Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Poll: Which of these do you consider most likely?
Big 12 will lose 50% of revenue; PAC 10 will lose 0%
Big 12 will end up ahead of the "PAC-10"
PAC will add teams to stay even to
Big 12 and PAC will get similar broadcasting deals
Both will have to expand to maintain revenue streams
The conference with the most teams will earn the most revenue
Something else will happen (describe in comments)
[Show Results]
 
Post Reply 
Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
Author Message
Pervis_Griffith Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,295
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation: 265
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
Both conferences are going to take a pretty large cut in total revenue.

If the Big Ten lost Michigan and Ohio State, they'd take a huge hit too. Ditto the ACC with Clemson and North Carolina. Etc.


The Big XII is more stable, but when they added 4 schools to replace 2 schools, they added mouths to feed.

I wouldn't be shocked if the Big XII had a slightly larger overall annual revenue number than the PAC, but their per team share will be lower than a 10 team PAC.


07-coffee3
08-05-2022 05:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Realigned Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 98
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation: 18
I Root For: Big 12
Location: Houston
Post: #22
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
Maybe, it’s because I am in Big 12 country, but I’ve seen many projections that say the Big 12 will do better than the PAC 12. I don’t think anyone really knows because the Big 12 has three more years on its current contract.

When it comes to viewership, even though OU and UT are leaving, OSU is still in the conference to cover the state of Oklahoma and there are four Texas schools in the conference, so there will continue to be interest in Big 12 games in the Texas and Oklahoma markets.

The LA market for the PAC 12 is different. LA viewers who have ties to UCLA or USC currently have interest in an ASU-Utah game because the results could impact their team. Now that UCLA and USC are leaving, there will be less interest in other PAC 12 games.

However, in Texas and Oklahoma, there will continue to be interest in a Kansas State-Iowa State
game because it could impact Okla State or Baylor or TCU.
08-05-2022 06:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AztecEmpire Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 214
Joined: May 2020
Reputation: 21
I Root For: SDSU
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 04:39 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 04:25 PM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  The truth is UCLA has been a shell of its former self even in comparison to how far USC has been down the last decade. So from a viewership perspective losing UCLA doesnt appear that bad when you look at the tv numbers in the PAC. Basically the PAC lost the number 1 and 5 most watched teams in the conf whereas the B12 lost 1 & 2. That said losing LA is going to hurt and I still think both conferences will have comparable tv deals.

Losing LA is going to hurt, especially if the PAC doesn't replace USC or UCLA.

It may be that both conference will have comparable TV deals, but it seems to me that, with Cincy, UCF, Houston, and BYU coming aboard, the Big XII is going to be a much stronger conference with greater viewership potential than a "PAC-10" would be.

The Big XII probably made a wise move by adding those four schools, and the PAC would be well advised to consider doing the same. In view of the fact that the SEC and Big Ten are about to become 16-team conferences, the time may have come for the PAC to expand, as well.

.
It would not surprise me at all if 2 contracts from now the B12 has a better payout, even if most of the current PAC10 remains.
08-05-2022 06:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 40,203
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2259
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 06:29 PM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 04:39 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 04:25 PM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  The truth is UCLA has been a shell of its former self even in comparison to how far USC has been down the last decade. So from a viewership perspective losing UCLA doesnt appear that bad when you look at the tv numbers in the PAC. Basically the PAC lost the number 1 and 5 most watched teams in the conf whereas the B12 lost 1 & 2. That said losing LA is going to hurt and I still think both conferences will have comparable tv deals.

Losing LA is going to hurt, especially if the PAC doesn't replace USC or UCLA.

It may be that both conference will have comparable TV deals, but it seems to me that, with Cincy, UCF, Houston, and BYU coming aboard, the Big XII is going to be a much stronger conference with greater viewership potential than a "PAC-10" would be.

The Big XII probably made a wise move by adding those four schools, and the PAC would be well advised to consider doing the same. In view of the fact that the SEC and Big Ten are about to become 16-team conferences, the time may have come for the PAC to expand, as well.

