(12-29-2018 02:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]Wow. Is the Pac-12 Larry Scott getting desperate?
FIFY.
Presidents and chancellors are tired of Scott's repeated failures. He wants to avoid getting canned. He's trying to conjure up money out of nowhere to make up for the money he should have delivered already.
Money isn't everything in college football.
The AAC has plenty of money but can't get anywhere without bluebloods in the conference.
As long as the PAC is P5 and has its champ going to the Rose Bowl its going to be fine regardless if its 10, 20, 30 million per school back in TV revenue from the XII, B1G, SEC ect.
(12-30-2018 12:17 AM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ] (12-29-2018 02:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]Wow. Is the Pac-12 Larry Scott getting desperate?
FIFY.
Presidents and chancellors are tired of Scott's repeated failures. He wants to avoid getting canned. He's trying to conjure up money out of nowhere to make up for the money he should have delivered already.
Not sure the league is worth much more than what they are getting now. Their current TV contract is overvalued now but do believe the PAC Network could have been handled better to produce more revenue than it has so far.
Best asset the league has remains the Rose Bowl and that value seems to belong more to Big Ten participation than the PAC. But do agree that Scott should be fired for spending way more than he should and for his total lack of understanding of college athletics in general.
By the way, how close was the league to getting the Sooners and the Cowboys back in 2011? If that was a real attempt and not a sham by the Oklahoma schools, whoever at the PAC decided to squash that should have their heads on a spike. Passing up a legitimate content driver in a conference with only half a one (the Trojans) simply isn't smart business.
Sorry if this post comes off way too snarky, but as a fan of a conference that is currently in last place in terms of conference distribution monies I have no sympathy for fans from a certain two conferences complaining about money despite said conferences having overvalued TV contracts and getting more in CFP/NY6 money than the ACC.
Cheers,
Neil
(12-30-2018 01:43 AM)OrangeDude Wrote: [ -> ] (12-30-2018 12:17 AM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ] (12-29-2018 02:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]Wow. Is the Pac-12 Larry Scott getting desperate?
FIFY.
Presidents and chancellors are tired of Scott's repeated failures. He wants to avoid getting canned. He's trying to conjure up money out of nowhere to make up for the money he should have delivered already.
Not sure the league is worth much more than what they are getting now. Their current TV contract is overvalued now but do believe the PAC Network could have been handled better to produce more revenue than it has so far.
Best asset the league has remains the Rose Bowl and that value seems to belong more to Big Ten participation than the PAC. But do agree that Scott should be fired for spending way more than he should and for his total lack of understanding of college athletics in general.
By the way, how close was the league to getting the Sooners and the Cowboys back in 2011? If that was a real attempt and not a sham by the Oklahoma schools, whoever at the PAC decided to squash that should have their heads on a spike. Passing up a legitimate content driver in a conference with only half a one (the Trojans) simply isn't smart business.
Sorry if this post comes off way too snarky, but as a fan of a conference that is currently in last place in terms of conference distribution monies I have no sympathy for fans from a certain two conferences complaining about money despite said conferences having overvalued TV contracts and getting more in CFP/NY6 money than the ACC.
Cheers,
Neil
Just to clear the air for those who aren't as clued in, you would be referencing the PAC and the Big 12 as being overpaid. One of those over payments is deliberate and by your benefactor as much as by FOX. And they both had a hand in overpaying the other because they bought into the PAC overseas stuff that Scott was pushing back when.
The SEC has an undervalued T1 which we will hopefully remedy right soon, and the Big 10 may or may not be overpaid. I'd say in a content driven model they might be overpaid a little bit.
(12-30-2018 01:43 AM)OrangeDude Wrote: [ -> ] (12-30-2018 12:17 AM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ] (12-29-2018 02:45 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]Wow. Is the Pac-12 Larry Scott getting desperate?
FIFY.
Presidents and chancellors are tired of Scott's repeated failures. He wants to avoid getting canned. He's trying to conjure up money out of nowhere to make up for the money he should have delivered already.
Not sure the league is worth much more than what they are getting now.
As detailed in John Canzano's recent series of articles, each Pac-12 member would be receiving about $5 million more per year if the conference expenses were reasonable rather than outrageous, even without any additional gross revenue. And if Scott had set up P12N in partnership with ESPN or Fox, that might be another $5 million per school per year.
Nobody's asking for some magic that would make the media rights as valuable as the SEC's. They're just unhappy with incompetent management. This trial balloon looks like nothing more than a harebrained idea to make the CEOs less unhappy about Scott's own failures.
In a matter of 8 years, Larry Scott went from hero to villain.
