Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
Author Message
Nebraskafan Offline
Banned

Posts: 1,342
Joined: Jul 2015
I Root For: Nebreaska
Location:
Post: #21
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
I think the general masses is taking the change in TV environment to literal at the moment. Sure there is change and people are cutting the cord, but right now that is such a small amount of people. Over the next 30 years you will still have regular cable and TV games on those channels.

The change will come with people who are young and they don't get cable and go online to buy the channels they want to watch. BTN already has games online that you can rewatch and ESPNWatch does the same thing. It will take these networks about 5 or 7 years to fully put together all of the management, infrastructure, business planning, finances, etc, to have it function well for the masses as its stand alone package for about $35 a month.

These packages will probably be sold to these other places for those hourly games. ESPN, CBS, NBC, FOX and ABC aren't going anywhere. If anything, they will provide packages that people will pay for to watch.

When it comes to realignment, the Big 12 will fade into a G5 level conference after Oklahoma and Texas leave in the future.
08-08-2015 01:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nebraskafan Offline
Banned

Posts: 1,342
Joined: Jul 2015
I Root For: Nebreaska
Location:
Post: #22
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
I think people who say leagues at the college and pro level will start to get small deals are wrong. If anything, the bidding will become even more friendly among the networks because the rights to broadcast x and y for live content will become even more important. The B1G is going to get a massive deal because these networks NEED the live content in this new market. Those dumb TV shows that spout off the same thing all day long are not going to make these networks money. LIVE content will.
08-08-2015 01:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #23
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 12:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:13 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 11:52 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  I have thought for a long time that Netflix, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Sony, Facebook all make sense as potential rights bidders.

Netflix I doubt has the cash to make a big play but they have the infrastructure. Would probably need to create a standalone service and offer bundles with regular Netflix.

Youtube has been playing around with live sports streaming (carry quite a few US Open Cup soccer games), with the Google war chest they can afford a loss leader investment and they knew the delivery business both ad supported and subscriber.

Apple has enough cash on hand to buy all the NFL rights at a 50% premium for 60+ years. They are great at selling content and devices to view that content and the payment infrastructure.

Sony knows content and messes some with delivery via PS3 and the Crackle service.

Microsoft has the war chest to come in as well, selling via Xbox they are fully equipped for, other channels they would need some work.

Facebook has the war chest to play, they have the capacity to deliver the content. What they are weak at would be charging for it.

Netflix doesn't have the money to make a serious bid. Unless it's for the Sun Belt or maybe even the FCS level.

They have the "infrastructure" only in the sense that they rely on Comcast, Charter, et al to bring the content to their customers.


Sure, you can say the same for ESPN and FS1 relying on cable, but it's a much higher quality, dependable signal in a traditional setting that has already achieved saturation in the market.

And ABC, FOX, NBC, etc. do have actual infrastructure to bypass cable altogether to get the content to the consumer (OTA signals). It wouldn't be super difficult to encrypt those signals and only provide the unlocking key to paying customers, rather than giving away entirely for free.

The problem with unlocking an OTA signal is getting the hardware needed into homes. We pushed back the rollout of digital TV because hardware adoption was slower than expected. Right now no one has such hardware in their home.

Why is that a problem?

For $20/mo, the customer gets a free, little box that connects between the antenna and the TV, to decode the encrypted signal. Viola, great content, great signal and completely bypassed the landline network.
08-08-2015 02:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #24
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 12:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 11:21 AM)goofus Wrote:  That's an interesting revolutionary idea. What if football imposed a weight limit on all its players. If anybody meets the technical definition of obese, then they can't play.

I'd just make them play 60 minutes so it would be a disadvantage to be so big. Now if you have a drive of 10 plays, those giant defensive linemen are sitting their with their hands on their hips out of breath. And they are only playing for 7-10 seconds at a time.

It might be a great idea, but it will never fly.

Unlimited substitution is used almost ubiquitously in the modern game, except for offensive line for whatever reason. And QB.
08-08-2015 02:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #25
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 12:57 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:31 PM)goofus Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:18 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 10:56 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...0-pound-te

This is an interesting read, in the first part of two Dodd goes into this particular player for Baylor and what he could mean for the future of the game and the size we see in the future.

