(01-19-2023 01:28 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(01-19-2023 01:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-19-2023 02:13 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I think they'd be thrilled to go with an Amazon or Apple streaming service, if it would give them $40mil a year per team. At least until all the realignment settles down. Maybe as short as 2025.

I dont think they are going to get that much. That number assumes they can take the very best games from Amazon---without Amazon lowering the bid---and give CBS a package of CBS-OTA worthy games (one per week) at a premium price. Lets just use common sense----if anything near 40 million was currently on the table this deal would have long ago been done. The reason it hasnt been done yet is they are probably much closer to 20 million per team than they are to the Big12's 32 million per team----and thats a problem for the Pac12.....so the Pac12 continues to move the pieces around hoping to find a magic formula to get Big12 money or better.

I wonder...

If Colorado, AZ, AZ state, and SDSU joined the B12...

a.) would Fox and espn update the B12 media deal accordingly

b.) would a smaller PAC conference actually do better for media deal.

My thought on b, is that I think we're starting to see sticker shock for total conference media deal numbers.

Perhaps a smaller conference could get more.

Also, it definitely could reduce the PAC schools' travel times (and this travel costs) if those 3 left - which is of course another monetary concern to consider.

I don't see a scenario where a smaller conference would generate more money. You would need to get rid of duplicate market additions and under performing brands to do that. A conference without Washington State/Oregon State is different than one with no Arizonas or Colorado.

I do think that if the right group came to the Big 12, you would see ESPN/FOX bid on that media package with late night inventory and you would see the PAC be undercut. With competition from the B1G, Big 12, and PAC, the late night inventory slot would diminish in value as the PAC would no longer have a monopoly on it.

I don't know if there is sticker shock going on, or something else. I said earlier, if the press doesn't start leaking some semi-legitimate figures by the end of January, then something is amiss. They have had plenty of time to assemble their packages and deals and talk with outside parties. They should have a good idea of their value at this point. There may be "no rush" but I'm pretty sure that any teams planning on leaving have until July 2023 to give their notice. I can't see stability being strong if there is no media deal in place by that point.

I think they get a deal done, and it will be something that is not great but has to be tolerated. I don't see expansion happening absent a departure from Oregon and Washington.