New Alabama athletic director Bill Battle will be attending his first SEC meetings in Destin next week.  When it comes to potential discussion topics, Battle is already excited by one — the SEC Network:

“The potential there is great.  It’s premature to really know or to think about how much it really is, or to have a feel for what it is.  I know the goals are aggressive.  ESPN and the Southeastern Conference form a formidable partnership so the expectations and the goals are high and aggressive, but we’re 16 months out.  We’re a long way from launch, but it’s pretty exciting to think about…

They are working with each individual institution on their production, and they said, ‘If you produce it, we’ll air it.”  So that’s an interesting concept.  They are pretty bullish on what they think they might be able to do in the 11-state SEC footprint, and they believe there’s a market outside of the footprint.”

“Aggressive.”  “Pretty bullish.”

Those words seem to back up what we wrote earlier this month when AT&T U-verse was announced as the SEC Network’s lone cable or satellite partner at roll-out — it’s going to be an expensive channel for providers.  That or ESPN and the SEC are indeed trying to force their channel onto providers’ basic tier of channels within the SEC footprint.  Or both… it’s expensive and they want it on the basic tier.

Either way, with the words “aggressive” and “pretty bullish” being kicked around, it’s likely the fight to get the SEC Network carried by the big providers — Comcast, Time Warner, DirecTV, etc — will be a rough one.

Be prepared.

For the past year, members of the ACC have been living on edge.  It’s been the conference voted “Most Likely To Be Raided By Other Leagues.”  Money issues have been at the heart of the problem.  As in: The ACC and its schools don’t make as much money as the other four major conferences.

Before shocking the world with an out-of-left-field grant of rights deal a few weeks ago, ACC commissioner John Swofford had to make a near perfect sales pitch to league members like Florida State.  He did and all the conference’s schools signed on the dotted line.

Immediately, ACC fans (and some of us in the media) jumped to an awfully big conclusion — that the league would soon push forward a new ACC Network with ESPN.  ESPN had already stepped in to offer a bit more cash to the conference long-term in order to fend off further conference realignment, but an additional network was seen as the league’s best chance to close the financial gap on rival conferences.

However, The SportsBusiness Journal reports today that the ACC has not bought back the media rights it’s already sold off to Raycom and Fox Sports Net.  Those rights agreements run through 2027 and unless the ACC buys them back and turns them over to ESPN, there will be no new ACC Network.

This isn’t an oversight by the ACC, mind you.  Everyone involved had to know that without those rights, no channel would be possible.  Also, ESPN agreed to discuss the possibility of creating a network.  It did not agree to actually launch such a network.

For that reason, the topic of a network was not a hot one at last week’s ACC meetings.

If no new network launches, ESPN has agreed to kick in enough money to get ACC schools into the $20 million range annually.  At MrSEC.com, we’ve reported since last December that industry and SEC sources have told us that schools in Mike Slive’s conference could be making $30-35 million annually within a year or two of the launch of an SEC Network.

That network is already a done deal, thanks to a long-term agreement with ESPN.  And before reaching that agreement, the SEC bought back all of its media rights — television and digital — in order to turn them over to ESPN for use with the network.

While the ACC’s membership is clearly in favor of sticking together — they wouldn’t have signed a binding grant of rights deal otherwise — the main problem for the league has a growing cash gap.  Without an ACC Network, that will continue to be an issue for the schools in Swofford’s league moving forward.

Does this re-open Pandora’s Box when it comes to conference realignment?  No.  But it will probably give a lot of people reason enough to start writing about expansion again.  We’re heading into the blah days of summer after all.

First things first… football and basketball are two completely different sports.

Basketball coaches usually wrap up their own non-conference schedules just months ahead of their next season.

In football — with much more money on the table — athletic directors handle the non-conference scheduling.  Typically any “big” games are lined up at least a year or two in advance.  Aside from neutral site money games (Atlanta, Arlington, Houston, etc), most all games between BCS-level foes are scheduled three, four, five or more years in advance.

