+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: College Sports and Conference Realignment (/forum-637.html)
+---- Thread: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment (/thread-768431.html)
The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - JRsec - 01-28-2016 09:53 PM
I. The Current Conditions
Five years ago I told a group of my SEC friends on another site that the market model would be a passing phase on the way to the end goal of the networks. One reason that ESPN's overhead is too high is because they purposefully overpaid for the realignment that has already occurred. Their goal was to divide the interest of the largest states into multiple conferences. That's why they were behind a failed deal that would have taken N.C. State and Virginia Tech to the SEC, why they were for taking a large single market in Missouri away from potential rival FOX, and why they were for fragmenting the Texas market by backing A&M to the SEC, and why they were dead set against the SEC gaining a majority hold in Florida by taking F.S.U.. It's also why the sewed up the best product of the Old Big East in an effort to thwart the unleveraged expansion of the BTN into the Northeast. And why the later spent foolishly to tether Bevo away from the PAC.
To gain this control they were willing to pay multiple conferences for the total households subscribing to ESPN's bundle within the same duplicated states. But, this was just a temporary move on their part, and one that now will come to an end.
Five years ago I said that a saturation model would replace the footprint model which was but a carrot to move the product around that they wanted moved. By saturation I meant that in the state of Florida if the Gators drew 45% of the viewers, the Seminoles 40% of the viewers and the Canes the other 15% (numbers just for example) that they would only pay the SEC for 45% of the state of Florida and the ACC 60%.
Well the saturation model has now been replaced by market forces with a more far reaching method of fragmenting costs, streaming. The possibility of one day paying the conferences only for the actual number of viewers is changing the whole landscape of realignment.
The new winners of realignment will be those conferences with the most brand on brand competition whether that is football, basketball, or any other sport. The size of a markets won't matter when conferences are rewarded for actual viewers. The need to take a Virginia and North Carolina school is now only as important as the number of dedicated viewers they bring. In that regard the size of market is a plus, but it is no longer the slam dunk reason for the addition.
II. Economic Factors
While it is no longer 2008 the result of QE may very well be the same protracted stagnation that Japan has suffered for over 2 decades. Couple that with the dying out of the last two vested generations of the middle class in American history (WWII & Boomers) and the anticipation of well heeled donors in large numbers has passed and along with it the first decline in attendance at college football in decades is underway. In part this is happening because the rise in donations to buy tickets and the ticket prices themselves are causing more young fans to opt out and go the route of cable which to a much more tech savvy generation means those with the skill sets to appreciate and utilize cheaper delivery modes.
This has the networks, the conferences, the schools, and the consumers pausing to reevaluate their present positions. The SEC would have to add oodles of basketball schools to gain a larger toehold there, so they won't. Instead they will simply spend more football wealth on basketball and pursue growth by that method. The quickest way now for the SEC to add value is by seeking solid football brands to add to its already staunch inventory.
Conversely the Big 10 can't add enough football brands effectively to boost its content. It can however dominate college basketball and use the wealth of its region and alumni to build better football programs among its member schools. This doesn't mean that the Big 10 will not add football brands, but it does mean they can maximize their position by strengthening what it is that they already do wonderfully.
The net result of both will be better basketball and better football and probably a future alliance taking advantage of their inherent and historical rivalry.
The PAC will expand markets into areas where a higher percentage of viewers are engaged. The Big 12 has been a conference in need of scope and the PAC has been a conference in need of carriage and dedicated viewers. The PAC has scope and scholarship. The Big 12 has the second highest % of viewers based on market size in the nation just ahead of the Big 10 and just behind the SEC.
III. ESPN's Cuts
$250 million by 2017 is a tall order but not an insurmountable one. It won't take long for strategies to be reassessed and replaced before things start in earnest again to consolidate product into areas where it will be the most valuable, and to do so in ways that cut costs without punishing the schools.