It is an interesting read but for me, Dodd's part 2 was much more broad ranging and interesting.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...-the-field

He tackles multiple subjects, including Conference Realignment. He understands it is inevitable. As I say, it is just a matter of Pressure and Time.

Quote:Scott seemingly hasn't lost his appetite to expand into the Central Time Zone. A lot of those Pac-12 games still end after midnight in the East.

Have said this more times than I could even attempt to count. The PAC needs to get into the CTZ so badly that they showed all their cards in their attempt to get Texas and friends to come out West. That didn't work but the need for CTZ is still present, perhaps even more so now than just a couple years ago. More coverage on TV means more potential viewings, not just by fans and viewers but also by the CFP Committee.

Quote:The ultimate question is, what will be the next trigger? All the primary conference deals have a decade, or less, to run. Maybe it's technology. Who's to say Netflix isn't bidding against ESPN in the next round of realignment? If Notre Dame goes 11-1 and doesn't get in the playoff, does it head for a conference and that 13th game? The champion of each of four 16-team conferences would fit nicely into the current playoff structure.

I hadn't even thought of the Netflix angle but I could see it happening someday. The rhetoric in the media is adapting and becoming something very similar to what we have already been talking about on this forum. Told you guys that it was coming, a media blitz to prepare the way for the big changes. You may not have believed me then but you see it now.


A guy like Dodd hears a lot of things but he cant directly quote most of it, off the record kind of stuff. What he can do though is to take all of that and put together pieces like this one.

I rate Part 2 of this series as a must read. There is a whole lot more to this piece than just realignment though. I'm interested in seeing what parts stand out to all of you.

The PAC absolutely does not need to expand into the Central timezone.

We're not talking about a mutual fund here, where it's grow or die.


So what if the PAC media deal doesn't disperse exactly the same amount as the B1G's or SEC's media deals. It has the west coast locked up and it's always going to get the same payouts and access in the post season as whomever the power conferences are do. Good enough.

thats what I was thimking. its up to Fox and ESPN to find content for its early time slot and they already got that content. If the PAC adds some central time zone schools, Fox and ESPN will in theory pay more to the PAC, to show the same teams they were already showing, but the PAC will have more teams, so its only worth it if they make more per team. throw in extra travel and reduced rivalries, is it all worth it?

How do you figure in that there are reduced rivalries and extra travel? You are inserting those ideas as if they are fact and they are not.

First off, you have to understand that the two division system is dead when we get to 16. It will be four divisions. You put your California teams in the same division and that actually increases their rivalries because they are competing for the California Crown and representation in an expanded conference tournament. The northwestern schools will be grouped up together which improves all of their regional rivalries. With the two Arizona schools leading the way with Utah and Colorado that is a combination of similar cultural areas and could build up some quality rivalries there with two new schools to the PAC that currently don't have any rivalries. Then you have your four Central Time Zone expansion schools put together in their own division. The concept is all about rivalries.

Now, for travel? It's three games in division which isn't a travel issue. You then have two games against every other division. One is home and one is away so travel is heavily mitigated.

Cost factor? It's 90 new time slots that the PAC can now fill and it is largely considered the second most difficult football conference in the country. Getting that content during the initial kick offs would be big money, absolutely.

Conference Championships brought the PAC and Big Ten 20 million. Add in two semifinal games and that could be a boost of 30 million. That right there alone is almost two million a year to each school in that expanded 16 team PAC. If they enable the assimilation of the entire big 12 conference then they are absolutely going to get a major pay increase from the Networks because without it, The PAC doesn't do it.

A lot of logistical and structural complication for marginal gains.

West coast major college football fans know Washington, Oregon and California teams. That's what they want to see.

The current structure does that just fine.
08-08-2015 02:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #26
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 02:35 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:13 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 11:52 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  I have thought for a long time that Netflix, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Sony, Facebook all make sense as potential rights bidders.

Netflix I doubt has the cash to make a big play but they have the infrastructure. Would probably need to create a standalone service and offer bundles with regular Netflix.

Youtube has been playing around with live sports streaming (carry quite a few US Open Cup soccer games), with the Google war chest they can afford a loss leader investment and they knew the delivery business both ad supported and subscriber.

Apple has enough cash on hand to buy all the NFL rights at a 50% premium for 60+ years. They are great at selling content and devices to view that content and the payment infrastructure.

Sony knows content and messes some with delivery via PS3 and the Crackle service.

