Pac media rights negotiations: Potential partner 'unlikely' to make a deal
according to Sports Illustrated.
36 Replies
H
HOO86
3y
Most of ESPN/ABC the slots are spoken for when they add the Big 12 to the ACC, SEC, American, and MAC. Fox wanted USC and UCLA. They aren't pursuing the rest. Amazon is insisting on first pick each week of games. The PAC 12 is insisting that best game be on Network TV. So Amazon may back off.
(In response to this post by Stech)
3y
it over. The slow death is the worst!
(In response to this post by HOO86)
M
Mercury
3y
its all about PR versus self interest
Big 10 dont want to harm the reputation by grabbing more PAC 10 teams to distroy the conference
Oregon and Washington dont want to be the first to leave and as PAC 10 best 2 brands destroy the conference
Big 12 really dont want to be raider and eat up the PAC 10
The other academic schools in the PAC 10 REALLY dont want to be partnered with the Big 12 schools. Especially Utah, Cal Stanford)
Arizona might but they are 'within the state' kinda linked with Arizona state and they dont want to see either programs left to dry...
Who makes the move//// and when. probably in the dark drousing days of Late May June when nothing else is going on. (sorta like when the ACC made the initial move with cuse BC and Miami
grab your popcorn
(In response to this post by Stech)
What makes you think that the B1G cares about harming the PAC?….
They already effectively gutted the Conf by taking USC and UCLA…..They’ll take Cal and Stanford and Washington and maybe Oregon. Any delay is simply part of a plan that is already thought out. If the PAC goes away, the B1G won’t lose a minute of sleep.
(In response to this post by Mercury)
M
Mercury
3y
Actually , while USC and UCLA was a grab,... the PAC 10 could exist...The UNIVERSITY PRESIDENTS, yes they do have a role, do not want their institutions to look bad, and they have advised the Big 10 leadership on their direction. . For joe six pack fan, that means NOTHING, but to them its everything, and they are the CEO of the university's not the AD not the fans, not the contributors but they are....
Still bottomline, things will happen in a deliberate and orchestrated pace, and the website's and experts no nothing about it.
(In response to this post by CrystalCoveHokie)
E
EDGEMAN
3y
And you are correct...they don't give a crap about harming any conference if it brings them more money.
(In response to this post by CrystalCoveHokie)
T
tcc_dc
3y
into the BIG. Says what we have heard before they do not want to make the move that will officially kill the PAC.
** Edited by tcc_dc at 5/11/2023, 3:46:25 PM
Link:
Youtube
(In response to this post by Stech)
B1G already took one tire off the race car..the Pac 12...
is running on 3 tires right now. The Pac-12 is severely damaged with out the two L.A. schools. If the B1G was so concerned about not being the conference that killed the Pac-12, why did they take its two most important members? I guess the B1G wants the Big 12 to take off 2 more tires and the B1G will go in and take the last. IMHO, the B1G is responsible for the eventual demise of the Pac-12 even if the Big 12 goes in first and takes 4 or 6 Pac-12 schools.
(In response to this post by tcc_dc)
3y
Here is the ultimate power move if the BIG wanted to get creative.
- Take the entire PAC but put them under the BIG umbrella as a subsidiary
- PAC subsidiary gets a separate contract
- The new BIG umbrella operates as a relegation conference, with PAC being the lower level
- Top level gets the BIG contract money each year, relegation level gets lower contract money each year
- BIG gets one auto qualifier for playoffs from top level, but both the top level and the relegation level can qualify for at large bids to the expanded playoff.
BIG would then control coast to coast. Not have to worry about sharing money from their big contract. Get more chances of getting teams into the playoff. And would effectively control a third of all college football "P5" content. PAC schools would survive and maybe get a decent contract by being connected to the BIG umbrella.
(In response to this post by tcc_dc)
T
Truthahn
3y
** Edited by Truthahn at 5/12/2023, 11:59:10 AM
(In response to this post by tcc_dc)
Who is "they"? The B1G or UO/UW?
(In response to this post by tcc_dc)
3y
IMHO.
(In response to this post by tcc_dc)
3y
Conference invade before they do it again. In their minds (not mine) they will then spin the next ones they take, as rescuing them. So in their minds, they are the good guys.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
Interesting take. I wish the ACC was in the bidding for some of these PAC
properties if it all goes down. I realize there are big obstacles here, but I wonder if the suits in the ACC even have a creative thought in their head about ANYTHING.
(In response to this post by Stech)
What schools that are left would move the needle?
(In response to this post by Maroon Baboon)
Not sure. But the more that are taken, the better. I'll mention a few here.
Getting the ACCN into a bunch more states should help. So I think I'd look at taking a bunch of West Coast schools, one per state. The more that we take, the easier it is on travel, and the more appeal (geographically, regionally) that we have. I'd look at 1 California school and 1 Texas school. Then build from there. I think Washington and Oregon are big brands, and I'd take them for sure. I'd look at ASU or Arizona. I also like Colorado and possibly Utah. That's seven schools from seven states.
I just don't think the B1G plan to just take 2 West Coast teams is a good plan.
But I'd like to at least see the ACC make an attempt to do something like this; at least do a study and show some interest. To me, it's a win-win. Many of these Pac schools don't want to go BigXII and don't want to be on streaming only. They get East Coast exposure, while having plenty of opponents to play in their timezone. The ACC needs fresh blood, and could use some national exposure.
