Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
Author Message
green Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,245
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 389
I Root For: Miami
Location:
Post: #101
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-14-2017 03:16 AM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  For some odd reason, UT has a thing for Pac-12 schools, specially the ones in California. Notice how they go out of their way to schedule them in OOC (same with Oklahoma) and unlike OU, they don't really schedule many SEC, ACC and B1G schools.

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/big-12/t...ghorns.php

2017
09/02 - Maryland
09/09 - San Jose State
09/16 - at USC

2018
09/01 - at Maryland (at Landover, MD)
09/08 - Tulsa
09/15 - USC

2019
08/31 - Louisiana Tech
09/07 - LSU
09/14 - at Rice (NRG Stadium)

2020
09/05 - USF
09/12 - at LSU

2021
09/11 - at Arkansas
09/18 - Rice

2022
09/03 - at USF
09/17 - Ohio State

2023
09/02 - Rice
09/09 - UCF
09/16 - at Ohio State

2024
08/31 - at Michigan
09/07 - USF

2025
TBA

2026
TBA

2027
09/04 - Michigan

VENTURE OUTSIDE YOUR COMFORT ZONE
02-14-2017 10:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
green Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,245
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 389
I Root For: Miami
Location:
Post: #102
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-13-2017 11:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 02:25 PM)green Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 02:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  As for the hipsters in Austin they've been in serious discussions with the SEC on three occasions since '91.

http://www.espn.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/8...sion-teams

I'm thinking bigger. I'm thinking the program that invented swagger, the program that has won five national championships in the last 30 years, the program that nearly joined the SEC in 1990 when the league first expanded.

I'm thinking Miami.
-- espn.com

TALKING POINTS MEMO

Miami was kicked around in '90 when the SEC was evaluating how to move going forward. You were in the battleground contingency that Jackie Sherrill has mentioned several times. It was a 20 team scenario in case once we moved the Big 10 tried a massive drive East and then down the coast.

What we finally decided to shoot for in '91 was Texas, A&M, Florida State, Arkansas, Clemson, and a distant interest from Oklahoma if Texas made the move.

We got 1 of 6. Texas wanted to check out the PAC for the first time. A&M got bogged down in politics (but the dialogue continued off and on until they joined). OU pulled out when Texas failed to commit. Bowden took FSU to ESPN and the ACC. The thing is ESPN was likely behind that and knew the details of the SEC offer because we naively went to them for valuations. The Mouse was just beginning to build the ACC. Clemson was always tepid, and probably interested only to spy, but when one of their boosters recounted the details to a buddy of his who was a S. Carolina guy the word spread and the Gamecocks applied.

So the whole thing was touted as a whopping success because we expanded into two bridge states to future targets, got our 12 schools and two divisions that led to the CCG, and looked to the public like world beaters. And we were. But lost in the shuffle was the fact that ESPN may have been an undermining factor, and the two big fish and their buddy got away.

Well here we are today and we are in South Carolina so not having Clemson is okay. We have Texas A&M and that completes another goal. Missouri was sort of an ESPN suggestion worked through A&M and Florida as I hear it. But that's a nice new market for the SEC. Where we lost out was in failing to acquire a second Florida school. I don't think we will make that mistake in Texas. But at least there we don't have to take a second Texas school to accomplish a victory. Oklahoma gives us all we need in DFW.

The only knock on the Canes was distance. We were still in a driving mentality in '91. We had a shot at Virginia Tech in '91 as well but passed due to distance. Now with ESPN backing both the ACC & SEC largely any movement between the two of us is anathema to them. So we look West.

In a recent interview, former SEC commissioner Harvey Schiller reflected back on how Arkansas and South Carolina became the 11th and 12th schools in the league.

The scramble on the other side of the league was just as furious. Schiller remembers Vince Dooley of Georgia was pushing for Georgia Tech. At Florida, officials were pushing for FSU and Miami.

"They felt it was the only way to control recruiting," Schiller said. "We liked Miami, but passed because they didn't have a complete commitment to all their programs."
-- Paul Finebaum

THE ROAD TO HELL IS PAVED WITH GOOD INTENTIONS
02-14-2017 10:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
green Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,245
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 389
I Root For: Miami
Location:
Post: #103
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-13-2017 11:45 PM)dunstvangeet Wrote:  The Longhorn Network becomes a PAC-12 Network.

launching our own network is a long-term, unequivocal commitment
-- former University of Texas president Bill Powers

DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2017 11:08 AM by green.)
02-14-2017 11:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
green Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,245
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 389
I Root For: Miami
Location:
Post: #104
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-13-2017 11:45 PM)dunstvangeet Wrote:  If the overall revenues from the PAC-12 becomes more than 15 times the Longhorn Network revenues, then Texas gets 1/16th of the share above those networks.