.
It would not surprise me at all if 2 contracts from now the B12 has a better payout, even if most of the current PAC10 remains.

Thats my belief as well---though I dont think the difference will be anything huge. I really do believe that the biggest potential payout is in a Big16 where the 4-corners schools join the current new Big12. There are a lot of synergies to be had there. That would allow about 30% of the Big12 inventory to be capable of providing late night window content. It would make the Big12 #1 in the Mountain time zone (and #2 in most of the rest of its footprint), and it would leverage late games in those low population western areas by making them meaningful to watch for a footprint largely located in the more populated central and eastern time zones.
(This post was last modified: 08-05-2022 06:38 PM by Attackcoog.)
08-05-2022 06:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SouthEastAlaska Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,251
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 86
I Root For: UW,PAC12
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
I said this on one of the other billion threads we have but if the BigXII loses $$ it's because OUT was worth 50% of the BigXII value. The 4 schools that were brought in are nice but they don't recoup the lost money. On top of the lost value you now are splitting the pie by 12 mouth's instead of 10.

As far as the PAC is concerned, when you evaluate the PAC's lost value it's only around 25% if I remember correctly. UW on an individual basis is actually the most valuable school in the PAC and that's including USC and UCLA. What drove up their valuation is the LA market, much like the addition of Rutgers, the market drove the add more than the school. So yes the PAC is going to be hurt by the loss of the LA schools but they haven't added extra mouth's that dilute the conferences remaining schools values.

All this being said I don't think there will be a big difference between the two when both have signed their new TV deals.
(This post was last modified: 08-05-2022 07:10 PM by SouthEastAlaska.)
08-05-2022 07:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 40,203
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2259
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 07:03 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I said this on one of the other billion threads we have but if the BigXII loses $$ it's because OUT was worth 50% of the BigXII value. The 4 schools that were brought in are nice but they don't recoup the lost money. On top of the lost value you now are splitting the pie by 12 mouth's instead of 10.

As far as the PAC is concerned, when you evaluate the PAC's lost value it's only around 25% if I remember correctly. UW on an individual basis is actually the most valuable school in the PAC and that's including USC and UCLA. What drove up their valuation is the LA market, much like the addition of Rutgers, the market drove the add more than the school. So yes the PAC is going to be hurt by the loss of the LA schools but they haven't added extra mouth's that dilute the conferences remaining schools values.

All this being said I don't think there will be a big difference between the two when both have signed their new TV deals.

Im not sure I buy that. USC has value because its USC. USC can still draw viewers even when they arent that good. Im not sure Washington's in that same category. If Washington isnt very good---Im not sure they are drawing any more eyeballs than Cal or Colorado.
08-05-2022 07:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SouthEastAlaska Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,251
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 86
I Root For: UW,PAC12
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 07:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 07:03 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I said this on one of the other billion threads we have but if the BigXII loses $$ it's because OUT was worth 50% of the BigXII value. The 4 schools that were brought in are nice but they don't recoup the lost money. On top of the lost value you now are splitting the pie by 12 mouth's instead of 10.

As far as the PAC is concerned, when you evaluate the PAC's lost value it's only around 25% if I remember correctly. UW on an individual basis is actually the most valuable school in the PAC and that's including USC and UCLA. What drove up their valuation is the LA market, much like the addition of Rutgers, the market drove the add more than the school. So yes the PAC is going to be hurt by the loss of the LA schools but they haven't added extra mouth's that dilute the conferences remaining schools values.

All this being said I don't think there will be a big difference between the two when both have signed their new TV deals.

Im not sure I buy that. USC has value because its USC. USC can still draw viewers even when they arent that good. Im not sure Washington's in that same category. If Washington isnt very good---Im not sure they are drawing any more eyeballs than Cal or Colorado.