For that reason, it’s much easier to pull off a two-conference “challenge” type event on the hardwood than it is on the gridiron.  There are only 12 football games per season (as opposed to 27-30 regular-season basketball games).  Each one of those 12 games has an enormous impact on an athletic department’s year-end revenue.  And with a playoff on the way, the top-tier games on a school’s schedule will have to locked down for strength of schedule purposes.

All that said, in recent months, with conference realignment talk filling cyberspace and the airwaves, talk of conference challenges and scheduling alliances has still generated more talk than ever among football fans… and between actual conferences.

The Big XII admitted that it had had talks with the ACC about such a scheduling partnership.  Then — just as we suggested on this site — it was learned that some talks between the Big XII and the SEC had occurred as well.

Just this week news broke that the Mountain West and Pac-12 are exploring a possible scheduling deal.  That’s the same Pac-12 that had initially reached such an agreement with the Big Ten.

And what do all of those alliances — Big XII/ACC, Big XII/SEC, MWC/Pac-12, Pac-12/Big Ten — have in common?

Not one of them has actually gone from theory to reality.  Not one.  But they sure look neat on paper, don’t they?

On this site, before John Swofford pulled a grant of rights agreement out of his hat, we suggested that the SEC could help save the ACC — if it wanted to — by agreeing to a scheduling alliance with that league.  The ACC was looking for extra cash — cash that ESPN is now stepping in to provide in an effort to halt further realignment — and a series of neutral site games against SEC squads all branded under a corporate sponsor’s logo would have been worth some nice cash for both the SEC and the ACC.

An ACC/SEC partnership would make sense in non-financial ways, too.  Already Florida/Florida State, Georgia/Georgia Tech and South Carolina/Clemson meet annually.  With Louisville set to join the ACC, the Kentucky/Louisville game would become the fourth built-in tilt between the leagues.  Vanderbilt and Wake Forest just wrapped up a series of games suggesting those two schools could form a fifth partnership.  If those five games remained/became annual events it would leave nine schools from each league — not counting part-time ACC member Notre Dame — to match up on a rotating basis.  The best matchups could be moved to NFL stadiums in Atlanta or Nashville or Charlotte or Washington or Pittsburgh.  ESPN would love it.  In-season “bowl” games.

Just as a random example, imagine the following as one season’s lineup of games:

Not every game would be a winner but even the worst games would beat matchups with FCS squads.  And again, the above is just an example.  (Please, look at the possibilities and don’t get hung up on who we matched with whom and where… this isn’t about the specifics).

In the above scenario there would be a battle between two corps of cadets.  A new border battle.  Extreme North versus extreme South.  A David Cutcliffe Bowl.  Plus some good games between traditionally strong programs.

Slap an AT&T logo on all of them, give them to ESPN (potentially for its SEC and ACC networks) and let everyone rake in the cash.

But that’s just one option for an SEC scheduling alliance.

We also suggested that with the ACC reaching out to the Big XII for a series of games, the SEC could damage Swofford’s league’s chances of survival — if it wanted to — by stealing their dates, so to speak.  Sources claim the Big XII and SEC had some discussions at some level about the possibility of an alliance.  The two leagues have already broken new ground with their co-ownership of the Sugar Bowl.  They’ve also just officially announced a basketball challenge.  If two leagues appear to be getting chummy at the moment, it’s the SEC and the Big XII (ironic considering the moves of Missouri and Texas A&M).

In theory — there’s that word again — the four existing SEC/ACC rivalries could be left intact with the 10 remaining SEC teams lining up games with the 10 squads from the Big XII.

Imagine this draw as a possible slate of games:

Under that plan you’d have Nick Saban coaching against his home state school.  Mike Gundy would face the team whose job he didn’t take.  There would a We-Hate-Tommy-Tuberville Bowl.  There would also be showdown between Bears and Black Bears.  (Sorry, Rebel fans.  It had to be done).

Throw a Dr. Pepper logo on that “SEC/Big XII Challenge” and split the games between ESPN and FOX depending on each game’s location.  Money, money, money for all.

