Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
Author Message
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #121
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
(02-25-2014 11:08 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Also Sammy, the best way to describe it is this:

Forget what the president said because this came from the fans. The LHN high school controversy pissed off our fan base and led to a mass revolt whose basic message to our admin was "we are tired of fighting UT on these sort of issues. Why are we doing this when we have a golden ticket to the SEC? Get on the phone to Slive and make this happen now!"

A lot if people don't appreciate the pressure to leave that was coming from the fans and big cigars.

I definitely think that the fanbase entered into a love affair with it and that picked up steam. However there was an element to the public posturing by the admin that (IMO intentionally) had the effect of ramping that up throughout the year for political cover.
02-25-2014 11:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #122
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
(02-25-2014 10:41 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  
(02-25-2014 08:02 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Here you go little friend! Straight from the conference website, ie an unbiased source!

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.d...=204960432

I don't want to get in the middle of this, as an outsider, but the conference website, who has a vested interest in getting that message out (increases perceived value of the conference) is not an unbiased source.

And of course, there is the next paragraph:

However, based on revenue projections from future media rights, such compensation likely will be unnecessary. Contrary to some reports, this use of revenue of those five institutions does not affect the revenue distribution formula or the amounts that would be distributed to the other institutions, therefore negating the need for it to be offered. All liquidated damage fees withheld from Colorado and Nebraska will be evenly shared by the 10 remaining members.

Texas president William Powers said Tuesday morning that his school was not part of any deal regarding the withheld revenue money, hadn't heard about such a deal and was "not part of our consideration" to stay. We oppose that kind of deal." Powers said that revenue should be distributed according to Big 12 distribution bylaws.
02-25-2014 11:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #123
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
(02-25-2014 11:16 AM)S11 Wrote:  
(02-25-2014 11:08 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  Also Sammy, the best way to describe it is this:

Forget what the president said because this came from the fans. The LHN high school controversy pissed off our fan base and led to a mass revolt whose basic message to our admin was "we are tired of fighting UT on these sort of issues. Why are we doing this when we have a golden ticket to the SEC? Get on the phone to Slive and make this happen now!"

A lot if people don't appreciate the pressure to leave that was coming from the fans and big cigars.

I definitely think that the fanbase entered into a love affair with it and that picked up steam. However there was an element to the public posturing by the admin that (IMO intentionally) had the effect of ramping that up throughout the year for political cover.

And the President later said he decided to go to the SEC in June 2010. So its not certain how much he was following the fan base or how much the fan base was following his lead.
02-25-2014 11:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #124
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
I know you don't agree with it, but we really did feel that the HS controversy was way outside what was sold to both us and the Big 12 for approving LHN. We felt lied to.

And while the conference made the right decision to nip it in the bud, the feeling on our side was "if they (ESPN ) were wiing to use LHN to try and bend (if not outright break) the NCAA restrictions on recruits and school media, to promote their new product, what will they try next? How about instead of staying to find out, we take Mike Slive up on his offer."
(This post was last modified: 02-25-2014 11:29 AM by 10thMountain.)
02-25-2014 11:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,161
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #125
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
(02-25-2014 11:21 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  I know you don't agree with it, but we really did feel that the HS controversy was way outside what was sold to both us and the Big 12 for approving LHN. We felt lied to.

Even Billy Liucci (Texags) in a 2011 radio interview quoting some of the A&M higher ups that there wasn't much concern over it as they didn't see them getting that. It ultimately was fed to the press and riled people up but the ptb in cs didn't think it was anything realistic.

Quote:And while the conference made the right decision to nip it in the bud, the feeling on our side was "if they were wiing to use LHN to try and bend (if not outright break) the NCAA restrictions on recruits and school media, what will they try next? How about instead of staying to find out, we take Mike Slive up on his offer."

I can see the fan side of that but the fact is that the entire deal (per it's contract) is subject to both NCAA and conference regulations. It was never going to happen but ESPN simply took the stance of "make them tell us no before we leave an opportunity to make money".
02-25-2014 11:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #126
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
Well yes, my point was the fans, not the admin were extremely concerned about it.

The feeling was "why keep fighting these fights when we don't have to?"
02-25-2014 11:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tigeer Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,526
Joined: Aug 2004
Reputation: 127
I Root For: UoM & WVU
Location: Martinsville, VA
Post: #127
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
Myth - if WVU had waited they would have gotten a bid to the ACC.
02-25-2014 01:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #128
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
One myth that gets thrown around a lot here is:
ESPN overpaid the Big 12 to keep it together.