You don't have to believe me but there are a lot of valuations out there by individuals who get payed to do this who would back me up. You can even look at threads here on this board where you can see the same....

https://csnbbs.com/thread-922385.html

USC is a great school and they're definitely a blueblood program but unless they're winning their not as popular as you or they like to think. The B1G took them and UCLA for the market, which is completely understandable.
08-05-2022 07:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Milwaukee Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,472
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation: 138
I Root For: many teams
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 06:33 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 06:29 PM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 04:39 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 04:25 PM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  The truth is UCLA has been a shell of its former self even in comparison to how far USC has been down the last decade. So from a viewership perspective losing UCLA doesnt appear that bad when you look at the tv numbers in the PAC. Basically the PAC lost the number 1 and 5 most watched teams in the conf whereas the B12 lost 1 & 2. That said losing LA is going to hurt and I still think both conferences will have comparable tv deals.

Losing LA is going to hurt, especially if the PAC doesn't replace USC or UCLA.

It may be that both conference will have comparable TV deals, but it seems to me that, with Cincy, UCF, Houston, and BYU coming aboard, the Big XII is going to be a much stronger conference with greater viewership potential than a "PAC-10" would be.

The Big XII probably made a wise move by adding those four schools, and the PAC would be well advised to consider doing the same. In view of the fact that the SEC and Big Ten are about to become 16-team conferences, the time may have come for the PAC to expand, as well.

.
It would not surprise me at all if 2 contracts from now the B12 has a better payout, even if most of the current PAC10 remains.

Thats my belief as well---though I dont think the difference will be anything huge. I really do believe that the biggest potential payout is in a Big16 where the 4-corners schools join the current new Big12. There are a lot of synergies to be had there. That would allow about 30% of the Big12 inventory to be capable of providing late night window content. It would make the Big12 #1 in the Mountain time zone (and #2 in most of the rest of its footprint), and it would leverage late games in those low population western areas by making them meaningful to watch for a footprint largely located in the more populated central and eastern time zones.

The smoke signals don't seem to indicate that the 4 corner schools are going to join the Big 12, but commissioner Bowlsby and Oklahoma State's AD spoke openly about a Big 16 that would include Memphis, Boise State, SMU and USF (or SDSU).

Adding Boise State would bolster the Big 12's presence in the Mountain time zone. Adding SDSU (instead of USF) would go beyond that and establish the Big 12 as the only conference with schools in all four time zones.

A Big 16 with those four schools would be a much stronger football and basketball conference than a (non-reloaded) PAC-10.

Strong Big XII football schools (n=11): Oklahoma State, Baylor, Iowa State, BYU, Cincinnati, UCF, Houston, TCU, WVU, SDSU, & Boise St.

Strong Big XII basketball schools (n=10): Kansas, Houston, Oklahoma State, Baylor, Iowa State, BYU, TTU, WVU, SDSU, & Boise St.

Strong PAC basketball schools (n=5): Oregon, Arizona, Oregon State, ASU, & Washington.

.
08-05-2022 07:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 55,083
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 2310
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 07:03 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I said this on one of the other billion threads we have but if the BigXII loses $$ it's because OUT was worth 50% of the BigXII value. The 4 schools that were brought in are nice but they don't recoup the lost money. On top of the lost value you now are splitting the pie by 12 mouth's instead of 10.

As far as the PAC is concerned, when you evaluate the PAC's lost value it's only around 25% if I remember correctly. UW on an individual basis is actually the most valuable school in the PAC and that's including USC and UCLA. What drove up their valuation is the LA market, much like the addition of Rutgers, the market drove the add more than the school. So yes the PAC is going to be hurt by the loss of the LA schools but they haven't added extra mouth's that dilute the conferences remaining schools values.

All this being said I don't think there will be a big difference between the two when both have signed their new TV deals.
The most common number is 40% for those two schools.