Now, again, not all of those games would be home runs.  They would, however, be infinitely more interesting than the total strikeouts that are Florida versus Georgia Southern, Arkansas versus Samford, Tennessee versus Austin Peay, etc.

So if scheduling alliances look so good on paper, what’s the problem?

Read the rest of this entry »

After the SEC and ESPN unveiled the new SEC Network and some of their programming plans for it, Mike Slive referenced the fact that the SEC and CBS had also agreed on a new deal.  As part of that deal, the SEC Network will be able to air an afternoon game each Saturday which means CBS had to agree to nix its exclusive hold on that timeslot.

What else changed in the reworked agreement is unknown.

CBSSports.com’s Jeremy Fowler writes that the terms of that agreement “are expected to remain intact,” meaning the deal will still run through 2023-24 and that the network will continue to pay the SEC $55 million per year for, basically, one game per week and the rights to the SEC Championship Game.

According to Fowler’s source, “the renegotiation also included the exchange of non-revenue assets that weren’t disclosed by a source.”

So did expansion pay off for the SEC if the CBS deal remains the same?

Absolutely.

While each school’s split of the CBS revenue will be smaller — $55 million divided by 15 as opposed to $55 million divided by 13, with the league office always taking a full share — the new revenue stream created as a result of CBS’ acquiescence on the exclusivity front will more than make up for that shrinking portion.  Think of it like a meal… if CBS is the appetizer — cash-wise — and ESPN the main course, the appetizer will get smaller but the main course will get larger.

If Fowler’s source is correct and CBS is not having to pay more money to an expanded SEC, that’s a win for the network.  It’s product can also be rebroadcast by ESPN on the SEC Network which is promotion for CBS’ SEC game of the week programming.  Whether any CBS advertisers will get “bonus” runs on ESPN remains to be seen (Aflac, for example, will get more eyeballs for its weekly in-game trivia question with a re-airing on the SEC Network).

Also, CBS continues to have the first pick of SEC games each week.

For the SEC, they’ve given up nothing (that we know of) other than the potential for greater revenue from CBS.  In exchange, they’ve given themselves the opportunity to air three college football games on their new network each Saturday which should help the channel get cable and satellite carriage more quickly.  And ESPN will be throwing money at the league for the right to broadcast those SEC games whether the network gains immediate carriage or has to fight for it slowly.

One other point: Assuming the SEC is still a juggernaut in 2023-24 — and the league’s financial outlook suggests it will be –  and live football games are still pulling enormous ratings for networks, the SEC will be able to put its game of the week package back on the open market and cut a new massive deal with CBS or another distributor in 10 years.

With the information we currently have in hand, this renegotiation appears to be a win for both the Southeastern Conference and CBS.

Out with the old.  In with the new.

With the SEC/Big East Challenge dying — right along with the Big East as we knew it — the Southeastern Conference has found a new league to play against in the early part of each basketball season.  The SEC confirmed today what had been rumored for months — the Big XII/SEC Challenge will begin play in 2013-14.

The two leagues also recently partnered in taking control of the Sugar Bowl, which should turn into a fast-flowing revenue stream for both conferences.

Naturally, ESPN is behind the new hoops challenge.  All 10 Big XII teams will take part, while only 10 of the SEC’s 14 schools get to participate (for obvious reasons).  Like the old Big East challenge, the title of the series will flip-flop each year with the SEC getting top billing next season.

“The ability to showcase SEC basketball in this kind of conference competition makes this a unique and exciting event for our coaches, student-athletes and fans,” SEC commissioner Mike Slive said via press release.  “We are pleased to be able to work with the Big XII and ESPN to highlight the sport of men’s basketball.”

Here are the matchups for Year One of the Big XII/SEC Challenge.  (Arkansas, Georgia, LSU and Tennessee are the SEC squads not taking part.)

