Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Conference Realignment
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="stinger 1957" data-source="post: 1004545" data-attributes="member: 1682"><p>I think you guys need to get to the final understanding that all this realignment is about brand value NOT TV markets and definitely not academics!</p><p></p><p>IMO what you say depends on whether you're thinking short term or long term. Brands come and go with winning and losing. Many of the SEC people are making the argument about brands because that is what they are hanging their hat on. I would take both brands and media mkts. CFB is in massive change as we all know and the product is going to present itself very differently going fwd I'm pretty sure. Academics may become much more important ( along with endowments ) going fwd if we end up with half or less of higher education institutions which I have seen predicted more than once and makes a lot of sense when i look at the big picture. I could see a lot of the rural schools in the SEC with problems in coming years. Thus if I'm right and certainly that could be questioned I would want to go with the long term plan rather than hang my hat on brand alone. I remember when GT was one of the best brands in the country and have watched that go away over the years. I remember what 'bama was in 2007 and before, certainly not what it has become. It can head back the other way if they don't keep winning.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="stinger 1957, post: 1004545, member: 1682"] I think you guys need to get to the final understanding that all this realignment is about brand value NOT TV markets and definitely not academics! IMO what you say depends on whether you're thinking short term or long term. Brands come and go with winning and losing. Many of the SEC people are making the argument about brands because that is what they are hanging their hat on. I would take both brands and media mkts. CFB is in massive change as we all know and the product is going to present itself very differently going fwd I'm pretty sure. Academics may become much more important ( along with endowments ) going fwd if we end up with half or less of higher education institutions which I have seen predicted more than once and makes a lot of sense when i look at the big picture. I could see a lot of the rural schools in the SEC with problems in coming years. Thus if I'm right and certainly that could be questioned I would want to go with the long term plan rather than hang my hat on brand alone. I remember when GT was one of the best brands in the country and have watched that go away over the years. I remember what 'bama was in 2007 and before, certainly not what it has become. It can head back the other way if they don't keep winning. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
How many points did Georgia Tech score against Cumberland in 1916?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Conference Realignment
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top