There’s a few reasons it might get blocked but I don’t feel like wading through the expansion thread sewer. One major reason is the middle of the road SEC teams that get to reap the benefits of the ESPN tv deal might not be that stoked about their TV appearances getting bumped down from ABC/ESPN to ESPNU/SEC network. If Texas and OU join, that’s the last you’ll see of USCe, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri and others on any of the major networks.
At the end of the Day Money Talk, and BS walks. If they offer a bit more money do you think these lower SEC teams care about not playing on ABC/ESPN for recurring purposes maybe yes but other than that I would say they vote Yes. But I can see Old Miss or whipping boy Miss St. saying NO.
The billions upon billions of dollars won’t make it a very tough sell… to the administrations at least. The football departments at a&m and fla might raise ****, but a spoon full of Benjamins makes the medicine go down.
We’ve seen 2 SEC teams in a 4 team playoff. If it goes to 12 team playoff with this conference expansion I think the minimum # will be 4 SEC teams in the playoff.
Can you imagine a 9-3 **** team not getting in?? We think they cry about recruiting rankings. The tears will be apocalyptic
Except the TV deal has already been brokered and signed. The contract between the SEC and ESPN kicks in for the 2024 season. Adding more teams to the conference just means that TV money will get divided between more teams. Just because the conference is expanding, doesn't mean their contracts automatically increase. That contract doesn't expire until 2034.
| 1 |  Alabama | 10-0 | - | @ArkansasW52-3 | vs #4Notre DameW31-14 | |
| 2 |  Notre Dame | 10-0 | - | - | vs #1AlabamaL31-14 | |
| 3 |  Clemson | 9-1 | - | - | vs #3Ohio StateL49-28 | |
| 4 |  Ohio State | 5-0 | - | - | vs #2ClemsonW49-28 | |
| 5 |  Texas A&M | 7-1 | - | - | vs #13North CarolinaW41-27 | |
| 6 |  Iowa State | 8-2 | 1 | - | vs #25OregonW34-17 | |
| 7 |  Florida | 8-2 | 1 | vsLSUL37-34 | vs #6OklahomaL55-20 | |
| 8 |  Georgia | 7-2 | 1 | @ #25MissouriW49-14 | vs #8CincinnatiW24-21 | |
| 9 |  Cincinnati | 8-0 | 1 | - | vs #9GeorgiaL24-21 | |
| 10 |  Oklahoma | 7-2 | 1 | - | vs #7FloridaW55-20 | |
| 11 |  Indiana | 6-1 | 1 | - | vsOle MissL26-20 | |
| 12 |  Coastal Carolina | 11-0 | 1 | @TroyW42-38 | vsLibertyL37-34 |
Really? It seems counter productive for ESPN to offer more when the deal is already done. It's getting to the point where they're just bidding against themselves for the rights.
You didn’t know -
Definitely. Contracts aren’t set in stone. That deal may be done, but that deal was agreed to on materially different grounds - namely, it most likely didn’t account for the revenue that might be added by bringing on the only school in the country with enough of a following to garner its own network. There is literally no reason why espn wouldn’t want to add Texas and Oklahoma. It’s a huge windfall, even if it means restructuring an already astronomical deal. And, I’d bet fox would literally kill to have that sec contract, now that two of their 4 biggest draws are going to the competition.
Well of course they want to add the other two teams, I just don’t see why they would pay more than the $3B the contract is already for. Let’s say the SEC says “hey we added Texas and OU, we need more TV money” and ESPN says “well we already have a deal for 3 billion”. Is someone else gonna jump in and offer more than 3 billion dollars?
I mean I wouldn't say it can't happen but let's look at the possible suiters. ESPN has the 2024-2034 deal currently set at $3B. The same $3B that CBS balked at. Maybe Fox might jump into the fray but they lost their *** already betting on Texas and OU when they bought big12 rights. They might still be gun shy. NBC doesn't care. Not sure who else can pony up nearly that kind of money. Also, it hasn't really been brought up but the Longhorn network has been a huge flop. That might take some shine off their appeal.