Thursday, November 14th — Texas Tech at Alabama

Monday, December 2nd — Vanderbilt at Texas, Auburn at Iowa State

Thursday, December 5th — Ole Miss at Kansas State, West Virginia at Missouri, TCU at Mississippi State

Friday, December 6th — South Carolina at Oklahoma State, Kentucky vs. Baylor (at Arlington, Texas)

Tuesday, December 10th — Kansas at Florida

Saturday, December 21st — Texas A&M vs. Oklahoma (at Houston, Texas)

In its first year this new challenge might have already equaled the number of interesting matchups created in six years of the SEC/Big East challenge.

Future schedules will be put together with input from ESPN, the SEC and the Big XII.  With the Big XII having a say, it will be interesting to see if Texas and Kansas ever OK a games with Texas A&M and Missouri, respectively.  Obviously, that won’t be happening this year.

The new SEC Network is in for a fight.  Actually, it’s in for several fights.

As we’ve explained over the past several weeks, cable and satellite providers don’t like adding new channels.  That’s because they have to pay fees to new networks in order to carry (and re-sell) their programming.  Inevitably, the more they pay and the more channels they add, the higher your monthly bill rises.  The provider’s costs are passed along to its viewers.

Cable and satellite companies have tried to protect themselves from a large-scale subscriber revolt by bundling similar channels together.  Want premium movie channels?  You pay extra.  Want sports channels?  You pay extra.

More importantly, the family that doesn’t want extra movie or sports channels doesn’t have to pay any increased monthly fees.

But with so many channels now available, viewers are now growing tired of bundling, too.  A person might be willing to pay for the NFL Network and some extra regional sports networks, but that doesn’t mean he wants to be charged for the bull-riding or soccer channels.  Or vice versa.  A la carte programming is a desire shared by many.

On top of the “bundling versus a la carte” debate, many viewers are now choosing to get programming from a specific network by subscribing to that channel — or another provider — online.  More and more families are bringing content into their televisions via the internet with special TV hookups, video game consoles, or other devices/services.

Into all of that upheaval… enter the SEC Network.

Yesterday, Jon Solomon of The Birmingham News provided a broad overview of the current programming landscape and how the SEC Network might fit into it.  We linked you to it in our Sunday headlines, but in case you missed it, we wanted to push it again.  You should read it.

The more we as a society get used to instant answers to our questions — thanks, World Wide Web — the more we expect simple answers.  “When will I get the SEC Network?”  “How much will I pay for the network?”  “Can I just sign up for the network and nothing else?”

Unfortunately, as we’ve mentioned before, there are no simple answers on the SEC Network front.  Everything comes down to you where you live, your cable or satellite provider, and that provider’s willingness to cut a deal with ESPN/SEC.  Solomon’s column simply hammers home the point that how we view television is changing and that will impact the SEC’s new channel.

If you want simple, you’re outta luck.  The process by which providers add networks more often than not gets messy.  And the current television landscape — cable, satellite, bundling, a la carte, online, on-demand — is messier still.

Into all of that upheaval… enter the SEC Network.

The channel will make money and eventually you should be able to see it.  But you’d best be ready for a long, hard slog.  The Pac-12 Network, for example, launched last August and it’s still not on DirecTV.

How patient will SEC fans be?  Probably not very.  The thought of missing three football games every Saturday will likely lead some to pull their hair out, which is exactly what ESPN and the SEC are counting on.  The angrier you become, the more likely you’ll be to call your cable or satellite provider and demand the channel, thus upping the pressure on that provider to yield to ESPN and the SEC’s price demands (which will then be passed back to you).

What’s ironic is that before 2009 and the SEC’s twin contracts with ESPN and CBS, many SEC games weren’t on television.  After four years of nearly every SEC game getting national coverage, there’s now an expectation that any SEC game you want to see will be available.  Come next August, for some, that will no longer be the case.

SEC football coaches aren’t the only ones looking forward to using the SEC Network as a recruiting tool.  SEC basketball coaches are also anxiously awaiting the August 2014 debut of the network.  In a wide-ranging interview at the Columbia Daily Tribune, Missouri basketball coach Frank Haith sounded euphoric about the partnership between the SEC and ESPN.

