|
Replies: 29
| visibility 1
|
Varsity [202]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 184
Joined: 4/3/02
|
"No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 12:41 AM
|
|
The "SC is keeping Clemson out" argument sounds like BS to me. And if it were true then that would mean SC is keeping capital out of our state. Not just direct money from the conference but multiuse property developments, increased tourist dollars, and increased national exposure. You don't think AL, MS, and TN benefit more from having two SEC teams in state? If there is even the remotest truth to this rumor then state lawmakers should get involved and heads should roll.
And why again are NCSU and VT better properties than Clemson and FSU? Because they are in non-SEC states? Well so are Wake, Duke, Maryland, Rutgers, UVA, etc... but those schools don't command the viewership of FSU or Clemson and neither does NCSU or probably VT. The oft-repeated claim that it's just because cable contracts are dependent on how many states a conference is in is just plain stupid. If this were true then why not add weak teams in new states and just give those teams a smaller share of revenue? Plenty of teams out there who would be thrilled to have a smaller piece of the SEC's big 'ol pie.
|
|
|
|
 |
Freshman [4]
TigerPulse: 7%
Posts: 26
Joined: 1/5/12
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 1:27 AM
|
|
Not just direct money from the conference but multiuse property developments, increased tourist dollars, and increased national exposure.
___________________________
Multiuse property developments? Please explain.
Increased tourist dollars? Please explain. What is the difference between ACC schools traveling to SC to watch a game at Death Valley and SEC schools traveling to SC to watch a game at Death Valley? Clemson would play the same amount of home games regardless of what conference it is in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [81]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 151
Joined: 10/20/11
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 1:33 AM
|
|
How many BC fans come down to see the game? And WF, Duke?
I actually see some point there on the tourism front. You won't fill the away seats at DV with 60+% of the ACC probably, but I suspect SEC teams travel a lot better. Not to mention, there would be much more big games, which means much more Clemson fans in the stands too, some coming from out of state (and thus bringing money in).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [4]
TigerPulse: 7%
Posts: 26
Joined: 1/5/12
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 1:39 AM
|
|
There are only X amount of tickets allotted to the visiting team. If they don't get sold, they are released to the home team. I honestly don't believe it would make a tremendous economic impact.
Does Death Valley sell out when the Tigers play Duke? Would it sell out if the Tigers play Ole Miss? Would any more Ole Miss fans travel to Clemson than Duke fans? No.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17605]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14155
Joined: 10/24/10
|
I really believe Clemson would sell many more tickets for
May 19, 2012, 1:48 AM
|
|
Ole Miss than Clemson vs. Duke. And Clemson fans would travel more to SEC schools. No doubt.
While SEC would be ideal for Clemsopn Football, I expect Florida, UGA, Auburn, possibly TN and definitely SCU would see Clemson as a likely competitor for recruits and fans and shut us out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [53783]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43564
Joined: 11/17/03
|
Dude, BC maybe brought 200
May 19, 2012, 7:13 AM
[ in reply to Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense... ] |
|
fans. If they were allocated 5,000 tickets, there is no way those tickets would have been absorbed by additional Clemson fans. And if so, they would most likely be local fans.
You need to come down to Wren and run with myself and my coot running buddy. It took me three miles to explain to that clucker that Swofford's nine game schedule is a severe disadvantage to Clemson. We will probably be running this morning, so Tmail me and I will let you know when and where.
Spud
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [86]
TigerPulse: 27%
Posts: 234
Joined: 11/24/06
|
Re: Dude, BC maybe brought 200
May 19, 2012, 11:17 AM
|
|
That 9 game conference schedule is worse than the crappy TV contract. Even if the ACC fixes it so your 5 home games are when USC is away. You only get 7 home games a year.
USC+4 ACC+ 2 OOC = 7
5 ACC + 2 OOC = 7
If they screw Clemson, which they seem to like to do for whatever reason.
4 ACC + 2 OOC = 6
5 ACC + USC + 2 OOC = 8
You lose one home game every 2 years either way, but if you only have 6 one year....that will hurt financial in that budget year.