Almost every conference leadership and office expenses eats one full member's share of the profits. Eliminating two conferences is the equivalent of eliminating two schools from the pie. Consolidating into three somewhat more compact regional conferences cuts down on the legal work for ESPN and could eliminate 5 more schools from the pie while delivering better product placement, guaranteeing the participation of all three regions through the semifinals in football, and permitting a wild card selection which could again provide a way to balance audience participation for the networks when needed.
For the schools regionalism cuts down on the travel for minor sports, particularly if divisional play is emphasized and the divisions are regionally grouped. It also guarantees that the alumni of the schools involved have a better chance to drive a reasonable distance to the away games. So it also serves to enhance ticket sales and attendance, not to mention the stands are a lot fuller when the fans care about playing the opponent.
IV. Future Realignment
I wouldn't be surprised if a push for consolidation occurs when everyone is up to speed with the new environment for broadcasting athletics and have some reasonable idea of what kind of transition period will transpire before streaming is a fuller reality. Since a school joins a conference with the intentions to stay and that kind of change is costly and cumbersome I don't see any further expansion based purely upon market models occurring.
Product placement and the most reasonable approach to shoring up weaknesses will be the new plan for expansion.
Based upon that I wouldn't be surprised to see no new networks formed. Those that are in operation will be utilized. The LHN could be converted into a second PAC site.
Perhaps we will see something like Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and one of T.C.U. or Baylor to the PAC 12 to form 4 divisions of 5 schools:
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Colorado, Baylor/TCU, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah
Arizona, Arizona State, California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal
Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
And a Big 10 that takes 6 of the best basketball, academic, and lacrosse schools of the ACC, while the SEC takes 6 of its football first schools.
Why? Such a move enhances ESPN's value in the basketball first schools by placing their content with that of the Big 10. ESPN keeps the T1 deal for Big 10 football and T1 for Big 10 basketball will have so much content it won't matter who has T2. ESPN cuts around 60% of the payout to those 6 schools but enhances their advertising appeal for the rights they retain.
ESPN enhances tremendously the content value for SEC football for the total expense of 6 schools. They now have so much SEC content they can sublease part of it to FOX to alleviate overhead and gain FOX's cooperation in the new approach for both networks. They will need it if they are to gain a % each of the PACN in exchange for improving PAC distribution and payout. Morphing the LHN helps here and the expenses are still split 50/50 for the product they were essentially sharing 50/50.
In the process ESPN no longer has to pay half of 26 million each for two Big 12 properties, or all of 21.5 million for 3 ACC properties. In total they should approach $130 million plus in reductions in overhead while maximizing their content values in hoops and football without having to give up access to anyone. Cutting a channel out like ESPN classic and more talking heads would clear the rest of the requirements.
Then they could spend their time planning with FOX for the transition to streaming while realizing that they still have the best basketball and football product to be offered but now those titles belong to the Big 10 and SEC.
While this might not be what happens, it certainly is a possibility that has to be considered.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - bluesox - 01-28-2016 10:13 PM
I would agree a pac 20 with texas, texas tech, ou, Ok state, KU, k state, x, and x solves the problem. Disagree that you need to destroy the ACC post a pac 20 forming. I probably would create a 18-20 ACC to go along with a pac 20, big 10 and SEC with a final 4 of conference champs. You could leave the big 10 and SEC at 14 or switch a couple school's into the big 10 and SEC. Total number of school's would be 68.
Pac 20: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, OU, Ok state, KU, Kstate
ACC: Uconn, Temple, Cincy + maybe gtown and st johns for 20
SEC: WVU
Big 10: Iowa state, Missouri
If the pac 12 has problems with baylor and tcu you could switch them to the acc/sec or not invite them at all and go with 18 teams. Let the best of the MWC, CUSA and AAC form a 20-30 team league.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - Lord Stanley - 01-28-2016 10:21 PM
I think you give too much credit to ESPN. I doubt they are that smart, strategic, or willing to play the long game.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - JRsec - 01-28-2016 10:24 PM
(01-28-2016 10:21 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote: I think you give too much credit to ESPN. I doubt they are that smart, strategic, or willing to play the long game.
