Stick to pontificating. The SEC's contract for Tier1 and Tier2 rights expires in 2025. They will negotiate for more money with the addition of subpar teams from two new markets, but if they don't like ESPN's terms, then they can bide their time until 2025 and see what the market will offer.
"with the addition of subpar teams from two new markets" - I am assuming you are a golfer and subpar is a good thing. Or, are you just a mean spirited person to begin with?
It is a good thing. The conference was strong enough. They added two average teams from the Big 12. The SEC diluted their football strength, the Big 12 increased theirs. Why did USC get $6-8 million for the TV contracts when it was winning MNCs. Why does it get $21 million when it is on probation? Easy. The PAC12's long-term contract expired and they signed a new one. Check back in 2025.
Slive has stated that there is already a clause that automatically guarantees equal payouts is the SEC added teams so the equal share for A&M and Mizzou is already in place (effectively $40 mill a year for the next 12 years). The "look in" has to do with examining the entire contract. There is some question as to how much they could shift the deal based on the "look in" but without question the SEC is a more valuable product today than it was when the deal was signed.
The bigger negotiating point though and what will really make all the difference is the SEC Network. The SEC Network terrifies ESPN because if the SEC establishes it without ESPN and it is successful they could simply not renew any deal with ESPN on 2nd Tier rights and keep them. If that happens ESPN would be shut out of broadcasting the best league for college football with the best quantity of quality games. It would be enough to displace ESPN as the dominant force in college football broadcasting. They simply can't allow it to occur without them and they will be wiling to pay a heavy toll to protect themselves. That may mean partial ownership or it may mean some very expensive options but it definitely means ESPN will be willing to do what they have to in order to save their relationship with the SEC. That doesn't even consider other Networks bidding to get a piece of the action.
@medloh Slive is a lawyer. He understands that invoking the look-in rights does not void the other provisions in the agreement. The SEC and ESPN will negotiate the value of the additional two teams and television markets. That will probably add a billion to the existing contacts, but not $3 billion. If the SEC doesn't like their current contract, the can negotiate a new one in 2025 when the current contract terminates. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
Sorry about that, it was a user fail on my part. I meant to respond to Binding.
So Slive is just a dopey old man who had a soft place in his heart for the Aggies and Mizzou? Haha.
Don't take it too hard when the SEC announces their new T1/T2 contract, and then a little later when Slive packages the T3 stuff in a new ESPN network channel. You'll see the difference between adding a Mountain West team with a Big East team to the Big12, and adding A&M and Mizzou to the SEC. 36 million versus 90 million in state population footprint. SEC games had double the Nielson ratings last year as the B12. Enjoy those trips to Morgantown, I hear its a very nice drive from the Pittsburg Airport.
@aggressor Not sure why you are saying all this to me --- I have said exactly what you are saying. Better check the record.
@MoKelly Do you know anything about how Conference Re-alignment works or TV contracts? Where to begin.
A&M is a powerhouse in waiting. The performance on the field has been lacking the last decade but it is a rich school in a richer state with a monster alumni base (along with being the largest school in the SEC) and will have a 100k plus stadium within 5 years. It cannot stay down long. Adding A&M also grew the SEC footprint by 40% in one swoop. I won't even touch the academics.
Mizzou is a strong and balanced program that has performed well over the last 5 years and has the resources to continue to compete. They also added 6 million people to the SEC footprint and are an AAU school.
TCU and WVU both have small stadiums and smaller fan bases. TCU can't even sell out it's tiny 43k stadium and has a very fickle following with a small alumni base. WVU is in a small and poor state with no major media market and it is the worst academic school of the SEC, Big 1G, ACC, Pac 12, and Big 12 combined. Both schools have done well while playing in far lesser conferences but are going to be playing schools now that have double, triple, or more resources. They will be very lucky to continue to have a fraction of their former success long term.
Who won more games the last couple years means very, very little when it comes to conference re-alignment or TV money. For instance, any conference would bend over upside down to add Notre Dame and they haven't been good for a very long time. In the ACC the most valuable school BY FAR is North Carolina and they also have almost nothing to show for it on the football field recently.
@TigerinMO Agreed. TCU was headed to the great and powerful Big Easy football conference when the Big 12 pleaded for them to defect. The Big 12 would take any school from Texas and SMU may be next.
Check back in 2025??? If the SEC doesn't get a new deal well before then I will be amazed. That is why there are lawyers - to allow conference realignment and renegotiate contracts. If something doesn't happen before 2025 there is serious mismanagement in the SEC administration.
This is a dumb comment. Mizzou is among college football's winningest teams the last five years and has TV markets far superior to those of West Virginia. TCU adds NOTHING to the Big 12 TV footprint