Of all the things I’ve been associated with in 32 years in Texas—starting the foundation, building facilities, all those things—the Longhorn Network, 10 years from now, will maybe be the biggest thing we did.

It’s just going to separate us from everybody else.

And I’m not saying the SEC or Big 10 or Pac 12 did the wrong things by doing a conference network, because they’re going to have a beautiful network, and it’s going to be a lot money. But Florida’s going to sit down there, and they’re going to be one-fourteenth of something. And Ohio State is going to be one-fourteenth of something and USC’s gonna be one-twelfth of something, and we’re going to be 100 percent.
-- DeLoss Dodds

ALL FOR ME
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2017 11:36 AM by green.)
02-14-2017 11:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
green Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,245
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 389
I Root For: Miami
Location:
Post: #105
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-14-2017 03:16 AM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  it's a moot point since Texas has everything it wants in the Big XII: its own network, lots of money, its biggest rival Oklahoma, a Central Time zone league with good exposure, football first schools, a strong basketball conference, being able to dictate terms and conditions to the other schools not named Oklahoma and preferential treatment from the conference offices in Irving. Why give up all that just be a team player and treat other schools as equals in another conference?

then why the foreboding threads ...
are people out of their minds ...
the big12 has everything except stability ...
i.e. if ou casts a wandering eye ...
it's bye, bye, bye ...

DOOM & GLOOM
02-14-2017 12:07 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: #106
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-13-2017 11:45 PM)dunstvangeet Wrote:  They already offered this. There were two rounds when they tried this. The first was the original deal, when they decided that they were going to stay put. The deal was almost exactly what you proposed: that Texas gets to keep all revenue from the Longhorn Network. The Longhorn Network becomes a PAC-12 Network. If the overall revenues from the PAC-12 becomes more than 15 times the Longhorn Network revenues, then Texas gets 1/16th of the share above those networks.

By "they" in your first sentence, I assume you mean that Texas offered the PAC a deal.

I definitely believe that.


(02-13-2017 11:45 PM)dunstvangeet Wrote:  The PAC-12 said "No." If the PAC-12 was willing to accept this, then Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State would already be in the PAC-16. Texas only decided to stay put because the PAC-12 wouldn't accept their Longhorn Network proposal. The only reason that the Longhorns were looking at the ACC was that they figured that the ACC would be desperate enough to actually allow them to keep their Longhorn Network, especially since they didn't have their own conference network. The reality is that none of the Power-4 conferences would allow Texas to keep the deal they're getting in the Big-12.

This is exactly what I was getting at. Although, in my make-believe scenario it was Texas that had the pressure.

But if you simply alter the scenario a tad, such that Texas makes an announcement that it will be choosing either the PAC, ACC, or SEC for full, football playing, membership ... then you watch how those conferences contort themselves to try luring Texas into their respective flocks.

I do think the PAC would buckle. It would let the LHN be a stand-alone ESPN network, and it would let Texas show all of its non-conference home contests on the channel as well as even a limited amount of conference home contests on the channel. And would let Texas keep all revenue from that, while giving Texas a full share of conference distribution and full access to PAC bowls.

Even if it wouldn't allow any conference contests, Texas could still feather its schedules to sprinkle in non-conference games in all its sports throughout the season, giving plenty of content to LHN.



As you've alluded to, this is exactly the key to getting Texas to join one of the P4: membership, with full benefits, AND getting to keep all revenue from the LHN to themselves and stocking the network with sufficient content to keep people subscribing. It's their end game.
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2017 12:12 PM by MplsBison.)
02-14-2017 12:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
p23570
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #107
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-13-2017 11:45 PM)dunstvangeet Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 02:23 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If a sorcerer appeared before the UT Austin president and Univ of Texas board of directors, proclaiming "UT Austin must join the PAC, ACC, or SEC as full, football playing members before the next full moon, or I will make the campus vanish into thin air!"

... I would put my money on them joining the PAC, with rights being given to show some home contents in all sports on LHN and keeping that revenue stream to themselves.
They already offered this. There were two rounds when they tried this. The first was the original deal, when they decided that they were going to stay put. The deal was almost exactly what you proposed: that Texas gets to keep all revenue from the Longhorn Network. The Longhorn Network becomes a PAC-12 Network. If the overall revenues from the PAC-12 becomes more than 15 times the Longhorn Network revenues, then Texas gets 1/16th of the share above those networks.