Microsoft has the war chest to come in as well, selling via Xbox they are fully equipped for, other channels they would need some work.

Facebook has the war chest to play, they have the capacity to deliver the content. What they are weak at would be charging for it.

Netflix doesn't have the money to make a serious bid. Unless it's for the Sun Belt or maybe even the FCS level.

They have the "infrastructure" only in the sense that they rely on Comcast, Charter, et al to bring the content to their customers.


Sure, you can say the same for ESPN and FS1 relying on cable, but it's a much higher quality, dependable signal in a traditional setting that has already achieved saturation in the market.

And ABC, FOX, NBC, etc. do have actual infrastructure to bypass cable altogether to get the content to the consumer (OTA signals). It wouldn't be super difficult to encrypt those signals and only provide the unlocking key to paying customers, rather than giving away entirely for free.

The problem with unlocking an OTA signal is getting the hardware needed into homes. We pushed back the rollout of digital TV because hardware adoption was slower than expected. Right now no one has such hardware in their home.

Why is that a problem?

For $20/mo, the customer gets a free, little box that connects between the antenna and the TV, to decode the encrypted signal. Viola, great content, great signal and completely bypassed the landline network.

You don't think building 30 million boxes and distributing and in many cases installing them isn't an issue? This has been tried by at least 7 different companies that busted. With the switch to digital much more of the country cannot get an OTA signal strong enough to use.
(This post was last modified: 08-08-2015 02:54 PM by arkstfan.)
08-08-2015 02:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #27
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 02:53 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 02:35 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:13 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 11:52 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  I have thought for a long time that Netflix, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Sony, Facebook all make sense as potential rights bidders.

Netflix I doubt has the cash to make a big play but they have the infrastructure. Would probably need to create a standalone service and offer bundles with regular Netflix.

Youtube has been playing around with live sports streaming (carry quite a few US Open Cup soccer games), with the Google war chest they can afford a loss leader investment and they knew the delivery business both ad supported and subscriber.

Apple has enough cash on hand to buy all the NFL rights at a 50% premium for 60+ years. They are great at selling content and devices to view that content and the payment infrastructure.

Sony knows content and messes some with delivery via PS3 and the Crackle service.

Microsoft has the war chest to come in as well, selling via Xbox they are fully equipped for, other channels they would need some work.

Facebook has the war chest to play, they have the capacity to deliver the content. What they are weak at would be charging for it.

Netflix doesn't have the money to make a serious bid. Unless it's for the Sun Belt or maybe even the FCS level.

They have the "infrastructure" only in the sense that they rely on Comcast, Charter, et al to bring the content to their customers.


Sure, you can say the same for ESPN and FS1 relying on cable, but it's a much higher quality, dependable signal in a traditional setting that has already achieved saturation in the market.

And ABC, FOX, NBC, etc. do have actual infrastructure to bypass cable altogether to get the content to the consumer (OTA signals). It wouldn't be super difficult to encrypt those signals and only provide the unlocking key to paying customers, rather than giving away entirely for free.

The problem with unlocking an OTA signal is getting the hardware needed into homes. We pushed back the rollout of digital TV because hardware adoption was slower than expected. Right now no one has such hardware in their home.

Why is that a problem?

For $20/mo, the customer gets a free, little box that connects between the antenna and the TV, to decode the encrypted signal. Viola, great content, great signal and completely bypassed the landline network.

You don't think building 30 million boxes and distributing and in many cases installing them isn't an issue? This has been tried by at least 7 different companies that busted. With the switch to digital much more of the country cannot get an OTA signal strong enough to use.

Not much of an issue, no. How many cellphones do you think get built, per year?

I also doubt that OTA signal strength is lower because the data that rides on the signal is modulated digital instead of analog. It's still radio frequency carrier. It's still the same power output at the transmitter.
08-08-2015 02:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goofus Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,285
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 148
I Root For: Iowa
Location: chicago suburbs
Post: #28
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
if it made sense for the PAC to have central time zone schools, they should have proposed a merger with the Big 12 before they picked up WV.

Since that did not happen, there must be plenty of reasons why the central time zone schools and PAC schools don't want to be together.
08-08-2015 02:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #29
The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 12:57 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:31 PM)goofus Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:18 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 10:56 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...0-pound-te

This is an interesting read, in the first part of two Dodd goes into this particular player for Baylor and what he could mean for the future of the game and the size we see in the future.

