(08-31-2022 07:25 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:44 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:35 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:09 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  While big egos make personal animosity a possible reason for these entities to make some moves (executives ARE human, after all), most people who climb high enough to make these decisions are able to make those decisions based on facts and economics.

But while I doubt whether such a move would be made out of “hate”, I do think that there may have been some strategic considerations in play. The more healthy broadcasting entities there are, the more likely that someone with a strong inventory can maximize its value. Even if the world is evolving, the main over the air networks have the best chance to maximize viewership, and it wouldn’t behoove anyone to let ESPN get too powerful. And while there must be someone still watching SportsCenter, I don’t know anyone who still does, and I’m old enough that it was once a habit for my generation. I suspect most younger people get their sports news/scores/highlights online instead.

I'm pretty sure ESPN had designs on other issues before they entered the negotiations. With FOX conducting them the signal had already been sent so their decision to withdraw completed a bit of a discovery process which confirmed their plans.

If FOX has the B1G and ESPN has the SEC and both agree to split the B12 then I doubt what the B1G did or didn't want to do mattered much at all. This could all easily be a network dog and pony show for plausible deniability against accusations of collusion if the ACC is parsed and they split the consolidation conference 50/50 and control an expanded playoff.

It will be fun to see if that was the case when the B12 has a new contract.

Why do you keep assuming that it's Fox in control and not the Big Ten?

Did Fox really want to partner up with CBS and NBC and split the Big Ten CCG? I doubt it.

Yes, Fox did want that. They were in the room for a reason. They don’t have the bandwidth to give to an expanded BIG or ability to fund by themselves,

OK stop right there and think about that. I'll go ahead and say it--Let That Sink In.

They don't have the bandwidth or the ability to fund it by themselves.

That means they don't have the ability to call the shots.

Quote:plus basically have a stake in BIG. They needed partners. Getting two OTA to help get to a P2 +1 setup with ESPN having the other half is an agreeable setup.

although the preference for OTA as partners may have been in part the BIGs, Fox wants the BIG to get top billing. Going with ESPN doesn’t do that and also left NBC and CBS to team on PAC, which they clearly didn’t want, or Big 12.

Now Fox has BIG positioned with equal or better exposure to SEC, and still able to get more PAC, plus a piece of 3rd conference.

If Fox and BIG move 4 more PAC to BIG, resulting in ESPN getting BIG late night window.

Stop there, read that again and think about how that makes any sense for Fox. Fox is gonna pay a bunch of money so that ESPN can get Big Ten games?

Quote:In return Fox helps ESPN on 3rd conference as a place for ACC leftovers?

When a market isn’t competitive and only two participants, you get interesting deals

(08-31-2022 07:47 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 07:25 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:44 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:35 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:09 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  While big egos make personal animosity a possible reason for these entities to make some moves (executives ARE human, after all), most people who climb high enough to make these decisions are able to make those decisions based on facts and economics.

But while I doubt whether such a move would be made out of “hate”, I do think that there may have been some strategic considerations in play. The more healthy broadcasting entities there are, the more likely that someone with a strong inventory can maximize its value. Even if the world is evolving, the main over the air networks have the best chance to maximize viewership, and it wouldn’t behoove anyone to let ESPN get too powerful. And while there must be someone still watching SportsCenter, I don’t know anyone who still does, and I’m old enough that it was once a habit for my generation. I suspect most younger people get their sports news/scores/highlights online instead.

I'm pretty sure ESPN had designs on other issues before they entered the negotiations. With FOX conducting them the signal had already been sent so their decision to withdraw completed a bit of a discovery process which confirmed their plans.

If FOX has the B1G and ESPN has the SEC and both agree to split the B12 then I doubt what the B1G did or didn't want to do mattered much at all. This could all easily be a network dog and pony show for plausible deniability against accusations of collusion if the ACC is parsed and they split the consolidation conference 50/50 and control an expanded playoff.

It will be fun to see if that was the case when the B12 has a new contract.

Why do you keep assuming that it's Fox in control and not the Big Ten?

Did Fox really want to partner up with CBS and NBC and split the Big Ten CCG? I doubt it.

Yes, Fox did want that. They were in the room for a reason. They don’t have the bandwidth to give to an expanded BIG or ability to fund by themselves,

OK stop right there and think about that. I'll go ahead and say it--Let That Sink In.