Necessity is the mother of invention. Otherwise necessity is just a mother!
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - miko33 - 01-28-2016 10:38 PM
In 10 to 20 years, football at the collegiate and pro level will be so altered, that it will become a marginal sport. The model will ultimately break because the sport is decay from the bottom up. We're seeing it start in the youth leagues now. Soon that will filter up to the middle schools, then high school, college and finally the NFL. Parents are going to hold their kids out from playing football. No doubt football tries to compensate by making the sport "safer". The irony will be that they will try to improve the armor - which will show their fundamental idiocy - and that will result in MORE injury in the long run. They will try to go after the concussions much more aggressively and will once again miss the mark completely. I believe they will come to the conclusion that it's not the acute trauma brought on by being knocked out that is the primary issue of CTE, it's the chronic impacts the brain experiences on almost every play where the player handles the ball or every play when you are a lineman. All of those jarring hits that regularly rock the brain within the skull, but does not result in any concussions. This is a structural problem within the sport that cannot be avoided without fundamentally changing the way it's played.
That fundamental change will be the ultimate undoing of the sport. We like the violence. Without it, football dies in the long term. The feedstock needed to keep the system running are going to dry up. As more is learned about CTE, kids will be forbidden to play. Lone exception will be the poor rural and inner city kids who will need an avenue out of poverty. Then the sport will be deemed as "racist" and/or exploitative because only the poor and the minorities will be the primary players in the future.
This is all JMHO, but I'm almost certain this will be how it will pan out. A lot of the discussions about realignment, ESPN, FOX, conference owned networks and big fat TV contracts are little more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. A much bigger issue is in the near horizon and it's going to be the real fundamental game changer.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - JRsec - 01-28-2016 10:48 PM
(01-28-2016 10:38 PM)miko33 Wrote: In 10 to 20 years, football at the collegiate and pro level will be so altered, that it will become a marginal sport. The model will ultimately break because the sport is decay from the bottom up. We're seeing it start in the youth leagues now. Soon that will filter up to the middle schools, then high school, college and finally the NFL. Parents are going to hold their kids out from playing football. No doubt football tries to compensate by making the sport "safer". The irony will be that they will try to improve the armor - which will show their fundamental idiocy - and that will result in MORE injury in the long run. They will try to go after the concussions much more aggressively and will once again miss the mark completely. I believe they will come to the conclusion that it's not the acute trauma brought on by being knocked out that is the primary issue of CTE, it's the chronic impacts the brain experiences on almost every play where the player handles the ball or every play when you are a lineman. All of those jarring hits that regularly rock the brain within the skull, but does not result in any concussions. This is a structural problem within the sport that cannot be avoided without fundamentally changing the way it's played.
That fundamental change will be the ultimate undoing of the sport. We like the violence. Without it, football dies in the long term. The feedstock needed to keep the system running are going to dry up. As more is learned about CTE, kids will be forbidden to play. Lone exception will be the poor rural and inner city kids who will need an avenue out of poverty. Then the sport will be deemed as "racist" and/or exploitative because only the poor and the minorities will be the primary players in the future.
This is all JMHO, but I'm almost certain this will be how it will pan out. A lot of the discussions about realignment, ESPN, FOX, conference owned networks and big fat TV contracts are little more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. A much bigger issue is in the near horizon and it's going to be the real fundamental game changer.
All of that is quite possible. But as with any market producer the last ounce will be milked out of it before it goes and when it goes it will be slowly.
BTW you left out another important factor in the lack of sustainability of the game. The economy as a whole is leaving the middle class with less disposable income than before. Sports as a whole has ridden a bubble that will pop. The first avenue of handling CTE's will be limiting the number of years of play with full contact. I'm betting on 8. High School & College. The pros will feel the pinch of the declining middle class first. With pay for play around the corner in college I can see the networks vying for college ball to be the pinnacle. That will pay for a little while but without the allure of professional money even those inner city kids will look elsewhere.