At 25% you are saying they are only 50% above the Pac average.
USC is a blueblood in a massive market.
08-05-2022 07:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Milwaukee Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,472
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation: 138
I Root For: many teams
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 07:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 07:03 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I said this on one of the other billion threads we have but if the BigXII loses $$ it's because OUT was worth 50% of the BigXII value. The 4 schools that were brought in are nice but they don't recoup the lost money. On top of the lost value you now are splitting the pie by 12 mouth's instead of 10.

As far as the PAC is concerned, when you evaluate the PAC's lost value it's only around 25% if I remember correctly. UW on an individual basis is actually the most valuable school in the PAC and that's including USC and UCLA. What drove up their valuation is the LA market, much like the addition of Rutgers, the market drove the add more than the school. So yes the PAC is going to be hurt by the loss of the LA schools but they haven't added extra mouth's that dilute the conferences remaining schools values.

All this being said I don't think there will be a big difference between the two when both have signed their new TV deals.

Im not sure I buy that. USC has value because its USC. USC can still draw viewers even when they arent that good. Im not sure Washington's in that same category. If Washington isnt very good---Im not sure they are drawing any more eyeballs than Cal or Colorado.

I would agree with that. USC and UCLA (and Oregon and Stanford, probably) are viewership magnets even when they're not great. Washington...not so much.

.
08-05-2022 07:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
shizzle787 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,250
Joined: Oct 2015
Reputation: 19
I Root For: UConn
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 04:21 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 04:01 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 03:49 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  .

There has been a lot of chatter about the possibility that the Big XII schools may receive less than $20 million per year in broadcasting revenue, due to the departure of OU & Texas.

This would represent a substantial revenue cut, in the range of $10 to $15 million/year less than what the Big XII schools are currently receiving from the broadcasters.

Yet those who argue that the PAC will stay put with only 10 schools seem to have the impression that their broadcasting revenue streams will be relatively unaffected by the departure of USC and UCLA.

Question: Why would the departure of OU and Texas have a devastating impact on the Big XII remainers' broadcasting revenue, while the departure of USC and UCLA would have only a trivial impact on the PAC remainers?

.

Its only coming from message board posters who have absolutely nothing to base it on, but they "feel" the Big 12 should get less than now. If they say that, they are someone who should probably be ignored on the topic. And are pretty ignorant about TV ratings and the relative strength of the conferences on the field (which has some influence on TV ratings).

That may be so. What's mystifying to me is why there was so much of a hubbub about the huge revenue cuts the Big XII would receive, yet complete silence about revenue cuts for the PAC.

It's especially baffling when one notes the fact that the Big XII is reloading (adding Cincinnati, Houston, UCF, and BYU), while there are no signs that the PAC will replace USC or UCLA. One would think that the conference that has announced it's reloading would be viewed as protecting its revenue stream to some extent, and that the conference that doesn't reload would be expected to take a greater revenue hit.

.

The Pac-12 is getting a cut. They were supposed to get 500 million for 12 teams and now they are looking at 300 million for 10.
08-05-2022 08:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Milwaukee Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,472
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation: 138
I Root For: many teams
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 08:10 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 04:21 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 04:01 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 03:49 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  .

There has been a lot of chatter about the possibility that the Big XII schools may receive less than $20 million per year in broadcasting revenue, due to the departure of OU & Texas.

This would represent a substantial revenue cut, in the range of $10 to $15 million/year less than what the Big XII schools are currently receiving from the broadcasters.

Yet those who argue that the PAC will stay put with only 10 schools seem to have the impression that their broadcasting revenue streams will be relatively unaffected by the departure of USC and UCLA.

Question: Why would the departure of OU and Texas have a devastating impact on the Big XII remainers' broadcasting revenue, while the departure of USC and UCLA would have only a trivial impact on the PAC remainers?

.

Its only coming from message board posters who have absolutely nothing to base it on, but they "feel" the Big 12 should get less than now. If they say that, they are someone who should probably be ignored on the topic. And are pretty ignorant about TV ratings and the relative strength of the conferences on the field (which has some influence on TV ratings).

