure.
This has nothing to do with the football game last weekend. That was a great win.
This has nothing to do with the football game last weekend. That was a great win.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:13 am to lsu777
I'm sure Mike Slive has a calculator and can figure all that out.
This decision is a possible 50-plus year decision that will not be made based on who is winning right now, how much money will be made over the next 3 years, etc.
I'm not defending WVU. I'm not for them, either. But a lot of comments I read are not looking at the big picture over the next couple of decades.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:21 am to General13
quote:Oops, yes I forgot you are a Bama fan.
This is about dollars and exposure.
Y'all know all about throwing that big money around, considering who your present coach is and how much he costs. Of course, that seems to be a pretty good investment on y'all's part. But given a choice now, and having had experience with both Coach $$$$$ and Coach Miles, I'm very glad we have Les Miles at LSU and you have $$$$$. The Bear Bryant thing is still valid, however. Don't trash the opposition. That's a Spurrier game. If the WVU program is garbage, then they are nationally pretty well-respected garbage.
This post was edited on 9/28/11 at 9:25 am
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:30 am to lsu777
If a move is made soon, WVU and the Big East have a back out clause. Since two teams have chosen to leave the conference, there can be a vote to the conference and teams that want out (vote to dissolve) can leave without the 27 month wait, and without the 20 million buyout. This would be in the interest of the ACC, Pitt, Syracuse, and possibly WVU, UConn, and Rutgers.
Also you guys don't give WVU enough credit. They draw quite a large following in the Pittsburgh and DC markets. 15th in apparel sales (obviously a good fan base) and highest rated games ever on espn on a Thursday and Friday.
Also you guys don't give WVU enough credit. They draw quite a large following in the Pittsburgh and DC markets. 15th in apparel sales (obviously a good fan base) and highest rated games ever on espn on a Thursday and Friday.
This post was edited on 9/28/11 at 9:33 am
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:31 am to JawjaTigah
quote:
Oops, yes I forgot you are a Bama fan. Y'all know all about throwing that big money around, considering who your present coach is and how much he costs. Of course, that seems to be a pretty good investment on y'all's part. But given a choice now, and having had experience with both Coach $$$$$ and Coach Miles, I'm very glad we have Les Miles at LSU and you have $$$$$. The Bear Bryant thing is still valid, however. Don't trash the opposition. That's a Spurrier game. If the WVU program is garbage, then they are nationally pretty well-respected garbage.
They are not my opposition. Like I've said, I'm not talking about the football team. I'm talking about the program. Think of this as a business decision, would it be easier if I changed my team logo to LSU?
Nationally, pretty well respected garbage? I'm not talking about the football team. The program is small, surrounded by nothing and creates a weak TV rating if they play anyone other than LSU.
They add nothing...Hence the garbage tag.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:35 am to JawjaTigah
True, 27 months assuming the BigE survives in football. If WVU moves on, TCU would have to reconsider cause they lose AQ status. Doesn't look good for the? BigE.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:38 am to General13
quote:I think you're stretching. That "garbage" program has built a pretty respectable (nationally) football team and has weathered the loss of RR and Bill S. and continues to be highly thought of. When you say it is "garbage" that sort of negates reality for me, and loses credibility. Just say you don't like their style, or region or fan base, whatever, for your own personal or economic reasons and that's fine. I can respect that, but your dislike of WVU's athletic program, and pasting that dislike (by inference) onto their football program (what I am solely looking at as a revenue sport) is wrong-headed IMO. They are not garbage and are well-thought of around the country.
The program is small, surrounded by nothing and creates a weak TV rating if they play anyone other than LSU.
This post was edited on 9/28/11 at 9:40 am
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:45 am to Dilrod
If you have to play on Thursday and Friday for ratings, then no thanks. I saw on the BGN board all the bragging about how yall drew in viewers for the LSU, its only cause you played us. We can put up those numbers week in and week in SEC play, you cannot.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:47 am to lsu777
a few things to consider.
1. there is a reason that FSU's board formed an expansion committee to evaluate FSU future options. it happened when FSU knew that the ACC was working to add Pitt, Syracuse and maybe UConn, which they aren't excited about. The FSU board is being pressured from the fans to join the SEC. The FSU board doesn't want to empower the new President and AD to make the decisions.
2. the SEC needs to increase the tv deals by $150-180m per year if want to payout $30-$35m (as been reported) to 13 schools rather than today's deal of $22m to 12 schools. the ACC's deal is around $13m per year, so an ACC school would be able to pay the $20 buyout from the increased revenues to the SEC.(that is only if the SEC isn't going to help out w/ their $150-$180m windfall.)
3. FSU doesn't increase markets, but it does increase household viewership (i.e. ratings). the SEC's tier 1 & 2 deals are national, so new markets doesn't matter all that much anyway. the same legal provision that allows tv contracts to be renegotiated w/ expansion, also kicks in w/ contraction. therefore, the Big 12 and Big East could potentially have their contracts reduced by losing A&M, Pitt & Cuse. (which is Baylor's legal case). if FSU was the 14th school, ESPN could easily credit the SEC the value of FSU, which is significant to the ACC deal, and reduce the ACC's deal by that amount.