The PAC-12 said "No." If the PAC-12 was willing to accept this, then Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State would already be in the PAC-16. Texas only decided to stay put because the PAC-12 wouldn't accept their Longhorn Network proposal. The only reason that the Longhorns were looking at the ACC was that they figured that the ACC would be desperate enough to actually allow them to keep their Longhorn Network, especially since they didn't have their own conference network. The reality is that none of the Power-4 conferences would allow Texas to keep the deal they're getting in the Big-12. They'd want Texas to be an equal partner, not dominate it.

FYI ESPN owns LHN, not UT. UT does not call the shots.
02-14-2017 02:57 PM
Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,884
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #108
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-14-2017 10:47 AM)green Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 11:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 02:25 PM)green Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 02:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  As for the hipsters in Austin they've been in serious discussions with the SEC on three occasions since '91.

http://www.espn.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/8...sion-teams

I'm thinking bigger. I'm thinking the program that invented swagger, the program that has won five national championships in the last 30 years, the program that nearly joined the SEC in 1990 when the league first expanded.

I'm thinking Miami.
-- espn.com

TALKING POINTS MEMO

Miami was kicked around in '90 when the SEC was evaluating how to move going forward. You were in the battleground contingency that Jackie Sherrill has mentioned several times. It was a 20 team scenario in case once we moved the Big 10 tried a massive drive East and then down the coast.

What we finally decided to shoot for in '91 was Texas, A&M, Florida State, Arkansas, Clemson, and a distant interest from Oklahoma if Texas made the move.

We got 1 of 6. Texas wanted to check out the PAC for the first time. A&M got bogged down in politics (but the dialogue continued off and on until they joined). OU pulled out when Texas failed to commit. Bowden took FSU to ESPN and the ACC. The thing is ESPN was likely behind that and knew the details of the SEC offer because we naively went to them for valuations. The Mouse was just beginning to build the ACC. Clemson was always tepid, and probably interested only to spy, but when one of their boosters recounted the details to a buddy of his who was a S. Carolina guy the word spread and the Gamecocks applied.

So the whole thing was touted as a whopping success because we expanded into two bridge states to future targets, got our 12 schools and two divisions that led to the CCG, and looked to the public like world beaters. And we were. But lost in the shuffle was the fact that ESPN may have been an undermining factor, and the two big fish and their buddy got away.

Well here we are today and we are in South Carolina so not having Clemson is okay. We have Texas A&M and that completes another goal. Missouri was sort of an ESPN suggestion worked through A&M and Florida as I hear it. But that's a nice new market for the SEC. Where we lost out was in failing to acquire a second Florida school. I don't think we will make that mistake in Texas. But at least there we don't have to take a second Texas school to accomplish a victory. Oklahoma gives us all we need in DFW.

The only knock on the Canes was distance. We were still in a driving mentality in '91. We had a shot at Virginia Tech in '91 as well but passed due to distance. Now with ESPN backing both the ACC & SEC largely any movement between the two of us is anathema to them. So we look West.

In a recent interview, former SEC commissioner Harvey Schiller reflected back on how Arkansas and South Carolina became the 11th and 12th schools in the league.

The scramble on the other side of the league was just as furious. Schiller remembers Vince Dooley of Georgia was pushing for Georgia Tech. At Florida, officials were pushing for FSU and Miami.

"They felt it was the only way to control recruiting," Schiller said. "We liked Miami, but passed because they didn't have a complete commitment to all their programs."
-- Paul Finebaum

THE ROAD TO HELL IS PAVED WITH GOOD INTENTIONS

Roy Kramer would know the full story. Vince pushed for Georgia Tech and Florida pushed for F.S.U. once the field was narrowed. I'm sure sports package did probably play a role in Miami's consideration, but it was minor to some other issues. Vince had political pressure on him, and as an Auburn guy and Georgia head coach, Tech was the most long played rival for both besides each other. But even then schools had to be passed by our broadcast partners and the untold story in all of this goes directly to the SEC's affiliation with one of those.

The suspected network didn't want the SEC to have leverage over all of the Sunshine state. They believed it would give the SEC too much power in the region and they feared losing access to Florida if we bolted for a better deal. They had plans for the ACC. So any plans for a second Florida school to go with the Gators were thwarted at that level of inquiry. Nobody dares talk about dealings with the networks because it is biting the hand that feeds you. We got some other concessions.

Anything Paul Finebaum says will be the sanitized version via ESPN and the present SEC office, and probably cleared of any implications toward Alabama and there were a few in the process. Florida schools & Tech (who left the SEC in a dispute with Alabama) would probably not be listed among Alabama allies in conference voting. Expand East and Florida, Georgia, Auburn, and Tennessee can form a block with the additions. Expand West and Alabama can. Broyles, and Bear's old connections to A&M were kept in mind.