That may be so. What's mystifying to me is why there was so much of a hubbub about the huge revenue cuts the Big XII would receive, yet complete silence about revenue cuts for the PAC.

It's especially baffling when one notes the fact that the Big XII is reloading (adding Cincinnati, Houston, UCF, and BYU), while there are no signs that the PAC will replace USC or UCLA. One would think that the conference that has announced it's reloading would be viewed as protecting its revenue stream to some extent, and that the conference that doesn't reload would be expected to take a greater revenue hit.

.

The Pac-12 is getting a cut. They were supposed to get 500 million for 12 teams and now they are looking at 300 million for 10.

A $200 million cut would be a 40% reduction, which would be almost as large as the (purely) rumored OUT cut.

Do you have a source (link) for that figure, or is it, too, pure supposition, pulled out of *thin air* ?

.
(This post was last modified: 08-05-2022 08:30 PM by Milwaukee.)
08-05-2022 08:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gitanole Offline
Bartender
*

Posts: 634
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 125
I Root For: Florida State
Location: Speared Turf
Post: #33
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $?
I'm more interested in why Big 12 fans are surprised by this.

The B12 poaches from G5. Other power conferences poach it. Haven't you noticed? The proposed payday is right in line with what anyone would expect who pays attention to what actually happens, over and over.

The B12 lost Nebraska to the B1G, Colorado to the PAC, and Missouri and Texas A&M to the SEC. In that time the B12 added only WV from the old drain-circling Big East. Then B12 fans entertained fantasies of breaking up the ACC. But what happened? The B12 became the only P5 conference without a network.

B12 fans touted the joys of being a small conference with a round-robin schedule. Meanwhile, Texas and Oklahoma quietly made plans to leave.

This year the B12 had another near-death experience when Texas and Oklahoma made their departure to the SEC official. The only two reasons national media still paid much attention to the league were now gone.

Count'em up: that's six teams lost over recent years while other leagues were expanding. So what do surviving B12 fans talk about? They're going west to poach from the PAC...

Come on, guys, figure it out. The B12 hasn't been stable for years. It's been overpaid because networks like Texas. Texas liked having nearby playmates, but that's over. Texas wants network money now, as we all do.

You've still got great schools, just not especially lucrative ones. Your league is more stable now than it's been in years. You won't poach giants, but you'll be OK.

The Super 2 will eventually finish stocking the shelves for The Next Big Thing. When that happens, we'll likely see an appealing Best Of The Rest layer take shape. And the pay will be better.
(This post was last modified: 08-05-2022 08:43 PM by Gitanole.)
08-05-2022 08:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SouthEastAlaska Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,251
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 86
I Root For: UW,PAC12
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 07:50 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 07:03 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I said this on one of the other billion threads we have but if the BigXII loses $$ it's because OUT was worth 50% of the BigXII value. The 4 schools that were brought in are nice but they don't recoup the lost money. On top of the lost value you now are splitting the pie by 12 mouth's instead of 10.

As far as the PAC is concerned, when you evaluate the PAC's lost value it's only around 25% if I remember correctly. UW on an individual basis is actually the most valuable school in the PAC and that's including USC and UCLA. What drove up their valuation is the LA market, much like the addition of Rutgers, the market drove the add more than the school. So yes the PAC is going to be hurt by the loss of the LA schools but they haven't added extra mouth's that dilute the conferences remaining schools values.

All this being said I don't think there will be a big difference between the two when both have signed their new TV deals.
The most common number is 40% for those two schools.

At 25% you are saying they are only 50% above the Pac average.
USC is a blueblood in a massive market.

40% isn't for just the schools, it's 40% because of the combination of bringing both schools plus the market. How about this, how much value would the PAC TV deal lose if just one of the LA schools was joining the B1G? My guess less than 15%, these schools alone carry no where near the value that Texas or Oklahoma bring, this is why regardless of what people think the SEC is far and away winning the realignment battle.