It is an interesting read but for me, Dodd's part 2 was much more broad ranging and interesting.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...-the-field

He tackles multiple subjects, including Conference Realignment. He understands it is inevitable. As I say, it is just a matter of Pressure and Time.

Quote:Scott seemingly hasn't lost his appetite to expand into the Central Time Zone. A lot of those Pac-12 games still end after midnight in the East.

Have said this more times than I could even attempt to count. The PAC needs to get into the CTZ so badly that they showed all their cards in their attempt to get Texas and friends to come out West. That didn't work but the need for CTZ is still present, perhaps even more so now than just a couple years ago. More coverage on TV means more potential viewings, not just by fans and viewers but also by the CFP Committee.

Quote:The ultimate question is, what will be the next trigger? All the primary conference deals have a decade, or less, to run. Maybe it's technology. Who's to say Netflix isn't bidding against ESPN in the next round of realignment? If Notre Dame goes 11-1 and doesn't get in the playoff, does it head for a conference and that 13th game? The champion of each of four 16-team conferences would fit nicely into the current playoff structure.

I hadn't even thought of the Netflix angle but I could see it happening someday. The rhetoric in the media is adapting and becoming something very similar to what we have already been talking about on this forum. Told you guys that it was coming, a media blitz to prepare the way for the big changes. You may not have believed me then but you see it now.


A guy like Dodd hears a lot of things but he cant directly quote most of it, off the record kind of stuff. What he can do though is to take all of that and put together pieces like this one.

I rate Part 2 of this series as a must read. There is a whole lot more to this piece than just realignment though. I'm interested in seeing what parts stand out to all of you.

The PAC absolutely does not need to expand into the Central timezone.

We're not talking about a mutual fund here, where it's grow or die.


So what if the PAC media deal doesn't disperse exactly the same amount as the B1G's or SEC's media deals. It has the west coast locked up and it's always going to get the same payouts and access in the post season as whomever the power conferences are do. Good enough.

thats what I was thimking. its up to Fox and ESPN to find content for its early time slot and they already got that content. If the PAC adds some central time zone schools, Fox and ESPN will in theory pay more to the PAC, to show the same teams they were already showing, but the PAC will have more teams, so its only worth it if they make more per team. throw in extra travel and reduced rivalries, is it all worth it?

How do you figure in that there are reduced rivalries and extra travel? You are inserting those ideas as if they are fact and they are not.

First off, you have to understand that the two division system is dead when we get to 16. It will be four divisions. You put your California teams in the same division and that actually increases their rivalries because they are competing for the California Crown and representation in an expanded conference tournament. The northwestern schools will be grouped up together which improves all of their regional rivalries. With the two Arizona schools leading the way with Utah and Colorado that is a combination of similar cultural areas and could build up some quality rivalries there with two new schools to the PAC that currently don't have any rivalries. Then you have your four Central Time Zone expansion schools put together in their own division. The concept is all about rivalries.

Now, for travel? It's three games in division which isn't a travel issue. You then have two games against every other division. One is home and one is away so travel is heavily mitigated.

Cost factor? It's 90 new time slots that the PAC can now fill and it is largely considered the second most difficult football conference in the country. Getting that content during the initial kick offs would be big money, absolutely.

Conference Championships brought the PAC and Big Ten 20 million. Add in two semifinal games and that could be a boost of 30 million. That right there alone is almost two million a year to each school in that expanded 16 team PAC. If they enable the assimilation of the entire big 12 conference then they are absolutely going to get a major pay increase from the Networks because without it, The PAC doesn't do it.

While I agree with the pod format, I'm doubtful that the Cali schools will be able to deprecate themselves from the rest of the PAC schools. Those trips to the golden state are too valuable to give up simply to go to 16. CU didn't leave a plains conference to be put in a similar situation in their new home.
08-08-2015 05:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #30
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 05:27 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:57 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:31 PM)goofus Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:18 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 10:56 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...0-pound-te

This is an interesting read, in the first part of two Dodd goes into this particular player for Baylor and what he could mean for the future of the game and the size we see in the future.

It is an interesting read but for me, Dodd's part 2 was much more broad ranging and interesting.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...-the-field

He tackles multiple subjects, including Conference Realignment. He understands it is inevitable. As I say, it is just a matter of Pressure and Time.


