|
Seriously, does SC have Veto Power to keep Tigers from SEC?
storage
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
|
Replies: 33
| visibility 206
|
CU Medallion [19907]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 15116
Joined: 2010
|
Seriously, does SC have Veto Power to keep Tigers from SEC?
May 19, 2012, 12:36 AM
|
|
I understand the TV market premise of NCSU and VaT offering two new TV and recruiting states for SEC ... but also witnessed when UVA and Va politicians including the Va Governor were instrumental in allowing VaT to obtain ACC menmbership.
So anyway, can SCU block Clemson from SEC membership single handedly or do league presidents have a vote in process? Or does ESPN just finalize the decision? Seriously ... does anyone know the answer?
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [5636]
TigerPulse: 97%
39
|
I don't understand the TV/recruiting market discussion
May 19, 2012, 12:39 AM
|
|
the SEC is all over NC/VA/etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
24
|
Let me try to explain it to you. I get the Big 10 TV package
May 19, 2012, 2:55 PM
|
|
in the South. But I don't watch it. Now, if the Big 10 invited Clemson and, we joined that conference, then I'd watch Clemson and the other Big 10 teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Connoisseur [364]
TigerPulse: 18%
16
|
Re: Seriously, does SC have Veto Power to keep Tigers from SEC?
May 19, 2012, 12:43 AM
|
|
Nope. It requires four schools to block someone.
I just don't think the SEC wants Clemson because there is little reason to double down a relatively small market. If Clemson was in NC, they would be a no-brainer invite.
If the SEC powers at be (Slive and the Big 6) wanted Clemson, nothing SC said would make much of a difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1900]
TigerPulse: 99%
31
|
I dont understand the whole TV market
May 19, 2012, 12:48 AM
|
|
being such a big factor for the SEC, Just put the label SEC on a team and chances are the game will be nationally televised.
Whats the point of adding the likes of North Carolina or Virginia if it meant less competetive football teams for a bigger "market" where people would already be watching the games anyways
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [55]
TigerPulse: 45%
6
|
Re: I dont understand the whole TV market
May 19, 2012, 7:44 AM
|
|
Honestly, North Carolina and Virginia joining the SEC would elevate their football programs... it may take some time, but their programs would get better.
This is about expanded markets and tv sets
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1900]
TigerPulse: 99%
31
|
I understand its about TV markets
May 19, 2012, 10:05 AM
|
|
what i said above is that i dont understand why the SEC is so worried about it. put the SEC brand on any team and the whole country will be watching
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1900]
TigerPulse: 99%
31
|
Think about it this way
May 19, 2012, 10:07 AM
|
|
If you were the SEC and were looking for two teams to join the SEC, would you rather take FSU and Clemson? or UNC and NCST/VT and Virginia (assuming both are package deals) knowing that about the same amount of people are going to watch SEC football no matter who it is
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [554]
TigerPulse: 40%
20
|
Re: I dont understand the whole TV market
May 19, 2012, 10:25 AM
[ in reply to I dont understand the whole TV market ] |
|
its not about who watches. network tv cares about ratings. cable tv cares about subscriptions. the future sec neteork will already have this state. cable companies operate by states. like someone said if clemson was in nc they would be a shoo in. but in sc the sec network will already be on cable packages. even clemson fans with cable packages will be buying the channel already. so it adds no subscriptions to double down in a state. a bew state brings a ton of subscriptions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1900]
TigerPulse: 99%
31
|
well if thats the case
May 19, 2012, 1:02 PM
|
|
why not kick out Auburn, Miss St, and Vandy to make room for Nevada, Cal, and Washington? I mean if the point is to not have two "markets" from the same state, why keep the ones that are just taking up room?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [554]
TigerPulse: 40%
20
|
Re: well if thats the case
May 19, 2012, 1:05 PM
|
|
mostly because they are already in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1900]
TigerPulse: 99%
31
|
but think of the millions of more dollars you could be makin
May 19, 2012, 1:09 PM
|
|
thats whats really important here
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [554]
TigerPulse: 40%
20
|
Re: but think of the millions of more dollars you could be makin
May 19, 2012, 1:15 PM
|
|
point taken. it wouldnt surprise me at all if in 10 or 15 years teams are not discussing narrowing down into an even smsller elite group. like an nfl of college teams. i think we may be watching the death of college football, at least in the way we have always known it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Connoisseur [364]
TigerPulse: 18%
16
|
Re: I dont understand the whole TV market
May 19, 2012, 10:26 AM
[ in reply to I dont understand the whole TV market ] |
|
It seems counter intuitive to me too, but having a larger footprint makes it easier for the conferences to sell their package to networks.
You would think Clemson would bring more than an NC State/UNC but networks don't see it that way for whatever reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [37]
TigerPulse: 76%
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rookie [14]
TigerPulse: 31%
2
|
Re: Seriously, does SC have Veto Power to keep Tigers from SEC?
May 19, 2012, 3:08 PM
|
|
Charter members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [202]
TigerPulse: 79%
13
|
Re: Seriously, does SC have Veto Power to keep Tigers from SEC?
May 19, 2012, 12:45 AM
|
|
Just posted about the same thing. If this is true then lawmakers need to get involved because SC is actually keeping money out of the state just to serve their own selfish interests.
Would we try to do the same to them? Heck yeah! Should we be allowed to? Heck no!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Connoisseur [364]
TigerPulse: 18%
16
|
Re: Seriously, does SC have Veto Power to keep Tigers from SEC?
May 19, 2012, 10:30 AM
|
|
Its not a USC decision, it is an SEC decision. To be honest I don't think the SEC is looking to expand at all at this time. I don't think they were last year either, but A&M was too good of a prize to pass up. Missouri made the most sense in their view of the other teams available.