I remember how he was called a visionary, a man that would take the Conference of Champions to another level something that his predecessor, Tom Hansen failed to do. He almost got the biggest prize of them all, Texas. He negotiated an unprecedented $1 billion + tv deal and launched a conference network. Oregon was a powerhouse and played for the 2011 BCS championship. Things were going fine. The future looked bright. But the honeymoon only lasted a couple of years.
Since then, the Pac-12 has been in decline. The schedule alliance with the Big Ten fell off. USC fell off the rails. There’s a lack of a football power that dominates the conference like Clemson in the weak ACC and gets an automatic spot in the CFP. It still needs to win a playoff game. Its bowl record has been abysmal. Basketball is a disaster. UCLA and Arizona are down. The Pac-12 Network has failed to live to the expectations. Is it Scott’s entire fault? Not necessarily. The Presidents and Chancellors are keeping him as the face of the conference. But when Utah fans boo the commissioner who gave them the golden ticket to the P5, as it happened on the Pac-12 CCG, things are going bad. The Pac-12 needs change ASAP and it starts at the top.
(12-30-2018 04:56 AM)UTEPDallas Wrote: [ -> ]In a matter of 8 years, Larry Scott went from hero to villain.
I remember how he was called a visionary, a man that would take the Conference of Champions to another level something that his predecessor, Tom Hansen failed to do. He almost got the biggest prize of them all, Texas. He negotiated an unprecedented $1 billion + tv deal and launched a conference network. Oregon was a powerhouse and played for the 2011 BCS championship. Things were going fine. The future looked bright. But the honeymoon only lasted a couple of years.
Since then, the Pac-12 has been in decline. The schedule alliance with the Big Ten fell off. USC fell off the rails. There’s a lack of a football power that dominates the conference like Clemson in the weak ACC and gets an automatic spot in the CFP. It still needs to win a playoff game. Its bowl record has been abysmal. Basketball is a disaster. UCLA and Arizona are down. The Pac-12 Network has failed to live to the expectations. Is it Scott’s entire fault? Not necessarily. The Presidents and Chancellors are keeping him as the face of the conference. But when Utah fans boo the commissioner who gave them the golden ticket to the P5, as it happened on the Pac-12 CCG, things are going bad. The Pac-12 needs change ASAP and it starts at the top.
That scheduling alliance had two problems, the PAC was already playing a 9 game conference schedule which limits the number of options for OOC at 3 and both USC and Stanford already have annual games against ND.
The PAC is an underrated conference in football, imho. But it being on the West Coast and lacking, as you say, one dominant program like Clemson hurts them. But make no mistake about it, if Clemson were in the PAC, they would dominate that league as much as they do the ACC. As you say, the ACC was "weak" this year, but that wasn't the case in 2015, 2016, or 2017 when the Tigers went to the CFP in those years.
Cheers,
Neil
The PAC's biggest failure is the conference TV network.
Allow the bigger schools to retain/develop 3rd tier rights for more money.
It would also make room for Texas under this structure.
An NY8 where the Rose is a playoff game every two years would also further diminish the PAC since they would be rarely in it.
As an aside, ESPN looks to be "forcing" ACC coverage on cable operators as well, in this case Verizon. If the PAC had something like this instead of trying to do it themselves (for the most part unsuccessfully), things in the PAC might be a lot different than they are.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...nd=premium
(12-30-2018 01:53 PM)ICThawk Wrote: [ -> ]As an aside, ESPN looks to be "forcing" ACC coverage on cable operators as well, in this case Verizon. If the PAC had something like this instead of trying to do it themselves (for the most part unsuccessfully), things in the PAC might be a lot different than they are.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...nd=premium
SECN decline?
"The number of pay-TV subscribers who get ESPN fell 2.3 percent to 86 million last year. Less-popular Disney-owned channels, such as the SEC Network and ESPN News, experienced even greater declines."
(12-30-2018 02:46 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (12-30-2018 01:53 PM)ICThawk Wrote: [ -> ]As an aside, ESPN looks to be "forcing" ACC coverage on cable operators as well, in this case Verizon. If the PAC had something like this instead of trying to do it themselves (for the most part unsuccessfully), things in the PAC might be a lot different than they are.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...nd=premium
SECN decline?
"The number of pay-TV subscribers who get ESPN fell 2.3 percent to 86 million last year. Less-popular Disney-owned channels, such as the SEC Network and ESPN News, experienced even greater declines."
Given the nature of programming on the SECN I strongly suspect that its demand is massive within the region and much less so beyond it. Finebaum is niche, and SEC storied doesn't mean a thing to those out West.