Have said this more times than I could even attempt to count. The PAC needs to get into the CTZ so badly that they showed all their cards in their attempt to get Texas and friends to come out West. That didn't work but the need for CTZ is still present, perhaps even more so now than just a couple years ago. More coverage on TV means more potential viewings, not just by fans and viewers but also by the CFP Committee.


I hadn't even thought of the Netflix angle but I could see it happening someday. The rhetoric in the media is adapting and becoming something very similar to what we have already been talking about on this forum. Told you guys that it was coming, a media blitz to prepare the way for the big changes. You may not have believed me then but you see it now.


A guy like Dodd hears a lot of things but he cant directly quote most of it, off the record kind of stuff. What he can do though is to take all of that and put together pieces like this one.

I rate Part 2 of this series as a must read. There is a whole lot more to this piece than just realignment though. I'm interested in seeing what parts stand out to all of you.

The PAC absolutely does not need to expand into the Central timezone.

We're not talking about a mutual fund here, where it's grow or die.


So what if the PAC media deal doesn't disperse exactly the same amount as the B1G's or SEC's media deals. It has the west coast locked up and it's always going to get the same payouts and access in the post season as whomever the power conferences are do. Good enough.

thats what I was thimking. its up to Fox and ESPN to find content for its early time slot and they already got that content. If the PAC adds some central time zone schools, Fox and ESPN will in theory pay more to the PAC, to show the same teams they were already showing, but the PAC will have more teams, so its only worth it if they make more per team. throw in extra travel and reduced rivalries, is it all worth it?

How do you figure in that there are reduced rivalries and extra travel? You are inserting those ideas as if they are fact and they are not.

First off, you have to understand that the two division system is dead when we get to 16. It will be four divisions. You put your California teams in the same division and that actually increases their rivalries because they are competing for the California Crown and representation in an expanded conference tournament. The northwestern schools will be grouped up together which improves all of their regional rivalries. With the two Arizona schools leading the way with Utah and Colorado that is a combination of similar cultural areas and could build up some quality rivalries there with two new schools to the PAC that currently don't have any rivalries. Then you have your four Central Time Zone expansion schools put together in their own division. The concept is all about rivalries.

Now, for travel? It's three games in division which isn't a travel issue. You then have two games against every other division. One is home and one is away so travel is heavily mitigated.

Cost factor? It's 90 new time slots that the PAC can now fill and it is largely considered the second most difficult football conference in the country. Getting that content during the initial kick offs would be big money, absolutely.

Conference Championships brought the PAC and Big Ten 20 million. Add in two semifinal games and that could be a boost of 30 million. That right there alone is almost two million a year to each school in that expanded 16 team PAC. If they enable the assimilation of the entire big 12 conference then they are absolutely going to get a major pay increase from the Networks because without it, The PAC doesn't do it.

While I agree with the pod format, I'm doubtful that the Cali schools will be able to deprecate themselves from the rest of the PAC schools. Those trips to the golden state are too valuable to give up simply to go to 16. CU didn't leave a plains conference to be put in a similar situation in their new home.

As long as everyone else has the same amount of visits into California, what's the problem? How many visits do you think they have now? The Cali schools are split between the two divisions so on some years all they face are the two Cali schools in their division. It's not that big of a deal.
08-08-2015 06:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BIgCatonProwl Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,171
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Houston Cougars
Location:
Post: #31
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
70k a year and that was conservative estimate what CFB players will be making in the not too distant future. It won't be amateur anymore it will be semi pro ball (what it all ways has been, just under the guise of CFB IMO) for all practical purposes. I'm for the players being paid should have been getting paid, the coaches have been for a while now. If it turns off some, so be it.
08-08-2015 09:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,735
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #32
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 02:38 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:57 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:31 PM)goofus Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:18 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 10:56 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...0-pound-te

This is an interesting read, in the first part of two Dodd goes into this particular player for Baylor and what he could mean for the future of the game and the size we see in the future.

It is an interesting read but for me, Dodd's part 2 was much more broad ranging and interesting.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...-the-field

He tackles multiple subjects, including Conference Realignment. He understands it is inevitable. As I say, it is just a matter of Pressure and Time.