I don't think the SEC is going to invite anyone unless they are a homerun (winning tradition, facilities, fan support, new market).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enthusiast [135]
TigerPulse: 18%
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17363]
TigerPulse: 91%
51
Posts: 27490
Joined: 2003
|
Which begs the question...Why didn't you go to SCU law
May 19, 2012, 3:22 PM
|
|
school?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enthusiast [135]
TigerPulse: 18%
11
|
$$$***
May 19, 2012, 3:31 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1816]
TigerPulse: 96%
31
|
Of course no one really knows, but in my humble opinion
May 19, 2012, 12:46 AM
|
|
if Mike Slive wants FSU and Clemson to end up in the SEC, then it will happen. Personally, I just don't think that makes the most business sense. It makes the most sense for the SEC to expand their footprint by adding some combination of 2 of the 3 out of VT/UNC/NCSU. That way they either own NC outright or get NC and VA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19677]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14149
Joined: 2009
|
The SEC's footprint stretches from Hawaii to Maine already.
May 19, 2012, 1:05 AM
|
|
NC and VA? Really? I can almost guarantee you that SEC broadcasts outdraw ACC games in those markets as it stands now. The DC market? Does anybody actually believe that people in Washington, DC will tune in to a Va.Tech or UVA game over a Bama, LSU, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee game just because it's UVA or Va.Tech and they're close by? I don't think so.
If you want to follow the TV market route as a guide for expansion, Swofford's got a place in line for you in the ACC parade.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2245]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Re: The SEC's footprint stretches from Hawaii to Maine alrea
May 19, 2012, 1:16 AM
|
|
If south carolina is blocking us...then we should not play them anymore
Simple as that
There is no state law that forces us to play
Recent legislation allowed for the game to be moved to Thanksgicing weekend
If they don't want us around....just break the tie that binds
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17363]
TigerPulse: 91%
51
Posts: 27490
Joined: 2003
|
Simple as that?***
May 19, 2012, 1:48 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19907]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 15116
Joined: 2010
|
DC is MD Georgetown territory which caters to Liberal Arts
May 19, 2012, 1:18 AM
[ in reply to The SEC's footprint stretches from Hawaii to Maine already. ] |
|
more than Engineering majors. I agree with you and I don't see VaT's growing fan base as important in DC area. Would be surprised if UNC bails on ACC - talk about Swofford pulling a knife out of his back ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1816]
TigerPulse: 96%
31
|
Those would be interesting numbers to see (ratings by state)
May 19, 2012, 1:22 AM
[ in reply to The SEC's footprint stretches from Hawaii to Maine already. ] |
|
What you postulate may be correct with regards to the bigger, marquee games, but I doubt it for the lesser games. That is a pretty big assumption you make without any real data to back it up. The bottom line is, after FSU, why would we be next in line? UNC has a massive amount of monetary resources, a huge alumni base and is a national brand. We are on par with VT, but VT has had more football success than us as of late and is perceived nationally as a better program. What makes you so sure the SEC wants Clemson?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [554]
TigerPulse: 40%
20
|
Re: The SEC's footprint stretches from Hawaii to Maine already.
May 19, 2012, 3:21 PM
[ in reply to The SEC's footprint stretches from Hawaii to Maine already. ] |
|
not about ratings draws. about cable subscriptions. the sec network will not be on tv in maine. it will in sc. and it will in nc and va if they get teams there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17363]
TigerPulse: 91%
51
Posts: 27490
Joined: 2003
|
Neither FSU nor Clemson will be offered a slot in the SEC...
May 19, 2012, 1:46 AM
|
|
Period...The reason is irrelevant...time to move on...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4098]
TigerPulse: 94%
35
Posts: 10336
Joined: 1997
|
Re: Neither FSU nor Clemson will be offered a slot in the SEC...
May 19, 2012, 1:12 PM
|
|
U are right..the SEC does not want us.. we might be competitive and they have plenty of that now.. qwe also bring not much new T/V sets
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1400]
TigerPulse: 98%
29
|
They wouldn't vote no
May 19, 2012, 2:03 AM
|
|
because it would be political suicide. They'll never have to because the East schools (except Mizzou) would take care of each other. All they have to do is agree to vote no for any in-state rival of a fellow East school and all 6 of the original SEC East schools are protected.
Florida wouldn't have to vote no against FSU, Miami or anybody else and they would be blocked by 5 other votes.
Georgia wouldn't have to vote no against GT and they would be blocked by 5 other votes.
SCU wouldn't have to vote no against us and they would be blocked by 5 other votes.
Tennessee wouldn't have to vote no against Memphis or Middle Tennessee and they would be protected by 5 other votes.
Kentucky wouldn't have to vote no against Louisville and they would be protected by 5 other votes.
The only reason Virginia Tech has been in the ACC for as long as they have is the fact that UNC and Duke were automatic no votes for any expansion whatsoever. At that point UVA became the swing vote and VT became a member of the ACC because of political pressure placed on UVA to support VT.
We could come up for a vote to join the SEC right now, South Carolina could vote yes for us and we still wouldn't become a member because the SEC East will vote as a block for the most part.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [390]
TigerPulse: 71%
16
|
Re: They wouldn't vote no
May 19, 2012, 10:16 AM
|
|
Pretty much.
Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky and the Mississippi schools are the block against Florida State, Ga. Tech, Clemson, Louisville and Southern Miss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [0]
TigerPulse: 14%
1
|
Re: Seriously, does SC have Veto Power to keep Tigers from SEC?
May 19, 2012, 10:54 AM
|
|
USC, UF, and UGA have a long standing agreement to fight any expansion offer to a school in a state that already has an SEC team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 33
| visibility 206
|
|
|
|
50