“It’s huge. We’re going to still get on our national TV stuff, but I think the fact that you’ve got ESPN tied to the network … I mean, there’s other networks out there, but none of them have ESPN tied into it, and I think from a recruiting standpoint, we recruit nationally anyway, but now you’ve got this extra piece saying, “Hey, regardless of where we go recruit your kid, you’re going to see them play on TV. You’re going to see pretty much every one of their games.” I think that’s a huge, huge thing. I’m always thinking recruiting. I think it’s a huge, huge plus for us.”

Haith also opened up on a variety of other topics:

* Is he preparing for his June meeting with the NCAA?

“I’m not preparing for that. There’s nothing to prepare for.”

* Earlier start to practice in the fall.

“I applaud the NCAA. They’ve made some really good (changes).”

* The number of transfers and the culture of college basketball today.

“We live in a microwave society in general. Everybody wants things quick. But in college basketball it’s at another level, and you see kids moving all the time”

* Difference in style of play between Big 12 and SEC

“Our league was way more physical than our league was in the Big 12. Way more physical.”

Asked about a disappointing second season in Columbia after a thirty-win first year at Mizzou, Haith said, “This team personnel-wise could have been better.”  He said it wasn’t though, citing things like inconsistent play, injuries, toughness, chemistry and defense.  ”That’s a challenge for us as a coaching staff, holding guys accountable. It all starts out front. If we don’t have great consistency guarding the ball out front, we’re going to get broken down in the paint. And that’s what happened with this team. We weren’t consistent in guarding the ball out front, and that really hurt our defense.”

1. ACC Schools Were Wise To Stick Together And Not Jump To Big XII

2. SEC Commitment Comparison

3. LSU, Florida…Just Man Up And Stop Whining

4. Breaking Down School-By-School SEC Cash Flow And Subsidies

5. Sooner’s Stoops: What’s The Bottom Of The SEC Done? (Also See Saban Responds and Someone Alert OU’s Stoops)

6. Let The Conspiracy Theories Begin: ESPN, SEC Partnership Raising Eyebrows

7. SEC Recruiting Notebook: Auburn Lands A Big One

SEC Football

1. Is Auburn still shopping for a transfer quarterback? “We’ve got two guys currently, we’ve got three coming in. We feel like all of them can play.”

2. The trial of  former Auburn player Dakota Mosley - who was prominent in ESPN’s coverage of failed synthetic marijuana tests – remains tentatively scheduled for June 10.

3. Auburn assistant coach Dameyune Craig is getting attention for his work on the recruiting trail. (Also see our SEC Recruiting Notebook from earlier today).

4. Nick Saban with an endorsement of a power conference schedule.  He likes what the Big Ten is doing – moving away from playing FCS schools.  “I’m for five conferences – everybody playing everybody in those five conferences.”

5. Jeff Schultz on the Alabama coach : ”When Saban speaks, everybody listens now.” Pat Forde: “There is no longer a viable excuse for the rich not to play a nine-game conference schedule.”

6. Saban updates spring practice injuries – including running back Derrick Henry.

7. Texas A&M quarterback Johnny Manziel and his NFL critics.

8. Georgia offensive coordinator Mike Bobo is guarding against complacency.  ”I’m not the most popular guy with our offensive football team right now.”

9. Tennessee secondary looks thin after the departure of cornerback Daniel Gray.

10. Some marquee non-conference matchups involving SEC teams.

Bob Stoops/SEC

11. David Climer on Bob Stoops’ comments regarding the SEC.  ”The Oklahoma coach is right.”  Top six SEC teams went 30-0 against the bottom eight in 2012.

12. Matt Hayes disagrees: “Last year, the Big 12 had one team in the top 10 of the final BCS regular season poll. The SEC had six.”

13. Joe Walljasper: “Look, we don’t judge the Jacksons on the merits of Rebbie and La Toya.”

14. MrSEC’s take  -  top to bottom –the SEC dominates everyone else come bowl season.

SEC Basketball

15. Long rumored – finally happening. Georgia assistant coach Kwanza Johnson leaving for a job with TCU. Bulldogs only getting Florida, Tennessee and Kentucky on the road next year.  Coach Mark Fox:  ”Those are our biggest draws, and we don’t have that at home, so that’s concerning,”

16. I count five former SEC players on this list of those invited to NBA combine.  One of them is former Mizzou point guard Phil Pressey.

