DESTIN, Fla. - It has been on the back burner for the last year, but discussion of a proposed SEC television network will be the focal point at the league's annual spring business meetings that open here today at the Sandestin Beach Hilton.
The league's TV contracts with CBS, ESPN, ESPN2, Lincoln Financial and Fox Sports South expire at the end of the 2008-09 athletic season. If the conference wants a network to expand coverage in mostly its Olympic sports, as well as show more football and men's and women's basketball games not covered by the league's primary broadcast partners, it must figure out a way to make all parties happy.
The Big Ten Conference is the only league to won a network, but that network has been plagued by distribution problems. That's something that hasn't escaped the keen eye of SEC commissioner Mike Slive.
"A network is a very viable option for us, but it's premature to make any decisions," Slive said. "There are advantages and disadvantages. Each conference is different, and each conference's fans have different traditions and histories.
"The good news is everyone (networks) we've talked with is very enthusiastic about us, and that's very gratifying. The conference has been very well received by everyone, and it's nice to know people feel that way about what your conference can bring to the table.''
It's expected that football and men's basketball coaches will discuss the academic progress rate formula, since both sports get penalized when athletes leave school early for the pros. Tennessee's basketball program recently was docked a scholarship, and coach Bruce Pearl chose to sign one fewer player last season to cover the penalty.
The league's 12 schools also will divide revenue that should top last year's record total of $122 million, despite having to issue refunds for the SEC men's basketball tournament. After a tornado struck the Georgia Dome on the second night of the tournament, the last two days of the event were played at Georgia Tech before families and media.
On Thursday night, at the awards banquet that celebrates the end of the SEC's 75th anniversary celebration, retiring athletic directors Larry Templeton of Mississippi State and Skip Bertman of LSU will be honored.
Their replacements, Greg Byrne and Joe Alleva, will be attending their first league meetings, which run through Friday.
"The banquet is a very important part of our meetings because we'll be celebrating the end of a year-long 75th anniversary celebration," Slive said. "The celebration has been very well received.''
Among the new coaches also at their first conference business gathering are Arkansas football coach Bobby Petrino, LSU men's basketball coach Trent Johnson, South Carolina men's basketball coach Darrin Horn and Gamecocks women's basketball coach Dawn Staley.
Tennessee's signing class for 2012
Tennessee defeats Georgia 3-2 in…
Memorable moments in Pat Summitt's…
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 38
wjtenn writes:
There is a reason the TV networks prosper in their industry, just like the College Athletics thrive in theirs.
Sometimes the green we see is not grass, but greed.
drakosben1#216420 writes:
take your greed and stick it! The poor we will always have with us. Go Vols and go SEC, wear it out. It takes money to operate, and the more the merrier.
Gigavol writes:
SEC football coverage sucks.
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
drake, pretty interesting point. If I read your post correctly, the poor are our 'burden'??
Pretty odd statement for a capitalist, considering that captialism is basically a pyramid built upon the ability of a relative few to get wealthy vs the requirement that a whole lot of people be NOT wealthy.
Just a little, gentle reminder: you had best bring along the poor 'unwashed masses', else they will turn on you and you will not care for the results.
pj_ladyvolnMI writes:
We live in Indiana and were in Michigan before this. Everyone HATES the Big 10 network!! You can't see the games now unless you pay for extra extended cable. It's been so disappointing. My initial vote is no! (Not that they'll ask us.) pj
Cherokee writes:
mparker, you seem to have a very leftist view of capitalism. Capitalism is not a pyramid which requires that a lot of people be "not wealthy". In fact, relatively speaking, most people in the lower financial strata here are fairly wealthy relative to the rest of the world. Capitalism is not perfect (no system is), but it's not what you suggest. There's also nothing inherently incompatible with capitalism and assistance to the poor, although there will always be rich people who take advantage of the poor. It's just not necessarily an indictment of capitalism.
richvol writes:
This is the first step in the SEC charging you for games that you now see for free on the other stations. It's true that you pay for cable now but if games that are currently able to be seen are transfered to an SEC network then guess what...we will pay extra.
