SEC TV Decision Coming Soon

Thursday, July 24, 2008


The Big Ten Network was somewhat of a disappointment considering the giant mess between the channel and Comcast. Hopefully the SEC can do a better job. According to Conference Commissioner Mike Slive, the decision is likely to come this fall....

Southeastern Conference Commissioner Mike Slive says the league will make a decision on its television and multimedia rights this fall.

The TV deals with CBS, ESPN, Raycom Sports and FSN South run out at the end of the academic year.

Slive said at SEC football media days Wednesday that the options include an SEC Network similar to the ones started by the Mountain West and Big Ten conferences and the NFL.

Slive said criteria the league is considering include the ability to provide national exposure and to air events for other sports besides football and basketball.
I understand the idea of your own network on the surface, but the SEC doesn't really need help in exposing itself. Basically every single game is on TV and the CBS deal already gives them their own channel basically. If it's more money that's one thing, but they certainly won't get anywhere near the same exposure.

Slive says SEC will decide on television plans this fall (SI)

Posted by Awful Announcing- at 9:37 AM

8 Comments:

"I understand the idea of your own network on the surface, but the SEC doesn't really need help in exposing itself."

You hit the nail on the head right there, AA. The Big Ten starting a network made some sense, because they're a second or third fiddle at best on ESPN/ABC. The SEC starting its own network, though would be counterintuitive. They've got the great deal with CBS, their games are regularly the featured primetime games on ESPN, and they (rightfully) get the most media attention of any network. Unless CBS or ESPN is trying to dump SEC football (which I can't see), it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for the SEC to screw up a good thing.

James said...
Jul 24, 2008, 9:54:00 AM  

Won't somebody please think of Jefferson Pilot Sports!

GMoney said...
Jul 24, 2008, 10:29:00 AM  

Just as long as they keep together the "Dave, Dave & Dave" football broadcasts.

Anonymous said...
Jul 24, 2008, 10:33:00 AM  

The thing, AA, is that it's not like the Big 10 is at a loss for exposure. They still have afternoon games on ESPN and ABC. Whenever Minnesota plays Bowling Green or Penn State plays Coastal Carolina, those games are the ones that are broadcast.

SEC TV wouldn't have games like Alabama/Auburn or LSU/Florida, we'd be looking at games like Mississippi State/Tulane and Ole Miss/South Carolina.

Eric said...
Jul 24, 2008, 2:32:00 PM  

I don't care as long as I don't miss any Tennessee football. If I do because my cable company won't carry the channel, I'm gonna get pissed.

Anonymous said...
Jul 24, 2008, 3:57:00 PM  

"I understand the idea of your own network on the surface, but the SEC doesn't really need help in exposing itself. Basically every single game is on TV and the CBS deal already gives them their own channel basically. If it's more money that's one thing, but they certainly won't get anywhere near the same exposure."

This statement is simply wrong. The SEC has good television agreements but the SEC has no where close to the exposure that the Big Ten has under its television agreements. As comparision, in 2007, the SEC had a combined 34 games on CBS (15), ESPN and ESPN2 (19). The Big Ten also had 34 games on ABC (17) and ESPN and ESPN2 (17) so the number of national games for the SEC and Big Ten were identical, even though the Big Ten had 10 fewer home games than the SEC.

However, the biggest difference in television exposure between the SEC and Big Ten is in the coverage of the other games. The SEC had 14 games on Raycom which had strong regional coverage and ESPN GamePlan, but the SEC also had 18 games that were not televised at all and another 20 games that were limited to local PPV. In total, approximately 44% of the SEC's games were not televised at all or on a limited local PPV package. In contrast, the Big Ten had all of its games televised and was widely available (the BTN was in more than 30 million households) than SEC's Raycome coverage (less than 20 million households).

It is for these reasons that I believe the SEC Network will happen (which I hope it does). The SEC believes it is as good as the Big Ten and wants the same television exposure that the Big Ten has.

Anonymous said...
Jul 25, 2008, 6:54:00 AM  

Yeah, but the reason why those games aren't on is because they don't think enough people are interested in it to sell advertising against it. Just having a channel on the dial that people have to subscribe to doesn't generate enough revenue to cover costs. The only way it works is if they partner with a major network to sell advertising on it.

It is going to be a down couple of years for advertising after the elections are over. I predict the college networks disappear in 3 years.

Anonymous said...
Jul 26, 2008, 9:34:00 AM  

Fox obviously thinks that the "second tier" Big Ten games are worth paying for. According to News Corp's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC for the quarter ended 12/31/07, Fox owes payments to the Big Ten Conference of approximately $2.8 billion over the next 25 years for the Big Ten Network. This averages $112 million annually and does not include the additional approximately $100 million annually that the Big Ten will receive from ABC/ESPN. In comparison, the SEC received $127 million in television revenue for 2007, which amount is spread over 12 teams rather than 11 for the Big Ten.

The bottom line is that the Big Ten makes significantly more money and has significantly more exposure than the SEC. If the SEC wants to keep up, it will start their own network.

Anonymous said...
Jul 26, 2008, 11:33:00 PM  

Post a Comment