17. The question that will be asked all year – Kentucky or Louisville?

18. Referees could be getting some leeway on players elbowing an opponent above the shoulders. Also some changes coming to the block/charge call.

Extras

19. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany will be deposed in Ed O’Bannon lawsuit against NCAA.

20. . Concern over a toe was apparently the reason why former Alabama running back Eddie Lacy fell to late in the second round of the NFL draft.

21. Jeff Pearlman: “ Were it not for (Donald) Trump, (Tim) Tebow may very well have a job right now.” (If you’ve ever watched the ESPN documentary-  ”Small Potatoes: Who Killed The USFL?” – you’ll know why Pearlman’s comments make sense.)

Apparently Tuesday was “Go After the SEC Day” around the nation.  First, Bob Stoops called the league’s reputation a product of “propaganda.”  Then The Sporting News’ Matt Hayes conveyed word that folks are now concerned that the SEC and ESPN will work to put more league teams in the new College Football Playoff:

“Sports Business Daily reports that ESPN will own the SEC channel and share profits evenly with the conference.  The SEC owns the content.  ESPN owns television rights to all of the new College Football Playoff.

See where this is headed?

‘If I were anyone other than the SEC,’ says one industry source, ‘I’d be more than a little uneasy about the whole thing.’

If there weren’t already claims from the West Coast, Midwest and Southwest that the SEC has received preferential treatment from the BCS all these years, imagine what happens the first time the most successful conference in the game gets two (or more) teams in the new College Football Playoff.”

First, Hayes is correct that there will be conspiracy theories.  Thanks to the power of the internet, we no longer have any legitimate champions.  The kind of “the refs were in the bag” or “the TV networks wanted ‘em” talk that used to be heard in barbershops can now be shared with the world via social media and blogs and straight-up media websites.  We no longer crown champs.  Instead, we claim that Spygate or Bountygate or stolen signs in baseball (the World Series-winning Phillies) or spending (“The Yankees and Red Sox just buy their titles”) is the real reason teams win titles.  Hell, SEC fans do this to one another.  If it’s your school that wins, it’s legitimate.  If someone else win, there’s been some hanky-panky.

Second, Hayes is also correct that ESPN’s ownership of everything under the sun does make for some potential conflicts of interest.  Now, it’s doubtful that the new playoff selection committee — whatever that group turns out to be — will be on the phone with ESPN discussing who the network wants in the field.  That playoff will be watched by millions upon millions regardless of who’s playing in it.  But throw logic out the window, the potential for skullduggery will leave many claiming skullduggery.  Such is life in a world where ESPN has its hands in every pie.

Third, Hayes’ comment — “Imagine what happens the first time the most successful conference in the game gets two (or more) teams in the new College Football Playoff” — sums up the feeling we’ve been writing about since the playoff was announced.  Outside the SEC, no one wants the league to get more than one team into the playoff.  While there’s the slight potential that ESPN will try to influence the selection committee, there’s also the potential for selection committee members to succumb to their own biases in order to limit the number of SEC squads in the playoff.  Funny, no one seems to be worried much about that.

Finally, there’s a crack in the argument that the SEC and ESPN are two big bodies in cahoots — ESPN is in cahoots with everyone.  Who owns the rights to all the ACC games and is working on a new network for that conference?  ESPN.  Who partnered with Texas on its network?  ESPN.  Who has TV deals in place with the Big Ten and Pac-12 and Big East as well?  ESPN?

Yes, the SEC Network figures to be the most profitable of all those deals, but to suggest that ESPN will somehow push SEC teams into the new playoff more often is to ignore the fact that the network would have to snub all its other partners to do so.

Oh, you can count on conspiracy theories.  But that doesn’t mean the theories are reality.