Have said this more times than I could even attempt to count. The PAC needs to get into the CTZ so badly that they showed all their cards in their attempt to get Texas and friends to come out West. That didn't work but the need for CTZ is still present, perhaps even more so now than just a couple years ago. More coverage on TV means more potential viewings, not just by fans and viewers but also by the CFP Committee.


I hadn't even thought of the Netflix angle but I could see it happening someday. The rhetoric in the media is adapting and becoming something very similar to what we have already been talking about on this forum. Told you guys that it was coming, a media blitz to prepare the way for the big changes. You may not have believed me then but you see it now.


A guy like Dodd hears a lot of things but he cant directly quote most of it, off the record kind of stuff. What he can do though is to take all of that and put together pieces like this one.

I rate Part 2 of this series as a must read. There is a whole lot more to this piece than just realignment though. I'm interested in seeing what parts stand out to all of you.

The PAC absolutely does not need to expand into the Central timezone.

We're not talking about a mutual fund here, where it's grow or die.


So what if the PAC media deal doesn't disperse exactly the same amount as the B1G's or SEC's media deals. It has the west coast locked up and it's always going to get the same payouts and access in the post season as whomever the power conferences are do. Good enough.

thats what I was thimking. its up to Fox and ESPN to find content for its early time slot and they already got that content. If the PAC adds some central time zone schools, Fox and ESPN will in theory pay more to the PAC, to show the same teams they were already showing, but the PAC will have more teams, so its only worth it if they make more per team. throw in extra travel and reduced rivalries, is it all worth it?

How do you figure in that there are reduced rivalries and extra travel? You are inserting those ideas as if they are fact and they are not.

First off, you have to understand that the two division system is dead when we get to 16. It will be four divisions. You put your California teams in the same division and that actually increases their rivalries because they are competing for the California Crown and representation in an expanded conference tournament. The northwestern schools will be grouped up together which improves all of their regional rivalries. With the two Arizona schools leading the way with Utah and Colorado that is a combination of similar cultural areas and could build up some quality rivalries there with two new schools to the PAC that currently don't have any rivalries. Then you have your four Central Time Zone expansion schools put together in their own division. The concept is all about rivalries.

Now, for travel? It's three games in division which isn't a travel issue. You then have two games against every other division. One is home and one is away so travel is heavily mitigated.

Cost factor? It's 90 new time slots that the PAC can now fill and it is largely considered the second most difficult football conference in the country. Getting that content during the initial kick offs would be big money, absolutely.

Conference Championships brought the PAC and Big Ten 20 million. Add in two semifinal games and that could be a boost of 30 million. That right there alone is almost two million a year to each school in that expanded 16 team PAC. If they enable the assimilation of the entire big 12 conference then they are absolutely going to get a major pay increase from the Networks because without it, The PAC doesn't do it.

A lot of logistical and structural complication for marginal gains.

West coast major college football fans know Washington, Oregon and California teams. That's what they want to see.

The current structure does that just fine.

That's going to be up to the Pac12 to decide based on the numbers they are getting from their experts--but I think we already know which way they are leaning. They have analyzed the numbers and seem to like the idea of moving into the central time zone assuming the right pieces are available (and one of those is obviously Texas--not sure the rest of the pieces matter that much to them as long as Texas is part of the package).
08-08-2015 09:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chess Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,815
Joined: Dec 2003
Reputation: 219
I Root For: ECU & Nebraska
Location: Chicago Metro
Post: #33
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
Stuff like this is already happening. HBO also uses MLB's technology for streaming.

In addition, Youtube can broadcast in 4K if your ISP can handle it.
Quote:http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=776246 Commissioner Bettman and Commissioner Manfred on Tuesday announced a six-year digital media rights partnership between the NHL and Major League Baseball Advanced Media, the technical arm of Major League Baseball, that is expected to enhance the user experience across the League's digital platforms, including GameCenter Live, NHL Center Ice, NHL Network and NHL.com.
(This post was last modified: 08-08-2015 10:03 PM by chess.)
08-08-2015 10:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
hawghiggs Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,792
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 124
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #34
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
What happens the day that a kid doesn't need to go to the NFL anymore? What about when colleges start to push for 5 or 6 years of eligibility?
08-08-2015 10:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CintiFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Ohio St./ Cinti
Location:
Post: #35
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 12:17 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:14 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:12 PM)goofus Wrote:  I could see Netflix getting into football condensed replays after the main broadcaster is done with the live broadcast, the way it streams shows that are 1 year old.