Face it Miko, it could be the rebirth of my love, baseball. It has the fewest CTE's of Football, basketball, soccer, lacrosse, and volleyball.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - miko33 - 01-28-2016 10:57 PM
(01-28-2016 10:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:(01-28-2016 10:38 PM)miko33 Wrote: In 10 to 20 years, football at the collegiate and pro level will be so altered, that it will become a marginal sport. The model will ultimately break because the sport is decay from the bottom up. We're seeing it start in the youth leagues now. Soon that will filter up to the middle schools, then high school, college and finally the NFL. Parents are going to hold their kids out from playing football. No doubt football tries to compensate by making the sport "safer". The irony will be that they will try to improve the armor - which will show their fundamental idiocy - and that will result in MORE injury in the long run. They will try to go after the concussions much more aggressively and will once again miss the mark completely. I believe they will come to the conclusion that it's not the acute trauma brought on by being knocked out that is the primary issue of CTE, it's the chronic impacts the brain experiences on almost every play where the player handles the ball or every play when you are a lineman. All of those jarring hits that regularly rock the brain within the skull, but does not result in any concussions. This is a structural problem within the sport that cannot be avoided without fundamentally changing the way it's played.
That fundamental change will be the ultimate undoing of the sport. We like the violence. Without it, football dies in the long term. The feedstock needed to keep the system running are going to dry up. As more is learned about CTE, kids will be forbidden to play. Lone exception will be the poor rural and inner city kids who will need an avenue out of poverty. Then the sport will be deemed as "racist" and/or exploitative because only the poor and the minorities will be the primary players in the future.
This is all JMHO, but I'm almost certain this will be how it will pan out. A lot of the discussions about realignment, ESPN, FOX, conference owned networks and big fat TV contracts are little more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. A much bigger issue is in the near horizon and it's going to be the real fundamental game changer.
All of that is quite possible. But as with any market producer the last ounce will be milked out of it before it goes and when it goes it will be slowly.
BTW you left out another important factor in the lack of sustainability of the game. The economy as a whole is leaving the middle class with less disposable income than before. Sports as a whole has ridden a bubble that will pop. The first avenue of handling CTE's will be limiting the number of years of play with full contact. I'm betting on 8. High School & College. The pros will feel the pinch of the declining middle class first. With pay for play around the corner in college I can see the networks vying for college ball to be the pinnacle. That will pay for a little while but without the allure of professional money even those inner city kids will look elsewhere.
Face it Miko, it could be the rebirth of my love, baseball. It has the fewest CTE's of Football, basketball, soccer, lacrosse, and volleyball.
Yes, the overall socioeconomic situation can/may have long term repercussions on the sport. I'm not so sure about the cap idea. I think there is evidence that CTE damage may be observable in HS and college players. Chris Henry - the Bengal (former WVU) receive was found to have it prior to his death as well as the recent Giant player who was aged 27 and died of an overdose of pain killers (forget his name).
