Is the SEC Network Coming Soon?
by alduck on Aug 25, 2011 7:08 PM EDT
Email
PrintWith today's non-announcement announcement by Texas A&M, and the corresponding story in yesterday's NYT's regarding the SEC's television contracts being only slightly negotiable are we witnessing the birth of a true SEC Network? If the NYT's article is correct then Texas A&M can expect approximately $18 million yearly from the SEC, as can member 14- whoever that may be. However, one has to wonder why 12 existing members would agree to add members if the result is only a status quo financially. What's the catch?
Granted, adding Texas A&M is a fantastic fit culturally, academically, geographically, etc, etc. But if there's no new money for any existing member why do it? And don't tell me it's because of the recruiting. There is much more going on here than what we see on the surface. If ESPN and CBS are only going to kick in an additional 36 million for two new members, basically maintaining the current per team payout, then I seriously doubt they are getting any increase in game rights. I would expect that under this arrangement neither network is getting any increase in programming inventory. Yes, they are getting a larger pool to choose their inventory from, but no, they aren't getting an additional 24 games of programming for $36 million. Mike Slive is much to smart to allow that. So what happens to the additional 16 conference games that wouldn't be covered under the existing contracts? Further, what about the approximately 64 non conference games that aren't covered under any contract unless they are away or neutral? Yes, basic math leads to YOU MEAN THE SEC MIGHT HAVE 80 TIER II AND TIER III GAMES NOT TELEVISED. Possibly. In some cases Fox Sports has been picking up a few Tier III games straight from members, Florida has a good deal with the Sunshine Network for a couple of their Tier III games, but what about everyone else. Think about it, Texas A&M just increased the potential viewership of an SEC Network by around 45%. Any other new member is going to be an increase in potential viewership as well, as long as they are in a new footprint state. The network would cover the two most populated states in the South, as well as two of the top four in the entire nation (Florida and Texas).
Slive has watched what was the largest television deal in history drop to third in less than a few years. Did I mention that it's a conference with the most rabid fans in the nation? Did I mention that it's the conference that has won the last five BCS National Championships? Did I mention that it's the conference that has won the last two College World Series? I know I haven't mentioned the conference's impressive resume regarding Women's Softball, Swimming & Diving, Track & Field. Hey, even the Basketball isn't bad, it may not be the ACC or Big East yet, but the fans fill up the arenas and too many of them are having to watch games on their computer- this isn't the MAC ya know. I have to believe that there is ample programming available and that Slive and the presidents have discussed the possibility of an SEC Network after seeing what Larry Scott has accomplished with the PAC12. Would any cable company dare not placing it on their basic tier or expanded basic tier? Not in the South they wouldn't. The new expanded footprint of the SEC (not counting the 14th member) will encompass over 75 million homes. Even at .80c a pop per year you're talking about an additional $60 million bucks. Divided 13 ways that's an additional $4.6 million per school per year. A high population 14th member state and you're easily looking at up to $6 million additional per university. But really, is there an SEC team who's fans wouldn't accept a full dollar per month increase in their cable bill for the SEC Network? If you're out there let me hear from you cause I've never met ya! So now we're talking about, what $900 million (using the 13 members footprint) split between the 13 yearly- that's about $70 million per university. Only in the SEC are those type numbers possible.
So, bring on the SEC Network. I can' t wait to see Alabama v. Georgia Southern, Auburn v. Samford, and LSU v. Tulane. And yes, I'll pay my $12 bucks per year for it.
A FanPost gives the opinion of the fan who writes it and that fan only. That doesn't give the opinion more or less weight than any other opinion on this blog, but the post does not necessarily reflect the view of TSK's writers.
13 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
SEC Network
I don’t think it would be a bad idea. There are other sports besides even football and basketball that would garner some interest from the fan base. They probably wouldn’t get as much on other ESPN networks nationally (i.e I still can’t get ESPNU).
Not to mention all the behind the scenes stuff and documentaries that could be done. SEC fans would eat it up.
Softball would be a good draw
At least it is in my house ( i have all daughters). I know we didn’t miss a televised Alabama softball or volleyball (yes volleyball) game all of last year. Add to that some other non revenue sports, there are plenty of un televised men’s basketball games (had to watch AL v TN on the computer via ESPN3 or something last year) plus women’s basketball plus SEC baseball. Throw in a few football games (like the B1G Network) and it would be must see TV at my house.
