Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
More like afraid to add a program that would do nothing other than eat up the conference's shared revenue.
I like Ears and have nothing to bad to say about him. He's a very good coach.
I am thinking that and more importantly location is a bit of an issue. Texas Tech would be much more on the radar if the school was located in East Texas instead of West Texas. The SEC might give a look if UT and Texas A&M went to the PAC but it is near certain that a Big XII breakup would split those two and Texas Tech goes with UT West which might be shorter distances in divional games.
In terms of adding programs, it always seemed to me many fans kept thinking in terms of how good a team is now or in the past as most important. It looks like what is more important is how much a program can bring in the future as in what would they bring in when they are good. You have to think how it will help the conference not so much the near term, but over at least a 50-75 year timeframe.
I think at this point we know who teams 13-16 will be in the PAC when it happens (UT, OU, TT, OSU) which will in turn make certain who the 13th team is in the SEC (A&M). The problem is with the SEC is that they might not have many choices to expand that doesn't have a significant issue to them. (Inside current footprint {FSU, Miami, GaTech, Clemson}, state politics and/or not really interested {any NC or VA school}, or are not the number 1 or 2 university in the state which might limit fanbase. The Big Ten does have enough schools they would be interested in that doesn't have any of the issues.
(Vandy isn't listed, but I assume that it's AD revenues weren't as high as Tech's.)
Revenues should rise substantially this year due to the football stadium's east side expansion that brings the seating capacity to more than 60,000, the total number of suites to 83, and the club seating to 1500. It's not finished with improvements.
I know Neyland has more of those things, but Tech is not the program it was in 1997, when it last played your team in football, or even 2007.
I don't know what will happen in the next five years, but I'd guess that the Big 12 will fade into history, the SEC will expand and take one team from Texas and three from the east, and the Pac-10 will take the four left that were initially invited, minus the easternmost current Big 12 member in Texas. The Big Ten will take Missouri, Kansas, and two others, and the remaining programs might form a new conference.
(Vandy isn't listed, but I assume that it's AD revenues weren't as high as Tech's.)
Revenues should rise substantially this year due to the football stadium's east side expansion that brings the seating capacity to more than 60,000, the total number of suites to 83, and the club seating to 1500. It's not finished with improvements.
I know Neyland has more of those things, but Tech is not the program it was in 1997, when it last played your team in football, or even 2007.
I don't know what will happen in the next five years, but I'd guess that the Big 12 will fade into history, the SEC will expand and take one team from Texas and three from the east, and the Pac-10 will take the four left that were initially invited, minus the easternmost current Big 12 member in Texas. The Big Ten will take Missouri, Kansas, and two others, and the remaining programs might form a new conference.
Good luck to the Vols in 2010.
Your revenues and programs upgrades are practically inconsequential. I admire what TTU has done, but the TV market is just too small. The shared TV revenue in the SEC is so large that at this point a university would have to bring many viewers to be a legit candidate. Otherwise they'd take more revenue than they added.
No one's arguing that Vanderbilt and Mississippi State would would get invites if they were not charter members. They're also not getting kicked out.
As I've said, I believe the SEC will look west if they want to expand. The desirable schools in the adjacent eastern states are UNC, Duke, VT, UVA, and FSU, and all of those schools minus the Hookies seem to desire maintaining the ACC.
Your revenues and programs upgrades are practically inconsequential. I admire what TTU has done, but the TV market is just too small. The shared TV revenue in the SEC is so large that at this point a university would have to bring many viewers to be a legit candidate. Otherwise they'd take more revenue than they added.
No one's arguing that Vanderbilt and Mississippi State would would get invites if they were not charter members. They're also not getting kicked out.
As I've said, I believe the SEC will look west if they want to expand. The desirable schools in the adjacent eastern states are UNC, Duke, VT, UVA, and FSU, and all of those schools minus the Hookies seem to desire maintaining the ACC.
That is the way it looks like in terms of how SEC expansion will go. It will be in places in states that currently have no teams in conference. (Why the popular idea of taking the 4 Southernmost ACC teams is not going to happen) Though I wonder how easy the Hokies can join due to state politics and how they got in the ACC, that and they stated they really weren't interested two months ago. They might only be in play if UVA goes to the Big Ten (I won't be suprised if they are looking at UVA). The problem they have is there might not be many good programs they could that are top programs in their state, new markets, and are interested.
Dude I love UVA, but cmon. What would the Southern Fried Football Conference want us for? (Please don't give the academics schlop)
Besides I don't even think Tech would be a wise investment, while popular I don't think it's quite a RELIGION in the state (yet anyways). Plus (in reference to any conference expansion) the DC market deal is TOTALLY overatted. It's Redskins then everything else here.