They don't have the bandwidth or the ability to fund it by themselves.

That means they don't have the ability to call the shots.

Quote:plus basically have a stake in BIG. They needed partners. Getting two OTA to help get to a P2 +1 setup with ESPN having the other half is an agreeable setup.

although the preference for OTA as partners may have been in part the BIGs, Fox wants the BIG to get top billing. Going with ESPN doesn’t do that and also left NBC and CBS to team on PAC, which they clearly didn’t want, or Big 12.

Now Fox has BIG positioned with equal or better exposure to SEC, and still able to get more PAC, plus a piece of 3rd conference.

If Fox and BIG move 4 more PAC to BIG, resulting in ESPN getting BIG late night window.

Stop there, read that again and think about how that makes any sense for Fox. Fox is gonna pay a bunch of money so that ESPN can get Big Ten games?

Quote:In return Fox helps ESPN on 3rd conference as a place for ACC leftovers?

When a market isn’t competitive and only two participants, you get interesting deals

No it doesn’t. What an egregious logical fallacy on your part.

Let’s apply your logic consistently to show you- the BIG can’t do much without getting paid by the networks. So they also are not calling the shots!

The BIG has more agency than the Big 12 or PAC, but that agency is endowed by the networks, and Fox is overseeing. Warren had to get slapped in the face by Fox and USC before the BIG caught on to the opportunity that was in front of them.

Fox would be getting ESPN to spend money on more BIG expansion. Which is great for them as the BIG’s business partner..

(08-31-2022 05:21 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:11 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Perhaps I should rephrase. It's not that the Big Ten hates ESPN for no reason.

The Big Ten has a deep distrust of ESPN, and believes that ESPN is systematically low-balling the Big Ten and college sports as a whole. Therefore the Big Ten will do everything they can to escape the ESPN ecosystem and make deals with non-ESPN partners.

They have achieved this for the Big Ten games. The next objective point is the next CFP contract. So I don't expect the Big Ten to approve an early expansion-extension of the contract.

I don't think anyone doubts that espn has and will continue to.

I doubt it. ESPN is all about content and ratings. The SEC plays better football, and more people want to watch our games, in spite of the fact that the B1G is in 48 of the top 50 TV markets or whatever the number is today. But if in the future the B1G surpasses the SEC, ESPN would dropkick us to the curb in a heartbeat and go all out to try to get all the B1G content, instead.

(08-31-2022 08:03 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:21 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:11 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Perhaps I should rephrase. It's not that the Big Ten hates ESPN for no reason.

The Big Ten has a deep distrust of ESPN, and believes that ESPN is systematically low-balling the Big Ten and college sports as a whole. Therefore the Big Ten will do everything they can to escape the ESPN ecosystem and make deals with non-ESPN partners.

They have achieved this for the Big Ten games. The next objective point is the next CFP contract. So I don't expect the Big Ten to approve an early expansion-extension of the contract.

I don't think anyone doubts that espn has and will continue to.

I doubt it. ESPN is all about content and ratings. The SEC plays better football, and more people want to watch our games, in spite of the fact that the B1G is in 48 of the top 50 TV markets or whatever the number is today. But if in the future the B1G surpasses the SEC, ESPN would dropkick us to the curb in a heartbeat and go all out to try to get all the B1G content, instead.

I don't think they consider it in these terms often, but I guess the Big Ten would say that ESPN is lowballing the SEC as well. If the SEC were on the market right now, they'd surely do as well as the Big Ten just did. But they're not, they're tied to ESPN for another 10+ years.

(08-31-2022 06:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:44 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:35 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:09 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  While big egos make personal animosity a possible reason for these entities to make some moves (executives ARE human, after all), most people who climb high enough to make these decisions are able to make those decisions based on facts and economics.

But while I doubt whether such a move would be made out of “hate”, I do think that there may have been some strategic considerations in play. The more healthy broadcasting entities there are, the more likely that someone with a strong inventory can maximize its value. Even if the world is evolving, the main over the air networks have the best chance to maximize viewership, and it wouldn’t behoove anyone to let ESPN get too powerful. And while there must be someone still watching SportsCenter, I don’t know anyone who still does, and I’m old enough that it was once a habit for my generation. I suspect most younger people get their sports news/scores/highlights online instead.