Most of these stories that are coming out today don't reflect any of the behind the scenes internal conflicts over these 26 year old issues. The wrangling was however was made moot by by the aforementioned network vetting. Although officially that kind of stuff never happens..........right?
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2017 04:31 PM by JRsec.)
02-14-2017 04:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,884
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #109
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-14-2017 02:57 PM)p23570 Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 11:45 PM)dunstvangeet Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 02:23 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If a sorcerer appeared before the UT Austin president and Univ of Texas board of directors, proclaiming "UT Austin must join the PAC, ACC, or SEC as full, football playing members before the next full moon, or I will make the campus vanish into thin air!"

... I would put my money on them joining the PAC, with rights being given to show some home contents in all sports on LHN and keeping that revenue stream to themselves.
They already offered this. There were two rounds when they tried this. The first was the original deal, when they decided that they were going to stay put. The deal was almost exactly what you proposed: that Texas gets to keep all revenue from the Longhorn Network. The Longhorn Network becomes a PAC-12 Network. If the overall revenues from the PAC-12 becomes more than 15 times the Longhorn Network revenues, then Texas gets 1/16th of the share above those networks.

The PAC-12 said "No." If the PAC-12 was willing to accept this, then Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State would already be in the PAC-16. Texas only decided to stay put because the PAC-12 wouldn't accept their Longhorn Network proposal. The only reason that the Longhorns were looking at the ACC was that they figured that the ACC would be desperate enough to actually allow them to keep their Longhorn Network, especially since they didn't have their own conference network. The reality is that none of the Power-4 conferences would allow Texas to keep the deal they're getting in the Big-12. They'd want Texas to be an equal partner, not dominate it.

FYI ESPN owns LHN, not UT. UT does not call the shots.

I believe that contractually the voiding of the contract has to be mutual, but yes ESPN owns it.
02-14-2017 04:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DawgNBama Offline
the Rush Limbaugh of CSNBBS
*

Posts: 8,319
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation: 444
I Root For: conservativism/MAGA
Location: US
Post: #110
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-14-2017 10:10 AM)green Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 11:27 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 05:33 PM)chess Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 03:01 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Doesn't want another SEC team in Florida.

Florida is a big state.

Yeah, but so is Michigan, and I don't see the University of Michigan being open to letting WMU (Western Michigan)into to the Big Ten anytime soon, regardless of what WMU's credentials might be; the same goes for Iowa and Iowa State. The reason why UF doesn't want another team in Florida is the same reason why TAMU moved to the SEC: they don't want to have share the spotlight with another in-state team, period.

Vanderbilt
Tennessee

Alabama
Auburn

Mississippi
Mississippi State

PERIOD A WEEK LATE

Those team pairings are a result of the old Southern Conference 1 which later became the SEC (SoCon 2 became ACC, SoCon 3 stayed the SoCon). This was back before tv and radio came about. Things changed a lot when tv and radio came in. I don't have any problems with Miami coming into the SEC, but the 'Canes adminstration doesn't seem to keen on it, and neither does the Gators' admin, so it's a dead issue. Shoot, I would be up for UGa-Miami games!! I really like Mark Richt, and he's one of my all-time favorite UGa coaches (Ray Goff is another). I still don't know what to make of Kirby Smart, but I will say this: you got yourself a good coach in Mark Richt!!
02-14-2017 04:53 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: #111
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-13-2017 11:27 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 05:33 PM)chess Wrote:  
(02-13-2017 03:01 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Doesn't want another SEC team in Florida.

Florida is a big state.

Yeah, but so is Michigan, and I don't see the University of Michigan being open to letting WMU (Western Michigan)into to the Big Ten anytime soon, regardless of what WMU's credentials might be; the same goes for Iowa and Iowa State. The reason why UF doesn't want another team in Florida is the same reason why TAMU moved to the SEC: they don't want to have share the spotlight with another in-state team, period.

Iowa is a small population state. 3 million.
Michigan has 10 million people.

Florida is a big state. Almost 20 million big. Miami, Gainesville, and Tallahassee are not next to each other.
02-15-2017 02:11 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: #112
RE: PAC expanding revenue deficit vs Big Ten and SEC
(02-15-2017 02:11 PM)chess Wrote:  Florida is a big state. Almost 20 million big. Miami, Gainesville, and Tallahassee are not next to each other.

Nonetheless, the state leaders at the time saw fit to proclaim it as the "University of Florida". Not the University of Gainesville, not the University of Northern Florida.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2017 02:59 PM by MplsBison.)
02-15-2017 02:59 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.