1. there is a reason that FSU's board formed an expansion committee to evaluate FSU future options. it happened when FSU knew that the ACC was working to add Pitt, Syracuse and maybe UConn, which they aren't excited about. The FSU board is being pressured from the fans to join the SEC. The FSU board doesn't want to empower the new President and AD to make the decisions.
2. the SEC needs to increase the tv deals by $150-180m per year if want to payout $30-$35m (as been reported) to 13 schools rather than today's deal of $22m to 12 schools. the ACC's deal is around $13m per year, so an ACC school would be able to pay the $20 buyout from the increased revenues to the SEC.(that is only if the SEC isn't going to help out w/ their $150-$180m windfall.)
3. FSU doesn't increase markets, but it does increase household viewership (i.e. ratings). the SEC's tier 1 & 2 deals are national, so new markets doesn't matter all that much anyway. the same legal provision that allows tv contracts to be renegotiated w/ expansion, also kicks in w/ contraction. therefore, the Big 12 and Big East could potentially have their contracts reduced by losing A&M, Pitt & Cuse. (which is Baylor's legal case). if FSU was the 14th school, ESPN could easily credit the SEC the value of FSU, which is significant to the ACC deal, and reduce the ACC's deal by that amount.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:47 am to southernelite
We don't have to, but choose too... Um. That was part of the tv contracts. We aren't the only ones... 
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:57 am to JawjaTigah
quote:
I think you're stretching. That "garbage" program has built a pretty respectable (nationally) football team and has weathered the loss of RR and Bill S. and continues to be highly thought of. When you say it is "garbage" that sort of negates reality for me, and loses credibility. Just say you don't like their style, or region or fan base, whatever, for your own personal or economic reasons and that's fine. I can respect that, but your dislike of WVU's athletic program, and pasting that dislike (by inference) onto their football program (what I am solely looking at as a revenue sport) is wrong-headed IMO. They are not garbage and are well-thought of around the country.
Ok... For economic reasons, adding WVU would lose the SEC money when we renegotiate. A&M, Mizzou etc would generate new revenue due to the amount of televisions located in their geographical area. Those new TV markets would need to generate more than 20 million per unit to produce more income with the SEC equal sharing. Adding a market like WVU that has zero metropolitans and a small fan base would create far less. Thus, the SEC would lose money by adding WVU instead of a larger market.
And for the 12th time. This has nothing to do with the football team. If you understand a shred of any of this, let that be it.
Posted on 9/28/11 at 9:59 am to JawjaTigah
quote:
Oops, yes I forgot you are a Bama fan. Y'all know all about throwing that big money around, considering who your present coach is and how much he costs. Of course, that seems to be a pretty good investment on y'all's part. But given a choice now, and having had experience with both Coach $$$$$ and Coach Miles, I'm very glad we have Les Miles at LSU and you have $$$$$. The Bear Bryant thing is still valid, however. Don't trash the opposition. That's a Spurrier game. If the WVU program is garbage, then they are nationally pretty well-respected garbage.
But arguments like this build so much credibility...
Posted on 9/28/11 at 10:11 am to General13
quote:
Ok... For economic reasons, adding WVU would lose the SEC money when we renegotiate. A&M, Mizzou etc would generate new revenue due to the amount of televisions located in their geographical area. Those new TV markets would need to generate more than 20 million per unit to produce more income with the SEC equal sharing. Adding a market like WVU that has zero metropolitans and a small fan base would create far less. Thus, the SEC would lose money by adding WVU instead of a larger market.
Mostly speculation that you posted, and the Pittsburgh market (WVU stuff is all over Fox Sports Pittsburgh) is a fairly good sized market. Missouri hardly pulls any tv audience as it is, even with the bigger market, so you really wouldn't be expanding much. Mizzous fan base isn't much larger than WVU's (there is a link here somewhere, too lazy to find it while at work, it shows Mizzous fanbase is barely 100,000 more people) yet the market is like 10 times bigger.
This post was edited on 9/28/11 at 10:14 am
Posted on 9/28/11 at 10:20 am to Dilrod
quote:
Mostly speculation that you posted, and the Pittsburgh market (WVU stuff is all over Fox Sports Pittsburgh) is a fairly good sized market. Missouri hardly pulls any tv audience as it is, even with the bigger market, so you really wouldn't be expanding much. Mizzous fan base isn't much larger than WVU's (there is a link here somewhere, too lazy to find it while at work, it shows Mizzous fanbase is barely 100,000 more people) yet the market is like 10 times bigger.
Correct, it's more about the market than the team. The sec and media believe in the product and plan on capturing the audience.
Pittsburg market and St. Louis market I believe are very different. I'm on a mobile otherwise I would look it up.
Please don't take any of this as a slight on your team. I'm just referring to market areas in regards to expansion.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News