Who would want to see that? I would.

That's another great point.

1 hr condensed games are great for time strapped fans. No commercials and they even cut out the 'dead time' between plays.

That would be ESPN and FOX reselling the tv rights that they bought from the conferences. That's not a bad idea considering the current state of ESPN

Dodd's Netflix comment was interesting, but he's not thinking big enough.

The long term viability of the cable model is certainly going to be challenged by ala carte cable channel pricing, but the longer term threat is delivering all media content over the internet.

Maybe Netflix will want to expand, but there's another bigger player in the internet space - Apple.

Apple currently has $200 BILLION dollars in cash on its books. At some point Apple may decide to expand from being a device company to a content company. They already dominate music with itunes and have a fledgling internet media delivery system with AppleTV. It's not far fetched to think they could become a real player in internet media too. They could buy the media rights for the PAC, SEC, B1G, Big 12 and ACC and it would barely make a dent in their cash.
08-08-2015 10:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
allthatyoucantleavebehind Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 942
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 24
I Root For: Penn State
Location:
Post: #36
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
If the Millenials' short attention spans do ANYTHING for this world, I hope they can force the NCAA and NFL to shorten football games.

Put advertising on the field (like soccer).

Three commercial breaks in the first half, three in the second half. 3 minutes each. No commercials for timeouts (even replay timeouts). Let's get every game finished in 3 hours...and the average game over in about 2.5 hours. That extra 30-45 minutes per game MATTERS to me...and it'll get more people to stick with football.
08-08-2015 11:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #37
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 02:57 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 02:53 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 02:35 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:23 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:13 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Netflix doesn't have the money to make a serious bid. Unless it's for the Sun Belt or maybe even the FCS level.

They have the "infrastructure" only in the sense that they rely on Comcast, Charter, et al to bring the content to their customers.


Sure, you can say the same for ESPN and FS1 relying on cable, but it's a much higher quality, dependable signal in a traditional setting that has already achieved saturation in the market.

And ABC, FOX, NBC, etc. do have actual infrastructure to bypass cable altogether to get the content to the consumer (OTA signals). It wouldn't be super difficult to encrypt those signals and only provide the unlocking key to paying customers, rather than giving away entirely for free.

The problem with unlocking an OTA signal is getting the hardware needed into homes. We pushed back the rollout of digital TV because hardware adoption was slower than expected. Right now no one has such hardware in their home.

Why is that a problem?

For $20/mo, the customer gets a free, little box that connects between the antenna and the TV, to decode the encrypted signal. Viola, great content, great signal and completely bypassed the landline network.

You don't think building 30 million boxes and distributing and in many cases installing them isn't an issue? This has been tried by at least 7 different companies that busted. With the switch to digital much more of the country cannot get an OTA signal strong enough to use.

Not much of an issue, no. How many cellphones do you think get built, per year?

I also doubt that OTA signal strength is lower because the data that rides on the signal is modulated digital instead of analog. It's still radio frequency carrier. It's still the same power output at the transmitter.

Here's an example.
http://antennaweb.org/Stations.aspx?Addr...91.6178011

No TV stations available with an antenna. Pre-digital you could receive Jonesboro, Springfield, Mountain Home. Today zip.

Six million were expected to lose access to TV with digital transmission because of inability to pull in a usable signal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/techno....html?_r=0

9.2 million expected to experience problems.
http://rbr.com/centris-fetting-about-over-air-viewers/

Seattle station expected to lose 2% of their reach
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/2009040.../704029937

Translators go dark in rural areas cutting off TV
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story...=101541768

Explanation of the cliff effect (ie. you get the signal or not)
http://hinessight.blogs.com/hinessight/2...ewers.html
08-08-2015 11:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #38
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 11:21 AM)goofus Wrote:  That's an interesting revolutionary idea. What if football imposed a weight limit on all its players. If anybody meets the technical definition of obese, then they can't play.


Sprint Football is what is called at the college football. Their is a weight limit for linemen. Schools that play Sprint are Army, Navy, Ivy League, Patriot, Post and Franklin Pierce schools.
08-09-2015 12:20 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #39
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 10:56 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...0-pound-te

This is an interesting read, in the first part of two Dodd goes into this particular player for Baylor and what he could mean for the future of the game and the size we see in the future.

