(11-01-2022 11:32 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  I'm not sure the obituary is going to be for the PAC.

B1G might go ND/Miami/GT to get the B1G network in Georgia and Florida instead of giving up valuable slots to the PN4.

Miami and GT just don't move the needle any more than UO and UW while being in an already overlapping time zone. If that's who ND mandates, then I get it, but we are so far away from ND making that move and then making a powerplay for certain teams. Miami and GT would be among their top picks for recruiting purposes though.

(11-01-2022 12:39 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 11:32 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  I'm not sure the obituary is going to be for the PAC.

B1G might go ND/Miami/GT to get the B1G network in Georgia and Florida instead of giving up valuable slots to the PN4.

Miami and GT just don't move the needle any more than UO and UW while being in an already overlapping time zone. If that's who ND mandates, then I get it, but we are so far away from ND making that move and then making a powerplay for certain teams. Miami and GT would be among their top picks for recruiting purposes though.

I've always liked Miami/ND to B1G.

Catholics vs. Convicts has national appeal.

Miami's best days were when they were the only FL team in their conference. I think as a fan base they would enjoy being on an island. It just means the "State of Miami" recruiting grounds is that much bigger.

(11-01-2022 12:39 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 11:32 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  I'm not sure the obituary is going to be for the PAC.

B1G might go ND/Miami/GT to get the B1G network in Georgia and Florida instead of giving up valuable slots to the PN4.

Miami and GT just don't move the needle any more than UO and UW while being in an already overlapping time zone. If that's who ND mandates, then I get it, but we are so far away from ND making that move and then making a powerplay for certain teams. Miami and GT would be among their top picks for recruiting purposes though.

For years, the PAC talked about needing to get all their games out of the late-night window to increase visibility. Now it's so important for everyone else to get games into that window?

(11-01-2022 01:02 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 12:39 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 11:32 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  I'm not sure the obituary is going to be for the PAC.

B1G might go ND/Miami/GT to get the B1G network in Georgia and Florida instead of giving up valuable slots to the PN4.

Miami and GT just don't move the needle any more than UO and UW while being in an already overlapping time zone. If that's who ND mandates, then I get it, but we are so far away from ND making that move and then making a powerplay for certain teams. Miami and GT would be among their top picks for recruiting purposes though.

For years, the PAC talked about needing to get all their games out of the late-night window to increase visibility. Now it's so important for everyone else to get games into that window?

Diversify your portfolio

(10-31-2022 11:25 PM)Acres Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 11:14 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 10:39 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 10:27 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  https://twitter.com/TheMontyShow/status/...6438038528

YouTube: The Monty Show ---SUBSCRIBE
@TheMontyShow
·
1h
Sources tell me the #BIG12 getting their deal done first and at $50M was “crushing” to morale among #PAC12 executives, and some difficult conversations today with George Kliavkoff and members institutions, one source telling me “no confidence is an understatement”

If true, you have to believe some P12 teams are having some serious internal discussions about joining the B12. You want an aggressive, visionary leader. Yormark yes...Kliavkoff no.

Yormark is certainly visionary, Kliavkoff is just playing the hand that he was dealt (which was earned for him by his predecessor the Great Larry Scott). Kliavkoff might fail, he might succeed, I don't know, his quality is yet to be determined.

I will say that if he manages to keep things together, even through just one term to ~ 2030, then that would have to be considered a success.

Kliakoffs challenge is getting those schools to sign a GOR. It’s that simple. They have been talking last four months, the numbers are known at this point.

Unless the BIG comes calling, if they want money they will need to sign a GOR. However, this is why they are looking at a 5-7 year media deal. Personally, I think the SHTF occurs when the ACC deal terminates.

(11-01-2022 11:18 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 09:38 AM)Poster Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 11:36 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  Any sources to this alleged meeting?

Canzano reported that they were meeting yesterday. This actually was their annual meeting that they have every year (not some suddenly scheduled emergency meeting like the OP is seeming to insinuate), although it probably was the least pleasant fall meeting they've ever had.

Honestly, the OP's 9 points seem to be his unsourced speculation. In particular, I've seen no evidence for point 1 or point 2.

All but 2 and 6 are essentially facts, not speculation. 6 is speculation. Fox refusing to participate was widely reported. As for #2, there were several reports that ESPN offered $24 million per school. Don't recall the sources, but they were better than the Dudes from Minnesota or West Virginia. Here's one that reported $16 million. https://www.outkick.com/pac-12-espn-repo...eal-offer/ And SBJ reported they were "hundreds of millions" apart.

