Started By
Message
re: SEC Network: Friend or Foe
Posted on 5/14/14 at 4:29 pm to cardboardboxer
Posted on 5/14/14 at 4:29 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
(maybe UK)
UK had one of the 5 most valuable Tier III deals because of their brand status and basketball. In basketball the new network will not give UK that kind of coverage. On the flip side, they will get UK's baseball, softball, w basketball, and volleyball games out there. Not sure how it affects soccer as both Cats and Cocks play in CUSA there.
quote:
For minor sports sure for a single game it is better to be on ESPN2, but since you only get a a game or two on there every season OVERALL you get more exposure having EVERY game on the SECN.
Yes and no.
100% of USA > 100% of SEC
Sure it would be great if more in the footprint can watch more stuff you get more local exposure, but if that local exposure means no more national exposure, then you are screwed.
The biggest example of the is w basketball. Top to bottom the SEC probably has the nest w basketball in the country. TAMU benefits from being in this and they have an established program that gets some national exposure. Now suppose TAMU vs UT goes from being a national game to one on SEC TV (and say Uconn vs Duke gets that spot now on ESPN or ESPN2) then the SEC just got shut out of national recruiting exposure. Sure more in the SEC can now see it, but at the cost of kids outside the footprint now seeing Uconn.
If TAMU lost national recruiting to say Baylor or California that is not good long term for TAMU.
2
Posted on 5/14/14 at 4:39 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
Now suppose TAMU vs UT goes from being a national game to one on SEC TV (and say Uconn vs Duke gets that spot now on ESPN or ESPN2) then the SEC just got shut out of national recruiting exposure.
From reading this, I take it that it is your opinion the network will be a massive failure or you don't understand what they are doing. The concept is not relegated to only the SEC states. In fact, ESPN's stated goal is a national network that has as many subscribers as ESPNU. ESPN2 is in 97.7m homes. ESPNU is in 74.5m (65.19% of households with television). It's a difference but it's not particularly major like you are suggesting.
The cable providers that have signed on have all placed it in the basic/basic+ tier so far meaning it will be national. The only difference is how much the cable companies will pay per subscriber by state.
Edit: update for '13 numbers
This post was edited on 5/14/14 at 4:45 pm
Posted on 5/14/14 at 4:46 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
UK had one of the 5 most valuable Tier III deals because of their brand status and basketball.
Sure, but is that brand enough to float an entire national network? I really don't think so. Kansas is in a conference that would allow such a network and what they have is all local.
quote:
100% of USA > 100% of SEC
The SECN is meant to be a national network like the B1G Net, and it will be thanks to Dish deal.
Just because the business plan is contingent on milking the base, getting national distribution is also a priority. Hence one price for cable companies within the footprint, and a much lower price for cable companies outside the footprint.
Greater national exposure for one game (a game-since its not football-that the national doesn't really care about) is not better than EVERY basketball game getting to fans of the SEC.
I would agree if every baseball and basketball game in the SEC was on ESPN1/2 currently then the conference is getting screwed on exposure with the SECN. But that is not the case.
Overall once the network hits more SEC games (of every type of sport) will be broadcasted than ever before. That is huge.
EDIT: the great tmc94 beat me to it, with real numbers even. Thanks TMC!
This post was edited on 5/14/14 at 4:47 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News