Edit; I don't think they and their market are 40% of the value either, but that is my opinion.
(This post was last modified: 08-05-2022 08:38 PM by SouthEastAlaska.)
08-05-2022 08:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Milwaukee Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,472
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation: 138
I Root For: many teams
Location:
Post: #35
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 08:37 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 07:50 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 07:03 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I said this on one of the other billion threads we have but if the BigXII loses $$ it's because OUT was worth 50% of the BigXII value. The 4 schools that were brought in are nice but they don't recoup the lost money. On top of the lost value you now are splitting the pie by 12 mouth's instead of 10.

As far as the PAC is concerned, when you evaluate the PAC's lost value it's only around 25% if I remember correctly. UW on an individual basis is actually the most valuable school in the PAC and that's including USC and UCLA. What drove up their valuation is the LA market, much like the addition of Rutgers, the market drove the add more than the school. So yes the PAC is going to be hurt by the loss of the LA schools but they haven't added extra mouth's that dilute the conferences remaining schools values.

All this being said I don't think there will be a big difference between the two when both have signed their new TV deals.
The most common number is 40% for those two schools.

At 25% you are saying they are only 50% above the Pac average.
USC is a blueblood in a massive market.

40% isn't for just the schools, it's 40% because of the combination of bringing both schools plus the market. How about this, how much value would the PAC TV deal lose if just one of the LA schools was joining the B1G? My guess less than 15%, these schools alone carry no where near the value that Texas or Oklahoma bring, this is why regardless of what people think the SEC is far and away winning the realignment battle.

Edit; I don't think they and their market are 40% of the value either, but that is my opinion.

The Big Ten may win the viewership battle, which is more important than the realignment battle.

Q: Why?

A: Because by adding UCLA & USC, the Big Ten has become the nation's first coast to coast conference, with teams in the 3 most populous time zones.

In contrast, OU and UT don't add a time zone to the SEC.

.
08-05-2022 08:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 55,083
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 2310
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 08:24 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 08:10 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 04:21 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 04:01 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 03:49 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  .

There has been a lot of chatter about the possibility that the Big XII schools may receive less than $20 million per year in broadcasting revenue, due to the departure of OU & Texas.

This would represent a substantial revenue cut, in the range of $10 to $15 million/year less than what the Big XII schools are currently receiving from the broadcasters.

Yet those who argue that the PAC will stay put with only 10 schools seem to have the impression that their broadcasting revenue streams will be relatively unaffected by the departure of USC and UCLA.

Question: Why would the departure of OU and Texas have a devastating impact on the Big XII remainers' broadcasting revenue, while the departure of USC and UCLA would have only a trivial impact on the PAC remainers?

.

Its only coming from message board posters who have absolutely nothing to base it on, but they "feel" the Big 12 should get less than now. If they say that, they are someone who should probably be ignored on the topic. And are pretty ignorant about TV ratings and the relative strength of the conferences on the field (which has some influence on TV ratings).

That may be so. What's mystifying to me is why there was so much of a hubbub about the huge revenue cuts the Big XII would receive, yet complete silence about revenue cuts for the PAC.

It's especially baffling when one notes the fact that the Big XII is reloading (adding Cincinnati, Houston, UCF, and BYU), while there are no signs that the PAC will replace USC or UCLA. One would think that the conference that has announced it's reloading would be viewed as protecting its revenue stream to some extent, and that the conference that doesn't reload would be expected to take a greater revenue hit.

.

The Pac-12 is getting a cut. They were supposed to get 500 million for 12 teams and now they are looking at 300 million for 10.

A $200 million cut would be a 40% reduction, which would be almost as large as the (purely) rumored OUT cut.

Do you have a source (link) for that figure, or is it, too, pure supposition, pulled out of *thin air* ?

.