1. Fox refused to participate in the exclusive window.
2. ESPN offered $240M/year with a GOR in the exclusive window, signifcantly less without.
3. ESPN & Fox are excited enough about the Big 12 to do a very early extension of their contracts, and prioritize it before they finalize any Pac 12 deal.
4. Fox is excited enough about Big 12 basketball to take a slate of their games for the first time.
5. ESPN had enough faith in the future of the Big 12 to give the league a pro rata clause for expansion.
6. To try to meet or exceed the Big 12 revenue numbers, the Pac 12 will have to take a lot of games off the major college athletics networks onto platforms not known for college sports.
7. Oregon and Washington attempted to leave for the Big 10 with USC and UCLA.
8. There may be sentiment among some schools to either avoid a GOR or push for unequal revenue sharing.
9. Aside from a longshot pitch to retain UCLA, there aren't any "additive" expansion targets out there now that the Big 12 has agreed to extend the GOR. Schools like SDSU and SMU make each piece of the pie smaller for the rest...

Of course, if the PAC gets terms like the B!2 then the pieces remain the same.

(11-01-2022 01:02 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  For years, the PAC talked about needing to get all their games out of the late-night window to increase visibility. Now it's so important for everyone else to get games into that window?

I think the calculus changes when you go to a majority streaming model (whether it's Big Tech or generic ESPN or Fox Sports apps) with headsets. It's simply easier for central and east coast viewers to stream those late games on headsets instead of a large TV that's barely audible when most family members are sleeping. People are watching on devices now. That's a fact.

(11-01-2022 02:51 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 01:02 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  For years, the PAC talked about needing to get all their games out of the late-night window to increase visibility. Now it's so important for everyone else to get games into that window?

I think the calculus changes when you go to a majority streaming model (whether it's Big Tech or generic ESPN or Fox Sports apps) with headsets. It's simply easier for central and east coast viewers to stream those late games on headsets instead of a large TV that's barely audible when most family members are sleeping. People are watching on devices now. That's a fact.

People are watching on devices, but that's a bit overstated in terms of the percentage of people doing it compared to watching on TV.

I recall Marchand and Ourand talking about the viewer data that they've seen for the Amazon NFL games and the vast majority of those viewers were watching on a television via a smart TV or streaming hub. It's the same with non-sports programs on Netflix and Disney+.

(11-01-2022 03:46 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 02:51 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 01:02 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  For years, the PAC talked about needing to get all their games out of the late-night window to increase visibility. Now it's so important for everyone else to get games into that window?

I think the calculus changes when you go to a majority streaming model (whether it's Big Tech or generic ESPN or Fox Sports apps) with headsets. It's simply easier for central and east coast viewers to stream those late games on headsets instead of a large TV that's barely audible when most family members are sleeping. People are watching on devices now. That's a fact.

People are watching on devices, but that's a bit overstated in terms of the percentage of people doing it compared to watching on TV.

I recall Marchand and Ourand talking about the viewer data that they've seen for the Amazon NFL games and the vast majority of those viewers were watching on a television via a smart TV or streaming hub. It's the same with non-sports programs on Netflix and Disney+.

You just aren't going to leave your TV on in a starter home at those hours. You are likely to be in bed as a central or east coast viewer, viewing on a device. I can understand a lawyer having multiple TVs and a separate room to stream on the TV early in the morning, but at some point, you retire to bed at the half and maybe snooze watch the second half on a device if it's still a tight game.

(11-01-2022 03:46 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  People are watching on devices, but that's a bit overstated in terms of the percentage of people doing it compared to watching on TV.

I recall Marchand and Ourand talking about the viewer data that they've seen for the Amazon NFL games and the vast majority of those viewers were watching on a television via a smart TV or streaming hub. It's the same with non-sports programs on Netflix and Disney+.

Sure. Larger devices are best for viewing whole games. Smaller devices are good for viewing highlight videos and post-game chatter. Sports TikTok.

(11-02-2022 05:06 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 03:46 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 02:51 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(11-01-2022 01:02 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  For years, the PAC talked about needing to get all their games out of the late-night window to increase visibility. Now it's so important for everyone else to get games into that window?

I think the calculus changes when you go to a majority streaming model (whether it's Big Tech or generic ESPN or Fox Sports apps) with headsets. It's simply easier for central and east coast viewers to stream those late games on headsets instead of a large TV that's barely audible when most family members are sleeping. People are watching on devices now. That's a fact.

People are watching on devices, but that's a bit overstated in terms of the percentage of people doing it compared to watching on TV.

I recall Marchand and Ourand talking about the viewer data that they've seen for the Amazon NFL games and the vast majority of those viewers were watching on a television via a smart TV or streaming hub. It's the same with non-sports programs on Netflix and Disney+.