Yeah I'll watch an occasional softball game....
I live in Tuscaloosa so I like to go to some of the minor sports’ games. Most of that stuff is pretty cheap, but I don’t go on a regular basis though.
When I was a student, one of my favorite things to do was go to the non-conference basketball games. Admission was free and you could park pretty much right outside the coliseum. They would also give the students a token that you could go get a hot dog, chips, and a drink with and that was all free as well. It was a pretty good deal and you didn’t usually have to worry about Bama losing the game either.
Not sure they can
The first problem is the possibility that the ESPN/CBS deals prohibit the formation of a conference network. This one might not exist though. Related to this the SECTV would have to buy back Tier 2 games from ESPN which will lower payouts in the end.
The second and probably biggest issue is SEC teams own the rights to their Tier 3 games. UF gets what 9 million for these rights from Sunshine. I am sure teams like Alabama, LSU and UGA have similar deals for their 3rd tier rights. These rights are also under contract so they wont be going to the SECTV pool until at least the end of the rights. I have to imagine that UF is not going to be rushing to give up these rights either to take a smaller cut.
The 3rd issue. TAM is not going to get the SECTV on Texas carriers. The LHN still has not signed a single carrier in Texas and that is with ESPN having long term relationships with the carriers and by far the most popular college football brand in the state. In the Big 12 TAM still can’t get on TV more than 6 times a year and has not shown their Tier 3 games on TV to try to boost stadium attendence.
I'm not sure about all the contracts.
I know Florida has a deal with the Sunshine Network, but I don’t know all the details. I’m not sure any of the other teams have that though. Bama doesn’t have any deal with a provider in state and I would think they would be one of the most marketable brands in the SEC.
The only TV station that shows any Bama sports that is not a national network is the local WVUA broadcast station and that’s only because the university owns the TV station. And I’m not sure WVUA can been seen anywhere outside of Tuscaloosa and West Alabama. I’ve heard some of the shows they produce can be seen in Bham. They don’t show any live football games and don’t have the rights to. The games that aren’t on CBS/ESPN/ or the syndicated SEC network are always PPV. I’m pretty sure it’s the same with every other member in the conference except Florida. The only sports I do see on there is the occasional basketball, baseball, or softball game.
I still think an SEC Network could work. There are already more Tier II and Tier III games than ESPN can broadcast and that would be especially true if the SEC expands. I think you could probably cut a deal where ESPN gets first pick of the games they want to show and all others are up for grabs by the SEC Network. That’s pretty much what they already do with the CBS and ESPN partnership. I also think it could really help out the other sports especially basketball. There are more of those on TV now than there used to be because of the ESPN contract, but there are still a load of them that no one can see. And watching any of the SEC non-revenue sports is pretty much impossible.
I don’t think getting the SEC Network on in Texas markets would be that hard. The BTN is on all over the country, maybe not on every provider, but in a lot of places. And it is definitely viewable in Big 10 country even though most of those schools don’t draw the attendance at football games that most SEC schools do. The Big 10 states are more populous than most SEC states so that contributes to high subscription rates even if the people don’t buy it, but the BTN is on in a lot of places in the country despite the fact a lot of people aren’t watching. That’s pretty much the way it is with most cable channels.
The LHN has had so much trouble because 1) there has probably been a lot of complaints made to the cable companies from non-UT fans because they don’t want to directly contribute to their rival, 2) they don’t have a lot of potential for content as none of the other Big 12 members want their games broadcast there and one non-conference game against Rice or someone like that can’t carry a network, 3) they aren’t going to be allowed to show high school games like they thought they could, and 4) this has never been tried before so I think a lot of businessmen are weary to try it.
The precedent for a school specific network has not been tried yet, but a conference network model has already proved very successful. There is literally 12 times the opportunity for content and 14 times if the conference expands. It can appeal to a wide variety of individuals in a lot of different places. In fact, an SEC Network would probably get a lot of carriers outside of SEC states just like the BTN and it also appears the Pac 12 is going to be able to do the same thing.
Georgia
They’ve made a mint on their third tier rights, and are right behind Florida in terms of bringing in cash from them. Only recently signed a new deal with IMG management to market them.
DawgSports/Falcaholic/Talkin' Chop
So does UGA have a broadcast partner within the state?