It was quoted in the Dennis Dodd article that has been linked here before. Probably mentioned in several other articles.
08-05-2022 09:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 55,083
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 2310
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 08:37 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 07:50 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 07:03 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I said this on one of the other billion threads we have but if the BigXII loses $$ it's because OUT was worth 50% of the BigXII value. The 4 schools that were brought in are nice but they don't recoup the lost money. On top of the lost value you now are splitting the pie by 12 mouth's instead of 10.

As far as the PAC is concerned, when you evaluate the PAC's lost value it's only around 25% if I remember correctly. UW on an individual basis is actually the most valuable school in the PAC and that's including USC and UCLA. What drove up their valuation is the LA market, much like the addition of Rutgers, the market drove the add more than the school. So yes the PAC is going to be hurt by the loss of the LA schools but they haven't added extra mouth's that dilute the conferences remaining schools values.

All this being said I don't think there will be a big difference between the two when both have signed their new TV deals.
The most common number is 40% for those two schools.

At 25% you are saying they are only 50% above the Pac average.
USC is a blueblood in a massive market.

40% isn't for just the schools, it's 40% because of the combination of bringing both schools plus the market. How about this, how much value would the PAC TV deal lose if just one of the LA schools was joining the B1G? My guess less than 15%, these schools alone carry no where near the value that Texas or Oklahoma bring, this is why regardless of what people think the SEC is far and away winning the realignment battle.

Edit; I don't think they and their market are 40% of the value either, but that is my opinion.

Your comment makes less than zero sense. They're worth 40% but not really because if they were in Boise it would be only 25%. Think about what you just said.
if they would have gotten $500 million but only get $300 million that's a 40% cut regardless of what reasoning the networks use to get there.

I think you seriously undervalue USC. USC-Texas in 2006 got a 21.7 rating. No other game has gotten better than 18.6. When USC is good, they get huge ratings.
08-05-2022 09:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PicksUp Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 973
Joined: Mar 2018
Reputation: 70
I Root For: UTEP
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
Id argue that the PAC has the top 3-4 brands from all schools remaining in both conferences, including the new additions.

The Big 12 has bottom 3-4.

Its that simple.
08-05-2022 09:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoCalBobcat78 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,026
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 179
I Root For: TXST, UCLA, CBU
Location:
Post: #39
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains
(08-05-2022 04:21 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 04:01 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 03:49 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  There has been a lot of chatter about the possibility that the Big XII schools may receive less than $20 million per year in broadcasting revenue, due to the departure of OU & Texas.

This would represent a substantial revenue cut, in the range of $10 to $15 million/year less than what the Big XII schools are currently receiving from the broadcasters.

Yet those who argue that the PAC will stay put with only 10 schools seem to have the impression that their broadcasting revenue streams will be relatively unaffected by the departure of USC and UCLA.

Question: Why would the departure of OU and Texas have a devastating impact on the Big XII remainers' broadcasting revenue, while the departure of USC and UCLA would have only a trivial impact on the PAC remainers?

Its only coming from message board posters who have absolutely nothing to base it on, but they "feel" the Big 12 should get less than now. If they say that, they are someone who should probably be ignored on the topic. And are pretty ignorant about TV ratings and the relative strength of the conferences on the field (which has some influence on TV ratings).

That may be so. What's mystifying to me is why there was so much of a hubbub about the huge revenue cuts the Big XII would receive, yet complete silence about revenue cuts for the PAC.

It's especially baffling when one notes the fact that the Big XII is reloading (adding Cincinnati, Houston, UCF, and BYU), while there are no signs that the PAC will replace USC or UCLA. One would think that the conference that has announced it's reloading would be viewed as protecting its revenue stream to some extent, and that the conference that doesn't reload would be expected to take a greater revenue hit.

When OU and UT announced they were leaving, Bob Bowlsby estimated that would cost the Big 12 50% of their TV revenue:
https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/tamu-f...oma-exits/

"Bowlsby estimates that the remaining eight Big 12 schools could lose $14 million per year in TV revenue upon Oklahoma and Texas’ departure. Bowlsby added that Big 12 distributes roughly $28 million in TV money per school, and OU/Texas account for about 50 percent of that, Sam Khan, Jr. of The Athletic reported."