http://espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5333971
Chris Henry was 26 when he died.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - DavidSt - 01-28-2016 11:40 PM
Lets say a conference could move most of their games for online streaming? They can hire their on announcers, camera crew and all that. They could charge monthly rates, or buy a game to watch. Lets say the price is $10 per game to watch streaming. The game is Washington vs Eastern Washington, and you get 10 million viewers. that would be $10 million dollars. $50 million goes to pay for the cost of streaming live games, bandwidth, the announcing crew, the camera crew, sideline reporters, and some set aside as bonuses with the tv contract money, bowl games and so forth. The other $50 Million goes to the 2 schools playing. Washington gets $40 million dollars and Eastern Washington gets $10 million. Both schools would pick up more money that way. Eastern Washington getting $10 million per game could help their football program and other sports out including upgrading their facilities to join FBS. Streaming might be better now.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - JRsec - 01-28-2016 11:47 PM
(01-28-2016 11:40 PM)DavidSt Wrote: Lets say a conference could move most of their games for online streaming? They can hire their on announcers, camera crew and all that. They could charge monthly rates, or buy a game to watch. Lets say the price is $10 per game to watch streaming. The game is Washington vs Eastern Washington, and you get 10 million viewers. that would be $10 million dollars. $50 million goes to pay for the cost of streaming live games, bandwidth, the announcing crew, the camera crew, sideline reporters, and some set aside as bonuses with the tv contract money, bowl games and so forth. The other $50 Million goes to the 2 schools playing. Washington gets $40 million dollars and Eastern Washington gets $10 million. Both schools would pick up more money that way. Eastern Washington getting $10 million per game could help their football program and other sports out including upgrading their facilities to join FBS. Streaming might be better now.David I don't doubt for a second that this possibility will be explored in the coming years. The networks will try to find a way to make it convenient that they remain the middle man, but that role is certainly not guaranteed.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - Thegoldstandard - 01-29-2016 12:10 AM
Is it also true that they grossly overpaid for the nba and nfl rights they have?
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - Thegoldstandard - 01-29-2016 12:10 AM
Is it also true that they grossly overpaid for the nba and nfl rights they have?
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - miko33 - 01-29-2016 06:27 AM
(01-28-2016 11:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:(01-28-2016 11:40 PM)DavidSt Wrote: Lets say a conference could move most of their games for online streaming? They can hire their on announcers, camera crew and all that. They could charge monthly rates, or buy a game to watch. Lets say the price is $10 per game to watch streaming. The game is Washington vs Eastern Washington, and you get 10 million viewers. that would be $10 million dollars. $50 million goes to pay for the cost of streaming live games, bandwidth, the announcing crew, the camera crew, sideline reporters, and some set aside as bonuses with the tv contract money, bowl games and so forth. The other $50 Million goes to the 2 schools playing. Washington gets $40 million dollars and Eastern Washington gets $10 million. Both schools would pick up more money that way. Eastern Washington getting $10 million per game could help their football program and other sports out including upgrading their facilities to join FBS. Streaming might be better now.David I don't doubt for a second that this possibility will be explored in the coming years. The networks will try to find a way to make it convenient that they remain the middle man, but that role is certainly not guaranteed.
Per our earlier discussion in this thread, I can see this happening from a technological standpoint but not necessarily as a business model. I don't see how the consumers will be asked to foot more money to watch these sports without significant push back. If the delivery system for sports changes, it will be out of operational necessity and not due to innovation. In a situation like that, I expect the ability to monetize the product further will be gone and we move to the world of zero sum gamesmanship. This move would not be done to partner with a cable channel or OTA network. It will be done with the intent to harm a cable network channel. People will not be willing to pay more to watch what they can largely see now on a regular basis. There will be no pass thru cost. But someone is experience a transfer of wealth, and it's not going to be the consumer.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - Huskies12 - 01-29-2016 09:40 AM
(01-28-2016 10:57 PM)miko33 Wrote:(01-28-2016 10:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:(01-28-2016 10:38 PM)miko33 Wrote: In 10 to 20 years, football at the collegiate and pro level will be so altered, that it will become a marginal sport. The model will ultimately break because the sport is decay from the bottom up. We're seeing it start in the youth leagues now. Soon that will filter up to the middle schools, then high school, college and finally the NFL. Parents are going to hold their kids out from playing football. No doubt football tries to compensate by making the sport "safer". The irony will be that they will try to improve the armor - which will show their fundamental idiocy - and that will result in MORE injury in the long run. They will try to go after the concussions much more aggressively and will once again miss the mark completely. I believe they will come to the conclusion that it's not the acute trauma brought on by being knocked out that is the primary issue of CTE, it's the chronic impacts the brain experiences on almost every play where the player handles the ball or every play when you are a lineman. All of those jarring hits that regularly rock the brain within the skull, but does not result in any concussions. This is a structural problem within the sport that cannot be avoided without fundamentally changing the way it's played.