If your OOC games are home and away deals, then it gets worse for number of home games. So playing good teams OOC is a financial hardship, but playing weak team with the ACC schedule hurts strength of schedule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11435]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14500
Joined: 1/2/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [43]
TigerPulse: 25%
Posts: 96
Joined: 7/31/08
|
Re: SC wants no part of Clemson in the SEC they'd be even
May 19, 2012, 11:05 AM
|
|
That is a very uninformed statement and wishful thinking on your part.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [390]
TigerPulse: 71%
Posts: 1455
Joined: 8/9/02
|
Re: SC wants no part of Clemson in the SEC they'd be even
May 19, 2012, 11:34 AM
[ in reply to SC wants no part of Clemson in the SEC they'd be even ] |
|
There are going to be a lot of irrelevant schools when this shakes out, but I doubt an SEC member would be one of them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [390]
TigerPulse: 71%
Posts: 1455
Joined: 8/9/02
|
Re: SC wants no part of Clemson in the SEC they'd be even
May 19, 2012, 11:35 AM
|
|
Which is why Clemson should be throwing all energies and Money into securing a spot in the SEC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16136]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 26438
Joined: 11/18/03
|
It is what it is...Spin all you want, but that path is a
May 19, 2012, 1:43 AM
|
|
dead end and the reality is that it doesn't matter if you grasp it or not...Clemson , FSU , nor GT will join the SEC...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2397]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2410
Joined: 1/23/00
|
Re: It is what it is...Spin all you want, but that path is a
May 19, 2012, 6:20 AM
|
|
The only reason we say the SEC doesn't want Clemson is b/c there aren't any rumors about it. This is all speculation. The only basis I have heard for such speculation is that the Chickens would block us (speculation) and the SEC already has the SC market. Well, as I've said in pvs posts, Clemson would bring a healthy portion of the NC market (think Charlotte and west), plus a pretty good amount of national interest. I completely agree with the OP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1265]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 1576
Joined: 5/20/08
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 1:46 AM
|
|
I really dont think for a team that has never won the conference to have that much pull in deciding whether or not clemson could join. The SEC is bigger than the Univ. Of south carolina ever thought about being and if it wants clemson they will get clemson. Coots be ######. You think alabama wants to play lsu every year?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16136]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 26438
Joined: 11/18/03
|
Apparently, the SEC doesn't want Clemson...***
May 19, 2012, 1:50 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enthusiast [135]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 464
Joined: 2/2/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3568]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2974
Joined: 6/24/11
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 3:01 AM
|
|
The SEC doesnt want Clemson for whatever reason. However if the sec wants to get a hold of a market in north carolina adding clemson is the best route as far as the team actually filling the stands. Clemsons fanbase is strong in NC SC and Ga so im not buying that crap that tv markets are the issue. Also im from florida and i promise you there are a good deal of clemson fans there as well thanks to bowden recruiting florida. Imo the only Acc team that the SEC really wants is one it will not get until the acc is distingerated and thats Va Tech. Now another question why didnt the SEC take WVU a football school with a good football pedigree in a state / region that the SEC doesnt have a team in? Wvu wanted an invite and was declined. Why?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rookie [16]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 31
Joined: 12/1/09
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 4:04 AM
|
|
Are your seriously asking why the SEC chose Mizzou over WVU? Mizzou brings the Kansas City and St. Louis TV markets and its a fairly prestigious school unlike WVU.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1641]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2190
Joined: 8/17/09
|
A Couple points about the SEC
May 19, 2012, 6:57 AM
|
|
1. The SEC will NOT make the first move. Clemson would have to request membership. Then the SEC would vote. Simple as that.
2. South Carolina is not against Clemson joining the conference regardless of what you read on message boards. Go read the quotes from actual SCjr officials when rumors were swirling last summer. Even the ole ball sack was quoted as saying he would welcome Clemson to the conference.
3. It would be good for both Clemson and USCjr in terms of revenue and scheduling because it would free up an out of conference game. (Go read what the financial hardship that the Georgia series is going to create).
4. The SEC is most concerned about brand. PACKED stadiums, and match-up of ranked teams than geographical markets. (for those that doubt this, BC addition says hello)
5. We have less of a chance of being accepted by the SEC now that they are at 14 teams. Last summer was when we had the most leverage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [580]
TigerPulse: 25%
Posts: 4271
Joined: 8/7/99
|
Re: A Couple points about the SEC
May 19, 2012, 7:15 AM
|
|
BC is a bad example. It is a city school, not state-wide school. It's in the pro loving northeast, not the college loving southeast.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [580]
TigerPulse: 25%
Posts: 4271
Joined: 8/7/99
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 7:12 AM
|
|
No one will be able to prove that SC is privately working against clemson.
clemson not being invited has little to do with the SEC. It's CBS and ESPN who foot the bill. They are not interested in paying up for SEC markets that they are already paying for, certainly not paying enough to keep the rest of us from taking a pay cut. They know that you already watch SEC football when Carolina is on, wanting to see Carolina lose. YOU wouldn't take a pay cut, neither as an individual nor institution. Why should we?