Adding four G5 schools gets some additional income, but not $140 million annually. The fact that the TV contract is a decade old will help, but not much without Oklahoma and Texas. Twenty million per school or $240 milion seems low, but what school is carrying the flag for the Big 12 in football? Who would the networks trust in football?

The PAC still has Oregon and Washington, and even Stanford and Cal. At least for now. There are few programs in college football that are doing as well as Oregon. They are a top ten football brand. Since 2010, there have been nine schools that have played in a college football national championship game. Oregon is one of those nine schools and they have done it twice. Oregon was the only Pac-12 team ranked in the top ten in TV ratings in 2021, with 4 games on ABC , 2 on FOX, and 3 games on ESPN in the 10:30PM hour that ESPN likes. They have had three consecutive drafts with a top ten pick, joining Alabama and LSU as the only schools that have done that the past three years.

They are a top 15 recruiting school and already have two 5-star recruits for 2023:
https://247sports.com/Season/2023-Footba...tRankings/
2. Dante Moore Martin Luther King (Detroit, MI) QB
14. Jurrion Dickey Valley Christian (East Palo Alto, CA) WR
They also have 3 four-star recruits from Texas, and one four star recruit from Mississippi. Washington and Stanford also each have one four-star recruit from Texas. In 2022, Oregon, Stanford and Arizona finished in the top 25 in football recruiting. No new Big 12 school finished in the top 25.

I have no idea what the PAC will end up with for a TV contract, but as long as they have Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal, they will be okay. No one is saying that the PAC will be unaffected by the loss of UCLA and USC. That loss could cost the PAC $200 million annually from what was expected. Or maybe just $100 million. But they will be okay if the Big Ten stops at 16. For the Big 12, who is their Oregon?
08-05-2022 09:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
loki_the_bubba Online
All American
*

Posts: 4,754
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation: 452
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #40
RE: Why is Big XII rumored to lose 1/2 their broadcasting $, while PAC remains unscathed?
(08-05-2022 08:55 PM)Milwaukee Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 08:37 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 07:50 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-05-2022 07:03 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I said this on one of the other billion threads we have but if the BigXII loses $$ it's because OUT was worth 50% of the BigXII value. The 4 schools that were brought in are nice but they don't recoup the lost money. On top of the lost value you now are splitting the pie by 12 mouth's instead of 10.

As far as the PAC is concerned, when you evaluate the PAC's lost value it's only around 25% if I remember correctly. UW on an individual basis is actually the most valuable school in the PAC and that's including USC and UCLA. What drove up their valuation is the LA market, much like the addition of Rutgers, the market drove the add more than the school. So yes the PAC is going to be hurt by the loss of the LA schools but they haven't added extra mouth's that dilute the conferences remaining schools values.

All this being said I don't think there will be a big difference between the two when both have signed their new TV deals.
The most common number is 40% for those two schools.

At 25% you are saying they are only 50% above the Pac average.
USC is a blueblood in a massive market.

40% isn't for just the schools, it's 40% because of the combination of bringing both schools plus the market. How about this, how much value would the PAC TV deal lose if just one of the LA schools was joining the B1G? My guess less than 15%, these schools alone carry no where near the value that Texas or Oklahoma bring, this is why regardless of what people think the SEC is far and away winning the realignment battle.

Edit; I don't think they and their market are 40% of the value either, but that is my opinion.

The Big Ten may win the viewership battle, which is more important than the realignment battle.

Q: Why?

A: Because by adding UCLA & USC, the Big Ten has become the nation's first coast to coast conference, with teams in the 3 most populous time zones.

In contrast, OU and UT don't add a time zone to the SEC.

.
Far west Texas has a sliver of Mountain time.
08-05-2022 09:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2022 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, © 2002-2022 MyBB Group.