That fundamental change will be the ultimate undoing of the sport. We like the violence. Without it, football dies in the long term. The feedstock needed to keep the system running are going to dry up. As more is learned about CTE, kids will be forbidden to play. Lone exception will be the poor rural and inner city kids who will need an avenue out of poverty. Then the sport will be deemed as "racist" and/or exploitative because only the poor and the minorities will be the primary players in the future.
This is all JMHO, but I'm almost certain this will be how it will pan out. A lot of the discussions about realignment, ESPN, FOX, conference owned networks and big fat TV contracts are little more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. A much bigger issue is in the near horizon and it's going to be the real fundamental game changer.
All of that is quite possible. But as with any market producer the last ounce will be milked out of it before it goes and when it goes it will be slowly.
BTW you left out another important factor in the lack of sustainability of the game. The economy as a whole is leaving the middle class with less disposable income than before. Sports as a whole has ridden a bubble that will pop. The first avenue of handling CTE's will be limiting the number of years of play with full contact. I'm betting on 8. High School & College. The pros will feel the pinch of the declining middle class first. With pay for play around the corner in college I can see the networks vying for college ball to be the pinnacle. That will pay for a little while but without the allure of professional money even those inner city kids will look elsewhere.
Face it Miko, it could be the rebirth of my love, baseball. It has the fewest CTE's of Football, basketball, soccer, lacrosse, and volleyball.
Yes, the overall socioeconomic situation can/may have long term repercussions on the sport. I'm not so sure about the cap idea. I think there is evidence that CTE damage may be observable in HS and college players. Chris Henry - the Bengal (former WVU) receive was found to have it prior to his death as well as the recent Giant player who was aged 27 and died of an overdose of pain killers (forget his name).
http://espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5333971
Chris Henry was 26 when he died.
Chris Henry fell out of a truck i don't think that was CTE
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - esayem - 01-29-2016 10:27 AM
In terms of content, I believe the power will shift from the conferences to the schools. A rich and powerful school now has the ability to video and stream all of their home games in every sport. They can sell that content directly to the public or networks via streaming services. The conference wars has hit the ceiling.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - DavidSt - 01-29-2016 10:48 AM
(01-29-2016 06:27 AM)miko33 Wrote:(01-28-2016 11:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:(01-28-2016 11:40 PM)DavidSt Wrote: Lets say a conference could move most of their games for online streaming? They can hire their on announcers, camera crew and all that. They could charge monthly rates, or buy a game to watch. Lets say the price is $10 per game to watch streaming. The game is Washington vs Eastern Washington, and you get 10 million viewers. that would be $10 million dollars. $50 million goes to pay for the cost of streaming live games, bandwidth, the announcing crew, the camera crew, sideline reporters, and some set aside as bonuses with the tv contract money, bowl games and so forth. The other $50 Million goes to the 2 schools playing. Washington gets $40 million dollars and Eastern Washington gets $10 million. Both schools would pick up more money that way. Eastern Washington getting $10 million per game could help their football program and other sports out including upgrading their facilities to join FBS. Streaming might be better now.David I don't doubt for a second that this possibility will be explored in the coming years. The networks will try to find a way to make it convenient that they remain the middle man, but that role is certainly not guaranteed.
Per our earlier discussion in this thread, I can see this happening from a technological standpoint but not necessarily as a business model. I don't see how the consumers will be asked to foot more money to watch these sports without significant push back. If the delivery system for sports changes, it will be out of operational necessity and not due to innovation. In a situation like that, I expect the ability to monetize the product further will be gone and we move to the world of zero sum gamesmanship. This move would not be done to partner with a cable channel or OTA network. It will be done with the intent to harm a cable network channel. People will not be willing to pay more to watch what they can largely see now on a regular basis. There will be no pass thru cost. But someone is experience a transfer of wealth, and it's not going to be the consumer.