The attraction of 2 large new states like NC and VA is obvious. But the VT and NCS football programs are good, solid ones too, especially VT. And NC State has good basketball tradition they bring to the table.
But you all have worn me down on this topic. If you want in to the SEC, come on in. You have my support, which might buy you a cup of coffee. It's a tiring subject. But be careful what you wish for. SEC football week in and week out, is brutal. It can make the best of football programs wobbly. You won't have months to prepare for SEC football games like you did for Auburn the past couple of years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [62]
TigerPulse: 14%
Posts: 258
Joined: 12/2/11
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 7:31 AM
|
|
If the roles were reversed...would Clemson fans be anxious for Carolina to rejoin the ACC?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [91]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 302
Joined: 6/16/04
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 7:59 AM
|
|
POTD. That's funny. Clemson fans pulling hard to let SC into the SEC. Lord, that's funny. Almost as funny as SC fans demonstrating in front of the state capitol for the SEC to admit Clemson.
Let's level with one another on this matter of support by the University of South Carolina for Clemson to get into the SEC: If Pastidis, SOS, Tanner, Martin, and the President of the Gamecock Club were interviewed together on an international broadcast, and asked, 'Do you support Clemson's admission into the SEC?' they'd all answer 'YES!' together, BUT look closely. One of them would be ever so slightly raising an eyebrow!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [580]
TigerPulse: 25%
Posts: 4271
Joined: 8/7/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [554]
TigerPulse: 40%
Posts: 1874
Joined: 10/29/00
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 10:32 AM
|
|
its all about a future sec network. if the sec were to stay on espn forever clemson would be the better choice. they are eventually going to have a sec network though. then its not about markets its about footprints. the sec network eill be added to cable packages in all states in the footprint. not as a stand alone channel. it will be on your package. every cable subscriber in this state will be buying it. even clemson fans. so by adding clemson you would only gain a few households of clemson fans who dont already have cable. a minimal number of tv sets. by adding ncsu or vt you add ecery household with cable tv in two entire states. its not about who will have the higher ratings. that eould be clemson. its about who brings the most new subscriptions and the sec already has this state.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enthusiast [135]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 464
Joined: 2/2/11
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 11:30 AM
|
|
I think everyone on this board seems to be overlooking the concept that the SEC wants a cable network like the Big Ten and UT has. If it works anything like the Big Ten network does. They want the SEC network to be in as many households as possible. That's why the SEC chose Mizzou over WVU, and that's why it makes more sense to go into NC and VA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [202]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 184
Joined: 4/3/02
|
Cable TV execs can't be THAT stupid
May 19, 2012, 10:50 AM
|
|
Its about viewers, NOT states. Yes Clemson fans are already watching SCar games but they are watching our games too. Not the same viewers and games can be at different times (except once a year obviously). And as previously stated Clemson brings in more viewers in other states such as NC, GA, FL, and even AL (like me).
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [554]
TigerPulse: 40%
Posts: 1874
Joined: 10/29/00
|
Re: Cable TV execs can't be THAT stupid
May 19, 2012, 10:53 AM
|
|
for the future sec network states = new viewers
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [510]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 830
Joined: 9/12/99
|
TDP was quoted saying that SCar did not want us in SEC***
May 19, 2012, 11:30 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Member [25]
TigerPulse: 15%
Posts: 56
Joined: 11/28/10
|
Re: "No Clemson to SEC" arguments don't make sense...
May 19, 2012, 12:06 PM
|
|
I think the SEC is looking for a balance between good athletics and additional television markets while wanting to protect its existing members where possible. It's logical to think a school from VA and NC would be first in line with Maryland as a fallback. I think VA Tech would hold the advantage over UVA while UNC would be the top choice in NC. Now, UNC isn't leaving, meaning NC State would be most likely. I'm sure the SEC knows the value each team (including FSU /CU) adds to our contract.
I think FSU, CU, GA Tech, and Louisville would only be considered if the value they added was significantly higher than the others. For instance, if CU was worth $1,000,000 per year than NC State why make that move? It's only $80,000 per school per year. By going that route it hurts USCs advantage by creating parity in the state, which hurts the SEC over time. I think CU would need to add upwards of $10,000,000 more per year than the next option in order to get the call.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 29
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