I'm pretty sure ESPN had designs on other issues before they entered the negotiations. With FOX conducting them the signal had already been sent so their decision to withdraw completed a bit of a discovery process which confirmed their plans.

If FOX has the B1G and ESPN has the SEC and both agree to split the B12 then I doubt what the B1G did or didn't want to do mattered much at all. This could all easily be a network dog and pony show for plausible deniability against accusations of collusion if the ACC is parsed and they split the consolidation conference 50/50 and control an expanded playoff.

It will be fun to see if that was the case when the B12 has a new contract.

Why do you keep assuming that it's Fox in control and not the Big Ten?

Did Fox really want to partner up with CBS and NBC and split the Big Ten CCG? I doubt it.

It would totally depend upon what their overall objectives are and how much the wished to spend on other product. Remember John, there is no FS2. But they do own 10% more of the BTN. 3 networks virtually presupposed the need for more inventory in order to make the cooperation work. FOX isn't done and neither is ESPN.

Well, Fox is done with the Pac at least... :)

(08-31-2022 06:56 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 06:40 PM)Renandpat Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 04:28 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  It's not Fox vs ESPN. Fox is a minor player.

The Big Ten hates ESPN, and so the Big Ten engineered their three-network NFL-lite Saturday triple-header to escape the clutches of the Mothership. USC and the LA market made it a lot easier to make the NFL-lite three network model work.

The Big Ten hates ESPN, and so they spiked early playoff expansion so that it could go to market in 2024. (Possibly split between multiple partners, but the Big Ten wants to see what sort of offers the OTA networks and Amazon come up with.)

Kinda old news.

Jim Delaney thought that ESPN was low balling the conference back in 2004, hence the formation of Big Ten Network.



Saturday Tradition ran a story six years ago which detailed the times which Delaney showed his displeasure with negotiations with Disney (ABC and ESPN), specifically Mark Shapiro.

And yet the widespread assumption on this board is that it's fox telling the Big Ten what to do rather than the other way around

I've said for a long time that the SEC and B1G are driving this bus. Sure, today ESPN and Fox are our partners, and ESPN has been involved in quite a few Conference shenanigans over the years. But come 2030/34, our partners could be Amazon, or just NBC for both of us, or CBS, or Fox, Apple, etc etc etc. Smaller/weaker conferences might not have many options, but when you're one of a Duopoly like the B1GSEC then you have incredible market power.

(08-31-2022 08:06 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 06:00 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:44 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:35 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-31-2022 05:09 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  While big egos make personal animosity a possible reason for these entities to make some moves (executives ARE human, after all), most people who climb high enough to make these decisions are able to make those decisions based on facts and economics.

But while I doubt whether such a move would be made out of “hate”, I do think that there may have been some strategic considerations in play. The more healthy broadcasting entities there are, the more likely that someone with a strong inventory can maximize its value. Even if the world is evolving, the main over the air networks have the best chance to maximize viewership, and it wouldn’t behoove anyone to let ESPN get too powerful. And while there must be someone still watching SportsCenter, I don’t know anyone who still does, and I’m old enough that it was once a habit for my generation. I suspect most younger people get their sports news/scores/highlights online instead.

I'm pretty sure ESPN had designs on other issues before they entered the negotiations. With FOX conducting them the signal had already been sent so their decision to withdraw completed a bit of a discovery process which confirmed their plans.

If FOX has the B1G and ESPN has the SEC and both agree to split the B12 then I doubt what the B1G did or didn't want to do mattered much at all. This could all easily be a network dog and pony show for plausible deniability against accusations of collusion if the ACC is parsed and they split the consolidation conference 50/50 and control an expanded playoff.

It will be fun to see if that was the case when the B12 has a new contract.

Why do you keep assuming that it's Fox in control and not the Big Ten?

Did Fox really want to partner up with CBS and NBC and split the Big Ten CCG? I doubt it.

It would totally depend upon what their overall objectives are and how much the wished to spend on other product. Remember John, there is no FS2. But they do own 10% more of the BTN. 3 networks virtually presupposed the need for more inventory in order to make the cooperation work. FOX isn't done and neither is ESPN.

Well, Fox is done with the Pac at least... :)

Like hell! There will be more taken from the PAC by a FOX property.