DESTIN, Fla. - SEC commissioner Mike Slive* said late this afternoon that the league would decide in August whether it will start its own channel.
"If we decide to have a channel, we want to have it in place by August of 2009 because our current TV contracts run out at the end of the 2008-09 academic year," Slive said. "I'm open minded about this. I want the facts to dictate the decision, but a decision will not be made here."
Slive said the proposed channel would run in conjunction with the other networks that would have contracts with the SEC. Currently, CBS, ESPN, ESPN2, Raycom and Fox Sports South have contracts with the league that expire at the end of the 08-09 season.
Representatives of those entities met with Slive and the presidents and athletic directors of the 12 league schools for three hours here in the third day of the four-day annual spring business meetings. Reportedly, Fox may throw a hefty TV package at the SEC to wrestle away the national SEC TV rights for CBS.
"If we were to do a network, we'd still want a national network and national cable package over the air," Slive said. "Then, our own channel would be a part of that."
Slive said there are many pros and cons being discussed about an SEC channel. That's the SEC has been studying similar channels already on the air, such as the Big 10 and NFL networks.
"We're bringing everybody up to date in our conversations and exploring our options," Slive said. "We're talking to several of our current networks and others, and we're gratified by the interest and enthusiasm in the SEC."
Slive said there are several pros and cons in the league having its own channel.
"There are four elements to a channel," Slive said. "That is distribution, content, management and capital. All those issues have to be resolved in the development of a channel. We have to evaluate all the pro and cons of those before making a decision."
UT's new $45 million football…
Images from Larry Murphy's book on…
Smokey undergoes physical therapy at UT
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 12
gohawks1 writes:
I have a bad feeling about this. We'll end up having fewer available games instead of more, because cable companies won't immediately add a new channel to their lineup. Hope I'm wrong, but I've learned to not trust the cable industry.....
dvols writes:
as long as tim tebow is on 24 - 7
VOLINSC writes:
I hope the SEC stays with CBS. Their coverage is the best. I love the intro music to the games.
pdhuff#552644 writes:
Just hope its cheaper than the PPV route Phil is steering us onto. Takes a lot of alum cans even at .83 lb to pay $24.95 or so.
99gator writes:
just get rid of dave rowe, dave neal, bob kesling, and the camera crew from the local high school future media of tomorrow club and i'll be happy.
the picture quality, the broadcasters, and the camera angles chosen for sec broadcasts are horrible. it's just a mickey mouse broadcast, something i think most all sec fans can agree on.
thank god the gators are not on jp/raycom too often. nothing is worse than having a game on raycom, except losing a game on raycom.....which thankfully, i don't think florida has done for a while.
johnlg00#206211 writes:
I'm with IPOrange on this. If the SEC has its own channel, then that automatically devalues the existing and future contracts with other outlets. Fox may make a high-dollar bid to raise its own profile, but after that the usual competitive pressures will kick in. The more other entities that are involved, the less valuable any particular one will be. Future contracts with other outlets will decrease in value. More and more games will wind up on the SEC channel. Since it will not have a vast amount of other programming, it will have to charge a premium either to the cable/satellite carriers or to the viewers or both. As I said in another post on this same subject, we will ultimately either get fewer games or we will pay more for them or probably both.
tigervol9802 writes:
Amen 99, amen. Actually Dave Neal is a decent play-by-play guys in basketball. That football crew....man.
Disagree on the concept of fewer games. You may have to pay more, but I doubt there will be fewer games.
As for Fox, they have made it very clear they are willing to fight with ESPN to be tops in the college football business. Getting the SEC would be a major step in that direction.
richvol writes:
99gator is so right about jp/raycom...it's terrible. Even the picture is dull compared to the color on other stations. Not a fan of Dave,Dave and Bob either. CBS is a Notre Dame gofer.
knoxtenor writes:
If the SEC wants to pour money down a hole, I understand that there are many caverns under both TBA and Neyland.
IBleedOrange444 writes:
This is going to really blow for out of market fans. I live in Vegas and have some friends out here who went to Big 10 schools that missed some of their games b/c they were on the Big 10 Network which the cable provider out here doesn't offer. At least I can buy the ESPN package and still see almost every game under the current system. If the SEC starts up a network, they will undoubtedly take some of our better games to broadcast and out of market fans won't be able to see them b/c the cable providers outside of the southeast aren't going to carry the channel. I sure hope they don't do this. I may have to move back to Tennessee 'cause I can't be missing games!
givehim6 writes:
As long as I don't have to switch from cable to dish to watch TN or a good SEC game, or pay out the butt to see the games played by having a package added.
mivol writes:
Stay out of the tv business. In big10 it has been and continues to be nothing but profits for big10 and bust for viewers who can't get big10 nw on cable due to cost. Living outside of sports south and other local distribution networks, I'm content with PPV for the few TN games that are not national. Other sports like WBB and MBB would be the only benefit for me (if not blacked out like SS, foxS and other local networks are now).
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.