Not every game is on tv. Not everybody in the country could watch the Eastern Washington Vs. Oregon match up last year. All we got were highlights. Same with Portland State Vs Washington State. Plus, not everybody could get the SEC, Big 12, ACC and Big 10 games. The games could be charged like Netflicks subscription. PAC 12 could do a partnership with the MWC, Big Sky, WCC, WAC, Big West, GNAC, RMAC, and other conferences on the west coast as well to offer a variety of games. I would love to see Pacific Lutheran Vs Puget Sound game since both are there in the Tacoma area which is my birth place. PAC 12 could show Hockey games as well with the select schools. LAX, and some other sports that not all schools in the PAC 12 sponsors.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - TerryD - 01-29-2016 12:46 PM
(01-29-2016 10:27 AM)esayem Wrote: In terms of content, I believe the power will shift from the conferences to the schools. A rich and powerful school now has the ability to video and stream all of their home games in every sport. They can sell that content directly to the public or networks via streaming services. The conference wars has hit the ceiling.
That will be a great day......
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - ken d - 01-29-2016 01:06 PM
(01-29-2016 12:10 AM)Thegoldstandard Wrote: Is it also true that they grossly overpaid for the nba and nfl rights they have?
I suspect these are responsible for even more of their financial problems than college football. That NBA contract seems absurd to me.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - ken d - 01-29-2016 01:09 PM
(01-28-2016 10:38 PM)miko33 Wrote: In 10 to 20 years, football at the collegiate and pro level will be so altered, that it will become a marginal sport. The model will ultimately break because the sport is decay from the bottom up. We're seeing it start in the youth leagues now. Soon that will filter up to the middle schools, then high school, college and finally the NFL. Parents are going to hold their kids out from playing football. No doubt football tries to compensate by making the sport "safer". The irony will be that they will try to improve the armor - which will show their fundamental idiocy - and that will result in MORE injury in the long run. They will try to go after the concussions much more aggressively and will once again miss the mark completely. I believe they will come to the conclusion that it's not the acute trauma brought on by being knocked out that is the primary issue of CTE, it's the chronic impacts the brain experiences on almost every play where the player handles the ball or every play when you are a lineman. All of those jarring hits that regularly rock the brain within the skull, but does not result in any concussions. This is a structural problem within the sport that cannot be avoided without fundamentally changing the way it's played.
That fundamental change will be the ultimate undoing of the sport. We like the violence. Without it, football dies in the long term. The feedstock needed to keep the system running are going to dry up. As more is learned about CTE, kids will be forbidden to play. Lone exception will be the poor rural and inner city kids who will need an avenue out of poverty. Then the sport will be deemed as "racist" and/or exploitative because only the poor and the minorities will be the primary players in the future.
This is all JMHO, but I'm almost certain this will be how it will pan out. A lot of the discussions about realignment, ESPN, FOX, conference owned networks and big fat TV contracts are little more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. A much bigger issue is in the near horizon and it's going to be the real fundamental game changer.
I am always surprised at our ability to underestimate mankind's appetite for blood sports. Whether it's football or gladiator spectacles, they always seem to be the last things our societies are willing to give up.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - miko33 - 01-29-2016 03:11 PM
(01-29-2016 01:09 PM)ken d Wrote:(01-28-2016 10:38 PM)miko33 Wrote: In 10 to 20 years, football at the collegiate and pro level will be so altered, that it will become a marginal sport. The model will ultimately break because the sport is decay from the bottom up. We're seeing it start in the youth leagues now. Soon that will filter up to the middle schools, then high school, college and finally the NFL. Parents are going to hold their kids out from playing football. No doubt football tries to compensate by making the sport "safer". The irony will be that they will try to improve the armor - which will show their fundamental idiocy - and that will result in MORE injury in the long run. They will try to go after the concussions much more aggressively and will once again miss the mark completely. I believe they will come to the conclusion that it's not the acute trauma brought on by being knocked out that is the primary issue of CTE, it's the chronic impacts the brain experiences on almost every play where the player handles the ball or every play when you are a lineman. All of those jarring hits that regularly rock the brain within the skull, but does not result in any concussions. This is a structural problem within the sport that cannot be avoided without fundamentally changing the way it's played.
