Quote:
Originally Posted by blake5676
Apologies again for my shoddy memory, even though it's immensely difficult to tell you two knob-slobbers apart, but what exactly was the argument from your side in regards to the SEC network?
I'm sure it might've changed a time or two, but if I recall correctly it was either
1) it wouldn't get picked up by all the networks or have the coverage it's already locked up
OR
2) the $1.30 asking price was laughable and they'd settle somewhere much lower since they were CRAZY to expect that much
Help me out here.
|
The argument is all about whether it's better to be in the Big ? than in the SEC (
).
One front in this war was that the money isn't really that great in the SEC, because the Big ?'s (new) media contract came close to the SEC's old one. The counterpoint to that was "We'll see what the money is like in the SEC once the TV deals are renegotiated", and "The Big 12 doesn't even have a network". The counterpunch to that was "Well, your network is barely going to be on any TVs." This puts the lie to that. The SEC is approaching the point where they have every game nationally televised, at least on cable.