But, X if this is the case it certainly doesn't bode well for the ACCN at all and IMO makes the bundling of the two much more likely in the not to distant future. I believe the SECN does quite well in Texas.
To me it means that adding Texas schools (and Oklahoma schools) to the SEC/ACC, possibly with Kansas and then bundling the two means that cable markets from New York to Miami and over to Lubbock will stay dialed in. What happens from Denver to the West won't matter so much long term anyway.
ESPN has tried hard to make the Finebaum show a Big 10 vs SEC event with some ACC news tossed in. Since it is their conception I believe that objective is what they are hoping for. If they can generate enough Big 10 interest among their T shirt fans then they feel they can continue to glean revenue from the most interested and avid football fans from the Northern Midwest to the Southeast and capture Hoops fans along the entire Atlantic Seaboard and into the Northern Midwest and Central Plains.
(12-29-2018 02:07 PM)TerpsNPhoenix Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/dennisdoddcbs/status...95168?s=19
“Private & confidential” PAC-12 plan that would essentially be a series of bridge loans to carry over to next rights deal. Investors are going to want one hell of a return — or should. https://t.co/wBsfCY0xWy
So basically, Larry Scott is going to put the PAC 12 in debt in order to save his job?
The Presidents need to act sooner than later and fire this guy.
(12-30-2018 03:36 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (12-30-2018 02:46 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (12-30-2018 01:53 PM)ICThawk Wrote: [ -> ]As an aside, ESPN looks to be "forcing" ACC coverage on cable operators as well, in this case Verizon. If the PAC had something like this instead of trying to do it themselves (for the most part unsuccessfully), things in the PAC might be a lot different than they are.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...nd=premium
SECN decline?
"The number of pay-TV subscribers who get ESPN fell 2.3 percent to 86 million last year. Less-popular Disney-owned channels, such as the SEC Network and ESPN News, experienced even greater declines."
Given the nature of programming on the SECN I strongly suspect that its demand is massive within the region and much less so beyond it. Finebaum is niche, and SEC storied doesn't mean a thing to those out West.
But, X if this is the case it certainly doesn't bode well for the ACCN at all and IMO makes the bundling of the two much more likely in the not to distant future. I believe the SECN does quite well in Texas.
To me it means that adding Texas schools (and Oklahoma schools) to the SEC/ACC, possibly with Kansas and then bundling the two means that cable markets from New York to Miami and over to Lubbock will stay dialed in. What happens from Denver to the West won't matter so much long term anyway.
ESPN has tried hard to make the Finebaum show a Big 10 vs SEC event with some ACC news tossed in. Since it is their conception I believe that objective is what they are hoping for. If they can generate enough Big 10 interest among their T shirt fans then they feel they can continue to glean revenue from the most interested and avid football fans from the Northern Midwest to the Southeast and capture Hoops fans along the entire Atlantic Seaboard and into the Northern Midwest and Central Plains.
JR, I have no doubt that ESPN has a plan, a good plan and they are executing it with precision.
It would be interesting to see Texas and Kansas stay together in the next phase as well as Oklahoma and West Virginia/Iowa State/Texas Tech.
We may see the crossover games to include: Mizzou/Kansas, Texas/Texas A&M, Pitt/West Virginia, and a guaranteed continuation of the RRS.
Not saying, just sayin'...
Quote:The Pac-12 has "multiple bids of at least $750 million in hand from companies looking to become equity investors in the conference," reports @SmittySBJ
in tonight's SBJ College newsletter. Final decision to come "in months."
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ourand_SBJ/st...0193772544
(06-06-2019 10:26 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote: [ -> ]Not saying, just sayin'...
Quote:The Pac-12 has "multiple bids of at least $750 million in hand from companies looking to become equity investors in the conference," reports @SmittySBJ
in tonight's SBJ College newsletter. Final decision to come "in months."
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ourand_SBJ/st...0193772544
If it transpires it would be a game changer for them. 750 million divided 13 ways to account for a conference share is 57.7 million per school, roughly in line with SEC revenue projected from a T1 renewal. Since the Big 10 is at 54 pending their next contract renewal we could be looking at our new ceiling leaving the the Big 12 roughly 20 million behind and the ACC around 25 million behind factoring in the ACCN.
That would create a strange new paradigm in which the SEC, Big 10 and PAC would be positioned to grow out of the other two.
But it's always good PR to say you have multiple offers in hand, even if you don't. Whose going to know as long as you have 1.
It's a good investment, the money is there
Haw & Hous along with ND game in Vancouver at end of yr
Would be 3rd (22 game package) to sell
Network under control
Improve atten