Welcome to SECTalk.com
|Welcome to SECTalk.com -- The Home of 6 Straight National Titles!
You are currently accessing our site as a guest which means you can't access all of our features such as social groups, sports betting, and many more. By joining our free community you will have access to all of these great features as well as to participating in our forums, contacting other members, and much more. Registration only takes a minute and SECTalk.com is absolutely free, so please join today!
If you have any problems registering or signing in, please contact us.
Top High Fived
Posted 29 March 2012 - 04:12 PM
Turns out he'll be making around 600k more a year at USC. Can't blame him one bit for the change. Now he'll know the difference between UK basketball compared to Kansas basketball.
Posted 29 March 2012 - 04:44 PM
Definitely true, but did anyone catch PTI yesterday? They had no clue why Martin would come here, but more to the point one of them said leaving the ACC was one of the most boneheaded moves ever. Sure there was a hint of luck we got that SEC invite 20+ years ago, but I'd say things have worked out a little better (how's that for understatement of the year?) for our overall athletic dept. and school than if we were stuck in the ACC.
IMO USC leaving the ACC was not so much a boneheaded move - we were stifled under the thumbs of the Tobacco Road schools, and would continue to be today had we stayed. Our situation was not too unlike what the Big 12 schools have been dealing with with Texas, although from different perspectives: inequities in recruiting practices and academic standards as opposed to inequities in revenue generation and distribution. Although the 60s and 70s were a far different animal in terms of media revenues than it is today, and I'm not sure that any of the NC schools get any bigger slice of the TV pie than the other ACC schools (doubtful).
But the BIGGEST mistake by far by the USC administration was that we didn't have another football conference to move into after leaving the ACC. Other schools with bigger names, traditions, and alumni bases could afford to go the Independent route that USC did: had they been in FB conferences, they would automatically be leaders in facilities, stadiums, fanbase support, and attractive television-rights contracts. USC was in a small state with a mediocre history: we would have no choice but be followers instead of leaders.
But when we went independent, we had no one to follow, and therefore no one to keep up with. And the growth of our athletic programs suffered as a result of it, and has only gotten to the point where we are more on a common playing field with the other SEC programs since Spurrier came on board. The SEC TV contract monies have played the largest roles in that, IMO. Better late than never, I guess..
|Topic||Started By||Stats||Last Post Info|
- 0 replies
- 194 views
- 0 replies
- 424 views
- 12 replies
- 411 views
- 1 reply
- 179 views
- 0 replies
- 12 views