You just aren't going to leave your TV on in a starter home at those hours. You are likely to be in bed as a central or east coast viewer, viewing on a device. I can understand a lawyer having multiple TVs and a separate room to stream on the TV early in the morning, but at some point, you retire to bed at the half and maybe snooze watch the second half on a device if it's still a tight game.

Some people have TVs in bedrooms.

(11-02-2022 05:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  Some people have TVs in bedrooms.

Of course, but your partner probably has other interests or doesn't want to be disturbed.

(11-02-2022 05:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2022 05:06 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  ....
at some point, you retire to bed at the half and maybe snooze watch the second half on a device if it's still a tight game.

Some people have TVs in bedrooms.

People have been sleeping in front of TV games for generations. There's tradition here.

The first commercial ad spot in a televised game is the priciest one to buy. More than one reason exists for this.

(11-02-2022 05:53 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(11-02-2022 05:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2022 05:06 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  ....
at some point, you retire to bed at the half and maybe snooze watch the second half on a device if it's still a tight game.

Some people have TVs in bedrooms.

People have been sleeping in front of TV games for generations. There's tradition here.

The first commercial ad spot in a televised game is the priciest one to buy. More than one reason exists for this.

The late Sunday afternoon golf/baseball/NFL on TV nap on the couch is definitely a tradition unlike any other in my house.

Just anecdotally, it’s the opposite in my household. My wife generally gets tired before I do, so she’ll take an iPad up to bed and watch her show (typically The Bachelor or something of that ilk) until she falls asleep while I watch sports on the larger TV.

(11-02-2022 08:46 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-02-2022 05:53 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(11-02-2022 05:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2022 05:06 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  ....
at some point, you retire to bed at the half and maybe snooze watch the second half on a device if it's still a tight game.

Some people have TVs in bedrooms.

People have been sleeping in front of TV games for generations. There's tradition here.

The first commercial ad spot in a televised game is the priciest one to buy. More than one reason exists for this.

The late Sunday afternoon golf/baseball/NFL on TV nap on the couch is definitely a tradition unlike any other in my house.

Just anecdotally, it’s the opposite in my household. My wife generally gets tired before I do, so she’ll take an iPad up to bed and watch her show (typically The Bachelor or something of that ilk) until she falls asleep while I watch sports on the larger TV.

My wife frequently falls asleep on the couch watching the Bachelor or the Voice with her iPad in her hand playing Candy Crush or looking at Facebook.

I have fallen asleep on the couch trying to watch one of those 10:30 eastern games. Just can't make it through them in the Eastern Time Zone.

(10-31-2022 10:53 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 10:45 AM)Crayton Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 10:23 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  The 10 leftover Pac 12 presidents are meeting today in San Francisco.

Here's what they know:

1. Fox refused to participate in the exclusive window.
2. ESPN offered $240M/year with a GOR in the exclusive window, signifcantly less without.
3. ESPN & Fox are excited enough about the Big 12 to do a very early extension of their contracts, and prioritize it before they finalize any Pac 12 deal.
4. Fox is excited enough about Big 12 basketball to take a slate of their games for the first time.
5. ESPN had enough faith in the future of the Big 12 to give the league a pro rata clause for expansion.
6. To try to meet or exceed the Big 12 revenue numbers, the Pac 12 will have to take a lot of games off the major college athletics networks onto platforms not known for college sports.
7. Oregon and Washington attempted to leave for the Big 10 with USC and UCLA.
8. There may be sentiment among some schools to either avoid a GOR or push for unequal revenue sharing.

Kliakov on the hotseat today...

PS Pretty sure this is why the new Big 12 deal was announced on a Sunday.

Oof. Missed news of the pro rata. Those eyes will be a-wanderin'. Once (if) a few 4C schools jump, I wonder if Oregon and Washington jump as well.

Related, if the Pac-10 deal is satisfactory and no one jumps, who (if anyone) does the Big 12 target for future expansion? Yormark was vocal on "going national".

Why do we assume the "4 Corners" all think alike. Colorado and Arizona look a lot more like ACC schools than Big XII schools.

If K-Dub can't convince the dorks at the Big Ten roundtable to expand:

ACC type beat: Wash, Oregon, Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Colorado

Big XII type beat: Wazzou, Beaver St., Tempe St., Utah

Colorado was a former Big 12 school how could they "look" more like an ACC school than a Big 12 school? And for years the Arizona schools were considered potential Big 12 schools because of the similar cultures. I know that you have been anxious about the New Big 12 passing the ACC in the pecking order (you even pushed for the ACC to raid the Big 12) but the ACC is stuck with that deal and an uncertain future and TV shot down an ACC/Pac-12 collaboration months ago as well as ACC expansion out West. ESPN will get their West Coast content via the Big 12 not the ACC.