That fundamental change will be the ultimate undoing of the sport. We like the violence. Without it, football dies in the long term. The feedstock needed to keep the system running are going to dry up. As more is learned about CTE, kids will be forbidden to play. Lone exception will be the poor rural and inner city kids who will need an avenue out of poverty. Then the sport will be deemed as "racist" and/or exploitative because only the poor and the minorities will be the primary players in the future.
This is all JMHO, but I'm almost certain this will be how it will pan out. A lot of the discussions about realignment, ESPN, FOX, conference owned networks and big fat TV contracts are little more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. A much bigger issue is in the near horizon and it's going to be the real fundamental game changer.
I am always surprised at our ability to underestimate mankind's appetite for blood sports. Whether it's football or gladiator spectacles, they always seem to be the last things our societies are willing to give up.
So true. We were given the circus(es). With the shrinking tax base, more people are now being given bread. All should now be well, and our politicians can continue unfettered with their graft.
RE: The Economy, Streaming, and Needs of Conferences and Schools Have Changed Realignment - JRsec - 01-29-2016 05:12 PM
(01-29-2016 03:11 PM)miko33 Wrote:It usually takes a war to expose graft within the government. Unfortunately, the next real war of scope will be essentially determined within a brief span of time. So if graft has indeed undermined our preparedness then the outcome could be more final than most imagine.(01-29-2016 01:09 PM)ken d Wrote:(01-28-2016 10:38 PM)miko33 Wrote: In 10 to 20 years, football at the collegiate and pro level will be so altered, that it will become a marginal sport. The model will ultimately break because the sport is decay from the bottom up. We're seeing it start in the youth leagues now. Soon that will filter up to the middle schools, then high school, college and finally the NFL. Parents are going to hold their kids out from playing football. No doubt football tries to compensate by making the sport "safer". The irony will be that they will try to improve the armor - which will show their fundamental idiocy - and that will result in MORE injury in the long run. They will try to go after the concussions much more aggressively and will once again miss the mark completely. I believe they will come to the conclusion that it's not the acute trauma brought on by being knocked out that is the primary issue of CTE, it's the chronic impacts the brain experiences on almost every play where the player handles the ball or every play when you are a lineman. All of those jarring hits that regularly rock the brain within the skull, but does not result in any concussions. This is a structural problem within the sport that cannot be avoided without fundamentally changing the way it's played.
That fundamental change will be the ultimate undoing of the sport. We like the violence. Without it, football dies in the long term. The feedstock needed to keep the system running are going to dry up. As more is learned about CTE, kids will be forbidden to play. Lone exception will be the poor rural and inner city kids who will need an avenue out of poverty. Then the sport will be deemed as "racist" and/or exploitative because only the poor and the minorities will be the primary players in the future.
This is all JMHO, but I'm almost certain this will be how it will pan out. A lot of the discussions about realignment, ESPN, FOX, conference owned networks and big fat TV contracts are little more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. A much bigger issue is in the near horizon and it's going to be the real fundamental game changer.
I am always surprised at our ability to underestimate mankind's appetite for blood sports. Whether it's football or gladiator spectacles, they always seem to be the last things our societies are willing to give up.
So true. We were given the circus(es). With the shrinking tax base, more people are now being given bread. All should now be well, and our politicians can continue unfettered with their graft.
The next realignment could be swift and final as well.