Only one game was unavailable in football on TV last year and almost all the basketball games were televised. I don't see any real advantage to us fans...only to the bottom line for the SEC.
virginia346 writes:
I hope CBS keeps the main football contract
CoverOrange writes:
Living in Ohio I got to read a lot of complaints about the BTN.
First complaint was that the cable monopoly wouldn't agree to put the network on a lower tier, thus it was not on at all. Satellite companies did but most people are wedded to cable.
Second complaint was the existence of the network forced a certain number of games to be broadcast by each school. PPV was no longer an option as had been previously when a game wasn't on ABC or ESPN.
Third complaint was when neither football or basketball was being shown it was stuff even ESPN2 wouldn't touch.
The SEC needs to realize that LF/JP/Raycom serves the need of a network and probably more cheaply. Just give them a mil or so to go to HD broadcasting.
THE_VOL writes:
Anybody know of a good reading comprehension course - plenty on here could use it! They are NOT talking about ending ANY current contracts with other networks. They ARE talking about programming that would be much like ESPNU - Olympic sports and other non-revenue sports like baseball that are currently not televised at all for the most part. The football/hoops side of it would be primarily for the low end teams that currently MIGHT get one appearance a year on Lincoln Financial or Fox South and for some of the non-conference patsy games that are on PPV now. If you THINK about it, right now at least 3 of 6 conference games are usually on one of the networks every week and oftentimes more since the SEC gets quite a few Thursday night games too. In hoops, pretty much only KY, FL and TN are getting much action on ESPN/CBS with only a few games each week on the other outlets. Bottom line is nobody is going to lose anything they currently get but will be able to get even more if they want it. Yeah, you may have to pay your cable company for a package or whatever but don't we usually have to pay more to get more????? Besides your paying them NOW for getting what THEY want to show which might not be the events YOU want to see on a given day!
CoverOrange writes:
THE, if you find one you should sign up yourself. Nobody said what you are accusing them of.
And yes, some of us will lose because, mostly likely, only southern cable companies will carry the SECN. Thus, when UT v N Ill., for example, is exclusive to SECN, those outside of the south will not have the PPV option as before.
murrayvol writes:
mparker @ 8:25: Your last statement ranks among your most accurate & inspired. We would do well to remember that admonition.
WorkinLikeHeck writes:
Sweet...another television option for the Alabama-Tennessee game to be broadcast on.
WorkinLikeHeck writes:
Is Coach Foolmore at these meetings or is he in Jackson Hole and attending these via video conferencing?
auttat writes:
"The Big Ten Conference is the only league to won a network..."
They definitely can't "won" a Bowl Game against the SEC...wait, dang Florida!
Seriously, where is the editor when this stuff gets put in circulation?
WorkinLikeHeck writes:
and to think people want to pay for those types of mistakes.
volroadwarrior writes:
mparker is either an egghead idiot or a student brainwashed by egghead idiots. Capitalism works because if you work hard or smart, play by the rules and make good life decisions, you can go from homeless to wealthy. Socialism appeals to leaches and loafers. Don't worry mparker, we capitalists will work hard enough for you guys to skim from us enough so you can lead a better life than those under a socialist's boot. "A rising tide lifts all boats".
murrayvol writes:
auttat: No they can't "won" a bowl game vs the SEC but they can "own" a network and there's a lot more $$$ in that.
Don't know where the editor is but this piece has been up awhile.
murrayvol writes:
volroadwarrior: And a "rising Crimson Tide" is a hard team to beat.
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
volroadwarrior:
funny as hell how you some people are so ultra-defensive. You have NO knowledge of me, or my politics, yet you go on this nasty rant. What does that say about you??