(12-25-2022 03:29 PM)CatsClaw1 Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 10:53 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 10:45 AM)Crayton Wrote:  

(10-31-2022 10:23 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  The 10 leftover Pac 12 presidents are meeting today in San Francisco.

Here's what they know:

1. Fox refused to participate in the exclusive window.
2. ESPN offered $240M/year with a GOR in the exclusive window, signifcantly less without.
3. ESPN & Fox are excited enough about the Big 12 to do a very early extension of their contracts, and prioritize it before they finalize any Pac 12 deal.
4. Fox is excited enough about Big 12 basketball to take a slate of their games for the first time.
5. ESPN had enough faith in the future of the Big 12 to give the league a pro rata clause for expansion.
6. To try to meet or exceed the Big 12 revenue numbers, the Pac 12 will have to take a lot of games off the major college athletics networks onto platforms not known for college sports.
7. Oregon and Washington attempted to leave for the Big 10 with USC and UCLA.
8. There may be sentiment among some schools to either avoid a GOR or push for unequal revenue sharing.

Kliakov on the hotseat today...

PS Pretty sure this is why the new Big 12 deal was announced on a Sunday.

Oof. Missed news of the pro rata. Those eyes will be a-wanderin'. Once (if) a few 4C schools jump, I wonder if Oregon and Washington jump as well.

Related, if the Pac-10 deal is satisfactory and no one jumps, who (if anyone) does the Big 12 target for future expansion? Yormark was vocal on "going national".

Why do we assume the "4 Corners" all think alike. Colorado and Arizona look a lot more like ACC schools than Big XII schools.

If K-Dub can't convince the dorks at the Big Ten roundtable to expand:

ACC type beat: Wash, Oregon, Stanford, Cal, Arizona, Colorado

Big XII type beat: Wazzou, Beaver St., Tempe St., Utah

Colorado was a former Big 12 school how could they "look" more like an ACC school than a Big 12 school? And for years the Arizona schools were considered potential Big 12 schools because of the similar cultures. I know that you have been anxious about the New Big 12 passing the ACC in the pecking order (you even pushed for the ACC to raid the Big 12) but the ACC is stuck with that deal and an uncertain future and TV shot down an ACC/Pac-12 collaboration months ago as well as ACC expansion out West. ESPN will get their West Coast content via the Big 12 not the ACC.

lol easy. The Big XII today doesn’t look anything like the Big XII of 1996. If you don’t understand how Colorado looks institutionally more like ACC schools than Big XII schools, well, I can’t help you.

I didn’t push for a raid, I’ve said Houston would be one of the few schools I think the ACC should expand with. They’re not a Big XII school yet.

The ACC would be smart to proactively expand, the problem is the power brokers in the ACC (FSU, Clemson, UNC) have no interest in expanding. It's only a matter of time before the B1G and the SEC expand again. The aforementioned schools plus a few others that they bring along (Miami, UVA, Duke) will be able to secure high-value TV contracts in an S2 conference.

The mid-level ACC programs (Louisville, Pitt, NC State, VTech) will probably end up in the red-headed stepchild Big 12 power conference and the lower-level power schools (BC, Wake, maybe Syracuse, maybe GTech) will be left to band with the rest of the G5 misfits.

(11-02-2022 05:53 PM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(11-02-2022 05:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-02-2022 05:06 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  ....
at some point, you retire to bed at the half and maybe snooze watch the second half on a device if it's still a tight game.

Some people have TVs in bedrooms.

People have been sleeping in front of TV games for generations. There's tradition here.

The first commercial ad spot in a televised game is the priciest one to buy. More than one reason exists for this.

That's my only reason for watching the NFL. It's free and puts me to sleep faster than any sleeping pill could.

(12-26-2022 09:30 AM)UCbball21 Wrote:  The ACC would be smart to proactively expand, the problem is the power brokers in the ACC (FSU, Clemson, UNC) have no interest in expanding. It's only a matter of time before the B1G and the SEC expand again. The aforementioned schools plus a few others that they bring along (Miami, UVA, Duke) will be able to secure high-value TV contracts in an S2 conference.

The mid-level ACC programs (Louisville, Pitt, NC State, VTech) will probably end up in the red-headed stepchild Big 12 power conference and the lower-level power schools (BC, Wake, maybe Syracuse, maybe GTech) will be left to band with the rest of the G5 misfits.

Duke have more of a Kansas problem. Even Miami would have problems getting into a major 2 since their program have gone below the fan support a lot than Boise State at times. Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech and NC State might wind up in the SEC. As Big 10 and SEC are going after the same schools of Florida State, UNC and Virginia? I don't see they have enough schools be able to get rid of the GORs until it expires in 2036 since not everybody have a spot in another conference.