That’s what I’ve always heard, that SEC teams have rights to local media. So it would seem to me that the only way of taking advantage of that would be to broadcast games within your own state. Is there a piece to the puzzle I’m missing here?
Every school in the conference, even Vanderbilt, has some kind of contract for their local/third tier rights. I don’t think getting out of those contracts can be all that tough given that it was never even brought up as an issue when the Big Ten Network and Pac-12 Networks were being hatched.
Team Speed Kills -- SBNation's SEC Blog
If you're so inclined, follow me @Year2
I will post this part here
These are for 3rd tier rights (this includes other things like radio rights and the like but the bulk is going to be TV for Tier 3 football and mens basketball) that I could find.
UGA 8 years for 93 million
UF 10 years for 100 million
Alabama 9 years ffor 85 million
Tenneessee 10 years 83 million
UK 10 years 80 million
LSU 10 Years 75 million
Arkansas 10 years 73 million
The Big Ten and Pac 12 where able to get these 3rd tier rights from the school when they went into their new Tier 1/2 contracts so basically at the end of the schools former tier 3 contracts. The SEC schools for the most part are at the start of their Tier 3 contracts. This is what makes an SEC channel in the short term unlikely.
Great Information
I was also informed today that there is specific language in the SEC’s contract with ESPN that denies the conference the right to form a network unless ESPN has first rights as partner. The math above indicates that it would cost somewhere between 140 million to 200 million per year (accounting for the schools not listed) for ESPN to buy back those third tier rights. Yet if the possibility actually exists for $1 per month per household is even remotely reasonable then your talking about $1 Billion per year in revenue. I’m not saying it would be easy or that it is going to happen, but I just don’t believe that the SEC would be willing to expand for status quo money. I think Slive is keeping something hidden from us (John Q. Public) and the only thing that makes sense (and lots of dollars) is some kind of conference network.
Ok, just responding to the general conversation.
I’m a little confused here. Maybe I just don’t have all the facts, but I’m wondering where these contracts are coming into play.
I only really know about Alabama’s situation so I can only comment on that. Anyway, like I was saying before none of Alabama’s football games are broadcast on a local network. Every game is either CBS, ESPN, and occasionally on the syndicated SEC Network from ESPN. All other games are on PPV if they are broadcast. This has been the way it has been for quite a while now.
I would imagine those 3rd tier rights are just mostly radio rights because I can’t imagine any network, local or national, paying Alabama 85 million for 9 years and then never broadcasting a game in Alabama. None of Bama’s basketball games are broadcast in the state either unless they are CBS, ESPN, SEC Network, or occasionally on WVUA which is just in the Tuscaloosa area mainly.
Do the 3rd Tier rights belong to the SEC Network right now? Is that what I’m missing? Because no other network ever broadcasts those games.
Also, I may be a little unclear on what the tiers are referring to. I assume 1st tier are the primetime games that would be nationally televised no matter what. I thought the 2nd tier referred to conference games that were of lesser interest and that 3rd tier are basically these games against Kent State and teams like that. Am I way off here?
A little confused myself
But this is the way I understand them. CBS has 1st tier rights which means they get the 1st pick every week and a double header twice per season. ESPN family has 2nd tier rights (up to three picks weekly but also is required to show every in conference game unless one is picked up by the SEC Network- the old JP game). The third tier rights are held by the SEC Network on every school except for one game per season which the school keeps the rights to for PPV. That explains why last year Auburn and SE La or whoever was on FOX Sports South or Something for their first game of the season. Comcast Cable down here advertises that every game not on PPV is available on one of their extended basic platform channels but I don’t have Comcast. I have Knology but I’ve yet to have to listen to an Alabama football game on the radio. I just know that somehow we’re married to ESPN on these third tier rights via the SEC Network and if the SEC NEtwork is going to become stand alone ESPN has to be involved.
I know that expansion will trigger more negotiations....
I’m wondering if those negotiations are limited to adjusting the dollar value on the contracts or if expansion triggers the opportunity to negotiate every aspect of the new contract including media rights?
If this is the case then adding new teams could offer the SEC to put together the new channel and if ESPN has first digs then I’m ok with that. They would probably do the best job on production anyway and you know that they will push the network on their other channels which could add to subscriptions.
I don’t know, but I heard someone floating this idea out there the other day.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