There are good and bad things about every system. There are certainly quite a few socialists countries with better living standards than ours. You obviously have not clue as to the huge (and widening) income gap in our country, or the fact that even the rickest man inthe world, warren buffett, hss stated publicly that the wealthy pay too little tax.
You know, you don't have to be a left-wing driveler or a right-wing blockhead to see we ahve issues.
So, hey, go along with your smug ways, blithely forgetting that society ALLOWS you to get 'wealthy', and keep calling people with a different view than yours 'iditots'. At some point, wouldn't hurt you to study the French revolution, and compare and contrast that with the nanny state of Birtain under the Labour government.
Sigh.
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
As for the BTN, have heard NOTHING good about that at all.
Last season I saw almost every game either on the networks or the internet. Hope my luck holds with that!
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
cherokee:
neither socialism nor capitalism is 'perfect', but each works if not allowed to be taken to extremes.
each can be viewed as a 'machine', with the need for controls and adjustments to keep the thing from blowing up.
As for your comparison to other parts of the world, not really relavant. the poor we have live here, not there.
IMHO, in simplistic terms capitalism is great for promoting an aura of 'great ideas', whereas socialism seems to me more about methodical innovation and order.
gohawks1 writes:
If this thing develops and contracts with other networks (CBS, ESPN, FSS, etc.) are not renewed, my concern would be that the cable industry doesn't imediately pick up this new channel for their lineup. That means that we would initially have LESS available coverage rather than more. Cable carriers (in my case, Cablevision Industries) often take weeks, months, or years before adding a new channel to their programming.
If contracts with the other networks are renewed and a new SEC channel shows games not being broadcasted by them, then this would work. Otherwise, we end up getting fewer games than we already have.
Anybody have any insight on how a deal such as this might pan out?
VolInIndy writes:
As was stated in the article, distribution is a major problem with the Big Ten Network. Here in Central Indiana, half the people have no access to it because their cable systems refuse to pay the conferences price to carry it.
gohawks1 writes:
VolInIndy - That's my concern. My carrier is Charter Communications (I'm not sure where I got the name Cablevision Industries - maybe a former name), and they add 2-3 channels every few years, it seems. That's definitely a downside to such a deal.
ncvol writes:
I, like mparker watched games on internet for free on UTSports official Site and UTladyvols.com.
Also, ncaa.com. (all were streaming ) but it was better than watching the bottom line on ESPN.
Since I am in NC, I am thankful for the viewing. They always show NC Hurricanes on cable when the Lady Vols basketball are on National coverage. Just wanted to vent.Thanks for listening.
CoverOrange writes:
The Big Ten did not lose its contracts with the networks. The BTN showed whatever games that were not picked up by networks. Only stipulation was that each school had to appear twice a season.
Warren Buffet is hardly a leader of capitalism, more like a leach.
Cherokee writes:
mparker:
You've at least moved from a definition of capitalism as "basically a pyramid built upon the ability of a relative few to get wealthy vs the requirement that a whole lot of people be NOT wealthy" to something that "works if not allowed to be taken to extremes". Of course, I believe capitalism works a lot better than socialism.
As far as my comparison to other parts of the world, it may be that you don't see the relevance rather than that it is not relevant.
I'd be interested in hearing a listing of the "quite a few" socialist countries that you think have a better standard of living than the United States. Please don't say France.
And lastly, in regard to this statement:
"...in simplistic terms capitalism is great for promoting an aura of 'great ideas', whereas socialism seems to me more about methodical innovation and order.", I would agree that certainly is "simplistic".
pdhuff#552644 writes:
"Ah, the poor will be with us always."
I can attest to that with our rising rate of PPV Vol games, both in quantity and per game pricing.
Some see no problemo with even Ala-UT being shuffled off to Buffalo last year. Can't blame Mikey H for getting us on Natl Tv early with UCLA. Probably would have agreed to play it in June if the network insisted.
All is well.
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
Cherokee, thanks for the condescension, much appreciated.
Two wiki links for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Human...