Dude I love UVA, but cmon. What would the Southern Fried Football Conference want us for? (Please don't give the academics schlop)
Besides I don't even think Tech would be a wise investment, while popular I don't think it's quite a RELIGION in the state (yet anyways). Plus (in reference to any conference expansion) the DC market deal is TOTALLY overatted. It's Redskins then everything else here.
Well one reason for UVA as well would be having to get them as a package deal for VaTech due to state politics. In terms of SEC interest they might on the basis of not too many schools they really could ask if they needed to expand to keep up. (they only will expand if others do first, unless A&M goes)
Academics could play a larger role than most people think due to the budget issues most universities face. I wouldn't be suprised if other conferences look at the Big Ten model with the CIC and go closer towards that. One reason is the idea of combining resources could both save money for each university and raise their academic profile which is helpful when facing budget cuts. It would also help get research grants which the money in those dwarfs athletic TV contracts in terms of money involved by factor of ten.
In terms of TV market, it is based not as much on what support a team has now, but how much potential support it could have in the future.
Your revenues and programs upgrades are practically inconsequential. I admire what TTU has done, but the TV market is just too small. The shared TV revenue in the SEC is so large that at this point a university would have to bring many viewers to be a legit candidate. Otherwise they'd take more revenue than they added.
While Lubbock's TV market is pretty small, Tech basically owns all of West Texas (maybe not El Paso, yet) and Eastern New Mexico. It's the number two college team in D/FW (market #6) as far as I know, and has large presence in Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Corpus Christi, and the rest of the state. The game vs. Baylor at Cowboys Stadium last year attracted about 60,000 Tech fans (Baylor's crowd was pretty small), while the Alamo Bowl got about 50,000 to attend (Michigan State brought about 8000, the rest were perennial bowl ticketholders). I don't think there would have been that many buyers of tickets if Tech were a small-market team.
Plus, three of the top ten highest-rated games in the nation in 2008 involved Tech. The Alamo Bowl in January was the highest-rated bowl game on ESPN--I don't think fans were necessarily tuning in to watch a .500 Michigan State team. Eight or nine Tech games were televised last year vs. two or three for a certain other team in Texas that was conditionally invited to the SEC.
While Lubbock's TV market is pretty small, Tech basically owns all of West Texas (maybe not El Paso, yet) and Eastern New Mexico. It's the number two college team in D/FW (market #6) as far as I know, and has large presence in Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Corpus Christi, and the rest of the state. The game vs. Baylor at Cowboys Stadium last year attracted about 60,000 Tech fans (Baylor's crowd was pretty small), while the Alamo Bowl got about 50,000 to attend (Michigan State brought about 8000, the rest were perennial bowl ticketholders). I don't think there would have been that many buyers of tickets if Tech were a small-market team.
Plus, three of the top ten highest-rated games in the nation in 2008 involved Tech. The Alamo Bowl in January was the highest-rated bowl game on ESPN--I don't think fans were necessarily tuning in to watch a .500 Michigan State team. Eight or nine Tech games were televised last year vs. two or three for a certain other team in Texas that was conditionally invited to the SEC.
I am thinking Texas Tech's issue as to why the SEC would not be as interested is related to distance along with likely only wanting one team in each state if it can. Also have to consider that it is likely Tech would go with UT towards the Pac when that happens. (very likely in the next three years)
I do think they will be taken care of in realignment due to politics so there really should be no worries as to not being in what is currently a BCS conference. I really wonder as to how much interference there would be with Baylor this time since unlike 15 years ago there is no Ann Richards. It will be easier if there is interference if the Moutain West earns an auto-bid. (have to wonder if they will earn it regardless since it will make superconferences and the BCS less likely to face congressional and legal scrutiny)
I am thinking Texas Tech's issue as to why the SEC would not be as interested is related to distance along with likely only wanting one team in each state if it can. Also have to consider that it is likely Tech would go with UT towards the Pac when that happens. (very likely in the next three years)
I do think they will be taken care of in realignment due to politics so there really should be no worries as to not being in what is currently a BCS conference. I really wonder as to how much interference there would be with Baylor this time since unlike 15 years ago there is no Ann Richards. It will be easier if there is interference if the Moutain West earns an auto-bid. (have to wonder if they will earn it regardless since it will make superconferences and the BCS less likely to face congressional and legal scrutiny)
Tech and four others were headed to the Pac-10 until three or four things happened: the state legislature got involved, A&M wanted to go east, and the TV powers got worried that their contracts might become obsolete. Then there may have been "unnamed powers" who got concerned, whatever that means. The only politics involved this last time were the type that kept Tech away from the Pac-10.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