By any measure, the Big 12 gets comparable or better ratings than the Pac 12 who got a $21 million contract at roughly the same time the Big 12 got $20 million. The Big 12 also signed their Fox Tier II deal before the ESPN Tier I deal. That myth simply makes no sense even if you buy the hard to believe notion that ESPN is deliberately over-paying for things. Facts say they paid the market value and the facts also say it was the Fox deal that was offered first, not ESPN.
02-25-2014 03:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #129
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
(02-25-2014 01:47 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  Myth - if WVU had waited they would have gotten a bid to the ACC.
He who hesitates is lost. You snooze, you lose. A bird in the hand beats 2 in the bush.
02-25-2014 03:40 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #130
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
(02-25-2014 03:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  One myth that gets thrown around a lot here is:
ESPN overpaid the Big 12 to keep it together.

By any measure, the Big 12 gets comparable or better ratings than the Pac 12 who got a $21 million contract at roughly the same time the Big 12 got $20 million. The Big 12 also signed their Fox Tier II deal before the ESPN Tier I deal. That myth simply makes no sense even if you buy the hard to believe notion that ESPN is deliberately over-paying for things. Facts say they paid the market value and the facts also say it was the Fox deal that was offered first, not ESPN.

I think the networks are overpaying both the Big 12 and the ACC, because they think stability and a larger number of top-level conferences will save the TV guys money in the long run.

If Big 12 ratings at 7 pm ET are comparable to Pac-12 ratings at 10 pm ET, then the Pac-12 games are more valuable because they are performing well in a "more difficult" time slot, and they're drawing ratings in a part of the U.S. not reached by other major conferences. Part of the value of the Pac-12 inventory is the ability to air live games in later time slots. (A lot of Pac coaches would rather that more games aired earlier, but ESPN and Fox are paying $3 billion over 12 years to air the games when they want them.) College sports telecasts do much better in the participating teams' own region than outside that region. (The NFL, by contrast, has a smaller percentage drop-off, i.e., broader support outside each participating team's region.)
02-25-2014 05:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,287
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #131
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
(02-25-2014 05:19 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(02-25-2014 03:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  One myth that gets thrown around a lot here is:
ESPN overpaid the Big 12 to keep it together.

By any measure, the Big 12 gets comparable or better ratings than the Pac 12 who got a $21 million contract at roughly the same time the Big 12 got $20 million. The Big 12 also signed their Fox Tier II deal before the ESPN Tier I deal. That myth simply makes no sense even if you buy the hard to believe notion that ESPN is deliberately over-paying for things. Facts say they paid the market value and the facts also say it was the Fox deal that was offered first, not ESPN.

I think the networks are overpaying both the Big 12 and the ACC, because they think stability and a larger number of top-level conferences will save the TV guys money in the long run.

If Big 12 ratings at 7 pm ET are comparable to Pac-12 ratings at 10 pm ET, then the Pac-12 games are more valuable because they are performing well in a "more difficult" time slot, and they're drawing ratings in a part of the U.S. not reached by other major conferences. Part of the value of the Pac-12 inventory is the ability to air live games in later time slots. (A lot of Pac coaches would rather that more games aired earlier, but ESPN and Fox are paying $3 billion over 12 years to air the games when they want them.) College sports telecasts do much better in the participating teams' own region than outside that region. (The NFL, by contrast, has a smaller percentage drop-off, i.e., broader support outside each participating team's region.)

Part of the Pac's lack of value is the inability to fill the noon eastern time slot. That 10 slot has some value, but it is offset by what the Pac can't do. Noon seems to be getting better ratings than prime time except for the CCGs.

From what I've seen over the last 3 years, the Big 12 does as well or better than the Pac 12 in similar time slots, but I haven't done detailed analysis.
02-25-2014 06:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #132
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
The PAC 12 does better in key demos with the late windows. So that is a big difference. They draw in viewers at a time when without them, there simply would not be (comparatively speaking of course)
02-25-2014 06:33 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #133
RE: What are the conf realignment myths that need to be debunked?
(02-25-2014 06:33 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  The PAC 12 does better in key demos with the late windows. So that is a big difference. They draw in viewers at a time when without them, there simply would not be (comparatively speaking of course)

That's right. It's by far the best option for delivering an audience in west coast primetime. In every other time slot for live telecasts, there are a few strong alternatives, during both football and basketball season.

And that's what is valuable to the networks. As someone mentioned in a different thread, it's also the reason why networks pay a lot for the MLB regular season, even though CFB draws more viewers just in raw numbers -- MLB is by far the best live-sports draw available during the summer.
02-25-2014 07:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.