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialis...
I don't much use wiki, but you'll get the idea.
You seem to think I'm 'against' capitalism, which I'm not. However, when you compare the poor here to the poor elsewhere, you completely ignore things such as natural resourse, all that good stuff. I do indeed believe it is haughty to think your system and your country are 'it', and never view things as they really are. I can guess that helped hasten Rome's fall, though we are quite a ways from their longevity.
And, yeah, I chose to be simplistic, since this is a sports chatboard. Sinde everything I've said seems to offend you, I won't apologize.
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
pfhuff:
very astute on your part.
Cherokee writes:
mparker, I was condescending and I apologize. Your "not really relevant, the poor we have live here, not there" remark was a bit condescending IMO.
I'm "ignoring" 1)natural resources and 2)all that good stuff? I'm not sure how that plays into this, or what you are saying. Other countries have natural resources too. We have certainly been blessed with natural resources, but we've also worked hard to take advantage of them, improve upon them, and create markets where natural resources are efficiently allocated.
As far as the income gap widening, one thing that rarely gets mentioned is that when tracking individuals rather than just statistics, most people who are in the lower income grouping at one point in their lives are no longer there a few years later. Yeah, I think capitalism is superior to socialism, but I never said that one system or country is "it". Is it possible to compare two things and prefer one over the other without it being evidence of haughtiness?
johnlg00#206211 writes:
I'm afraid that the proposed SEC Network will more closely resemble the NFL Network than the all-sports Big-Ten Network. As most of you probably know, the NFL Network has been in a huge spitting contest with the major cable systems. As I understand it, the NFL Network wants to charge the cable systems a premium fee to carry it but also wants the cable systems to put it on the lower (basic) tier. If you remember, one of the bigger games of last year's regular season--forget which it was right now, but it was THE game in the NFL that week--was initially to be run EXCLUSIVELY on the NFL Network. It finally caved in to a massive public outcry and released it to more public outlets. However, as time goes by, the NFL Network will pull more and more of the better games off the more public forms of access as a means of pressuring the cable systems, through dissatisfied fans, into carrying the NFL Network. Since sports executives share ideas and information, I could easily see the SEC Network using similar tactics. The result will in fact be either less access to games or higher charges for them and, for a while at least, the worst of both worlds for the consumer. After all, it is a basic rule of capitalism--"I've got it; if you want some of it you'll pay what I want for it. Public interest? Never heard of it."
orangesox writes:
Last winter, for about three months, Dish Network took Sportsouth off my package and added the Big Ten Network (I live in Alabama BTW, so what's up with that?). It was not good. Lots of sports no one wants to see anyway, along with some second rate football and basketball reruns. If the SEC were to go that route, i would hope they would learn from the Big Ten's mistakes and do a better job.
richvol writes:
Anything and everything is driven by the almighty dollar. I'm telling you that this is going to cost you more money for something we are probably already getting. Virtualy all games of any significance in the SEC, and some that are not, are televised in some way...at least to the states that have an interest. If not there's internet. This is not for the benefit of the fans just like moving the UCLA game when most fans had already booked flights and hotels. Money,Money,Money,etc.
CoverOrange writes:
The affect of capitalism is entrepreneurial freedom, something that socialism curtails if not outright restricts. Without that freedom we wouldn't even be discussing the possiblility of a SECTV network unless the government deemed it necessary.
Cherokee writes:
richvol, I agree completely. As my Dad has said for years, television and money run everything, and while I appreciate what we have, I don't think the influence of TV and money have been all for the better. It is shameful the way fans get treated by their own schools. It would be nice to see a school stand up to television every now and then and say 'no', just in the interests of its fans. I swear there are some AD's who would play at 9 a.m. on Easter Sunday if it meant being on television.
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
cherokee, excellent response. I have an appreciation for BOTH systems.
Let's just leave it at that, most likely boring the hell out of most readers.
WD40, you are acknowledged and noted!!
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.