It is an interesting read but for me, Dodd's part 2 was much more broad ranging and interesting.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...-the-field

He tackles multiple subjects, including Conference Realignment. He understands it is inevitable. As I say, it is just a matter of Pressure and Time.

Quote:Scott seemingly hasn't lost his appetite to expand into the Central Time Zone. A lot of those Pac-12 games still end after midnight in the East.

Have said this more times than I could even attempt to count. The PAC needs to get into the CTZ so badly that they showed all their cards in their attempt to get Texas and friends to come out West. That didn't work but the need for CTZ is still present, perhaps even more so now than just a couple years ago. More coverage on TV means more potential viewings, not just by fans and viewers but also by the CFP Committee.

Quote:The ultimate question is, what will be the next trigger? All the primary conference deals have a decade, or less, to run. Maybe it's technology. Who's to say Netflix isn't bidding against ESPN in the next round of realignment? If Notre Dame goes 11-1 and doesn't get in the playoff, does it head for a conference and that 13th game? The champion of each of four 16-team conferences would fit nicely into the current playoff structure.

I hadn't even thought of the Netflix angle but I could see it happening someday. The rhetoric in the media is adapting and becoming something very similar to what we have already been talking about on this forum. Told you guys that it was coming, a media blitz to prepare the way for the big changes. You may not have believed me then but you see it now.


A guy like Dodd hears a lot of things but he cant directly quote most of it, off the record kind of stuff. What he can do though is to take all of that and put together pieces like this one.

I rate Part 2 of this series as a must read. There is a whole lot more to this piece than just realignment though. I'm interested in seeing what parts stand out to all of you.



With the fight between Oklahoma and Texas? I say the PAC 12 is just a pipe dream if Oklahoma and Kansas go to the Big 10, and Texas goes to the ACC. There really would be no incentives to add any Big 12 teams that could help. That means if they would take any Big 12 teams? They would take some MWC and some C-USA schools. I think there will still be a 16 P5 conferences after this instead of 4.

PAC 12 will bite the bullet and take BYU and Boise State, New Mexico, Hawaii (for the Asian Market they wanted), UTEP and Texas Tech to make 18.

Big 12 will have to replenish with Colorado State, Houston, UTSA, Memphis, Cincinnati, Northern Illinois, UCF, USF, North Dakota State and East Carolina for 16.

Plus, I do not think the Big 10 wants to stay at 16. I think they want to get as many big tv markets that they can get. Could that mean that they will go after none AAU schools in the ACC, AAC and maybe schools like U. Mass, Buffalo and Stony Brook in the future? It is just what ifs right now.
08-09-2015 12:45 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,334
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #40
RE: The Future of College Football by Dennis Dodd
(08-08-2015 10:39 PM)CintiFan Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:17 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:14 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(08-08-2015 12:12 PM)goofus Wrote:  I could see Netflix getting into football condensed replays after the main broadcaster is done with the live broadcast, the way it streams shows that are 1 year old.

Who would want to see that? I would.

That's another great point.

1 hr condensed games are great for time strapped fans. No commercials and they even cut out the 'dead time' between plays.

That would be ESPN and FOX reselling the tv rights that they bought from the conferences. That's not a bad idea considering the current state of ESPN

Dodd's Netflix comment was interesting, but he's not thinking big enough.

The long term viability of the cable model is certainly going to be challenged by ala carte cable channel pricing, but the longer term threat is delivering all media content over the internet.

Maybe Netflix will want to expand, but there's another bigger player in the internet space - Apple.

Apple currently has $200 BILLION dollars in cash on its books. At some point Apple may decide to expand from being a device company to a content company. They already dominate music with itunes and have a fledgling internet media delivery system with AppleTV. It's not far fetched to think they could become a real player in internet media too. They could buy the media rights for the PAC, SEC, B1G, Big 12 and ACC and it would barely make a dent in their cash.

As Lee Corso would say, not so fast my friend. Apple isn't nearly so flush with cash. At their latest quarterly report, they had a little less than $5 billion. More important, their total current assets were $70B and their current liabilities were $65B. Their cash balance is appropriate to maintain their current operations - there isn't much excess liquidity here.
08-09-2015 08:01 AM
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.