I think the ACC might be done in 2036 if not sooner. Might as well try something different. And cool.
You could have three 7 team pods (3 home, 3 away). Then four more games vs. the other pods (2 home and 2 away total). East Coast teams would go West once, West Coast teams would go East twice.
Play the title game on campus and cut the pretense.
(In response to this post by VaTechHokiesACC)
E
EDGEMAN
3y
Calling it the Pac-10 because USC-W & UCLA are as good as gone.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
T
Truthahn
3y
Keep the P10 together. Put them on the ACCN. Rebrand it the PACCN. That gives the ACCN six new states, and a late-night game each week, some featuring ACC teams playing a PAC team away.
Seems like there must be a way to make that work, so there is some increase in revenue for the ACC and the PAC.
But leave the conferences separate, aside from some cross-scheduling, at least in the revenue sports. So, no significant extra travel.
Something like that was floated last summer, but I guess the PAC did not bite. Maybe they are at that point now.
(In response to this post by EDGEMAN)
E
EDGEMAN
3y
...all ACC and P10 teams. That's 10 more mouths to feed with approximately the same overall revenue. I know we'll get more money for having teams in the west coast, but is it enough to make up the difference? Most likely not, and we would be taking home a smaller slice of the pie. That makes the gulf between the P2 and the ACC even wider.
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
E
EDGEMAN
3y
The SEC has two cable channels, although the second one only operates during football season.
(In response to this post by Truthahn)
E
EDGEMAN
3y
...it up.
(In response to this post by Stech)
2
2hhoop3
3y
the guy that writes this is a Southern Cal mouthpiece and Ourand and Marchand have been in bed with Yormark and the Big 12 from early on. These guys may prove true when all is said and done, however, I think we would all be best served to recognize whether new reports actually plow new ground, continue to prop up the previous circular reporting or carry out an expanded propaganda agenda. I still await the actual news conference or story where network execs and Big 12 officials go on record with deal specifics. Until this actually happens I look at SI, SBJ and others more as propaganda mouthpieces than factual news providers. They clearly seem, at least IMHO, trying to promote the Big 12 and put the final nails in the coffin of the PAC 12.
(In response to this post by Stech)
3y
by adding PAC schools that have not been invited to the Big10 or the SEC.
No one is talking about more money for the schools. No one is talking more time slots for the Big12 football programs. Not to say there aren't extremely good programs in the PAC - but what, exactly, do the current Big12 programs get out of adding PAC schools?
I don't see it. We already have our media contract. We already are arguably the best basketball conference (sorry ACC). We already have a firm pathway for at least one, if not two teams in the playoffs.
What the hell do we get out of the deal? A better media contract? If so, I want to see it.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
3y
listen to SI and then write that you don't, since it is an SI article? I am just trying to understand your point of view better.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
3y
I listen to either SI or SBJ. I think you misunderstood. Both are rapidly approaching the point of not being fit for birdcage liner when it comes to media and conference realignment matters.
(In response to this post by Stech)
3y
That said, it's a CR article and I think appropriate for this board. People can come to their own conclusions, but I think that the PAC is big in trouble in getting a substantial TV deal. What do you think? On a scale of 1-10 with 10 being an incredible TV/GOR deal, what number do you give them on getting a TV/GOR deal in the next couple of years or less?
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
3y
definitely appropriate for the board and all my original post intended to confer was that these articles need to be viewed with a healthy dose of inquiry into source, motive and what they factually say versus possibly speculate with bias.
As far as your question, the closer they get to 2024 the worse their prospects get. Right now, I would give them a 6 trending down as time passes. It was always going to be tough losing USC and UCLA. Their negotiations are made tougher by Yormark's effective PR BS campaign being spun by his media buddies. They say they have a deal but, NOBODY has gone on record with specifics and that allows Yormark to "sell" wavering PAC 12 schools on a better deal in the Big 12. The PAC 12 is in a tough position because the idiot Larry Scott thought he could play hardball with ESPN and others, the useless PAC12 Presidents and ADs went along and now ESPN and others are telling them those former offers are not available anymore with USC and UCLA gone and they are choking on the new numbers.
(In response to this post by Stech)
R
RJHokie
3y
the PAC 12’s media issues which are responsible for USC and UCLA jumping ship. Plus with the conference members mostly being on the Left Coast didn’t help matters wrt exposure to eastern viewership.
** Edited by RJHokie at 5/10/2023, 10:07:05 PM
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
2
2hhoop3
3y
and a fraud. He sold them a bill of goods on the network because he woefully underestimated the need for distribution leverage. That's fine, he banked on his ability and then proved he was the smallest midget in the room.
He compounded the mistake by doubling down instead of admitting his error and the second swipe at the apple was worse than the first. He was not managed, monitored or challenged and, if the employees scapegoated for the Comcast overpayment prevail in their lawsuit, it is evidence that in addition to gross negligence Scott likely committed outright fraud. The PAC12 schools Boards of Trustees need to be taking critical looks at their ADs and Presidents and asking themselves tough questions.
(In response to this post by RJHokie)
R
RJHokie
3y
of the conference. Gross negligence is putting it mildly. What Scott and the presidents did was criminally insane.
(In response to this post by 2hhoop3)
3y
the dust settles ? Might be some big surprises down the road for some of the teams !
(In response to this post by RJHokie)