(08-09-2022 11:23 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  ESPN is apparently out and CBS and NBC are possibly in, additionally Apple or Amazon may get in on the streaming. Certainly a lot of cash and exposure for the B1G.
Before I get to the point of this post, I'd like to do a quick pros and cons as I see moving away from ESPN.

Pro: Cord cutting is real. By reverting back to primarily over-the-air broadcasts, households that choose to cut the cord are still contributing to eyeball watching B1G football. This almost looks to me like a Wallstreet guy that sees the fundamentals deteriorating with the ESPN model and going back to old faithful while still keeping a toe in the cable business. There will still be cable exposure with FS1, FS2, & BTN however the Worldwide Leader won't be among them as their business model seems to be crumbling the fastest.

Pro: on a marginal level this puts downward pressure on ESPN carriage fees in B1G states. Why should B1G states pay full freight when no local team is being supported by those rates?

Con: ESPN drives the narrative in College football so I fully expect ABC/ESPN to really crank up the SEC bias and do everything they can to downplay or ignore B1G programs.

Con: Reduces likelihood of B1G expansion into ACC territory because why expand past 20?

Neutral: Bad for Pac 12 but good for Big 12. ESPN now has more slots to fill and some extra money to burn. The Big 12 stands to pick up most of those slots along with a nice payday. The Pac 12 has a beautiful late window that only they can fill, if they can stay together, BUT that late window also makes them more attractive for B1G expansion.

On to the main point. NBC has pitched and apparently sold the B1G on a prime time window. In other news, the B1G doesn't usually play prime time games in November for obvious reason.
Does this portend more West Coast teams being added? I think so, here are my reasons:
1. Keep a good amount of inventory available for the 7:00 EST slot. USC and UCLA will probably dominate late season prime time games but there is room for more potential content in that late slot from other Western teams.
2. Possibly create a super-late slot starting at 10 EST / 7 PST. I say limit this to 2 ish games per year. The east coast is starting to doze of to sleep so overall exposure suffers in the super late window, but it is still live content, and if it an important conference game, it may draw some east/central viewership.
3. Shut out ESPN from super-late start window, or bring them back to the table for that window. ESPN pioneered the After dark programing and is has been a success relative to other content in that window. It would hurt ESPN if the previously rumored combo of Cal, Oregon, Stanford, and Washington were gone from that window.
4. Grow Fox/CBS/NBC viewership in college football out West at the expense of ESPN and their associated properties. The SEC is great, but not everyone likes or watches the SEC...or B1G for that matter. ESPN is focusing on the South East almost to the exclusion of the rest of the country. By contrast the B1G is coast to coast and though mostly regional can still boast of NYC, DC, & LA. If the 4 aforementioned Pac-12 school go to the B1G, that would be the entire Left Coast not really caring what is going on with ESPN.

In the final analysis, I don't think another league could pull this off, the Big Ten/ESPN relationship is a long-standing one and no other league has (to my knowledge) walked away from ESPN. I don't think they are enemies but going West adds opportunities for the B1G and their partners while simultaneously removing them from ESPN and decimating the Pac12.

Absolutely. Stanford, Oregon and Washington are all on call.

(08-09-2022 11:23 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  ESPN is apparently out and CBS and NBC are possibly in, additionally Apple or Amazon may get in on the streaming. Certainly a lot of cash and exposure for the B1G.
Before I get to the point of this post, I'd like to do a quick pros and cons as I see moving away from ESPN.

Pro: Cord cutting is real. By reverting back to primarily over-the-air broadcasts, households that choose to cut the cord are still contributing to eyeball watching B1G football. This almost looks to me like a Wallstreet guy that sees the fundamentals deteriorating with the ESPN model and going back to old faithful while still keeping a toe in the cable business. There will still be cable exposure with FS1, FS2, & BTN however the Worldwide Leader won't be among them as their business model seems to be crumbling the fastest.

Agreed that cord cutting is real, but the flip side is that I believe that Disney is MUCH better positioned than the other legacy media companies for the streaming world. FOX doesn't have any material streaming capabilities (beyond authenticated mirroring of their games on their linear networks), Paramount+ for CBS is "meh", and Peacock subscriptions for NBC/Comcast has totally stalled (which might be why NBC suddenly pulled out the pocketbook for the Big Ten as they are truly desperate for Peacock content).

Quote:Pro: on a marginal level this puts downward pressure on ESPN carriage fees in B1G states. Why should B1G states pay full freight when no local team is being supported by those rates?

This isn't material at all (and I say this as a Big Ten guy that lives in a Big Ten state). ESPN has a full suite of NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL games on top of other college conferences and the Midwest (much more than the South) is a big-time pro sports area. No one in the Big Ten footprint is going to pay less for an ESPN that has the Packers, Bears, Steelers, Eagles, Cubs, Cardinals, Yankees, Mets, Phillies, Bulls, Knicks, Bucks... and now Dodgers, Lakers, Rams, etc. The network can charge full price across the entire country regardless of not having the Big Ten. There is only one TV contract that matters for the ESPN carriage rate: the NFL. (This isn't speculation - the ESPN carriage rate automatically goes down if they lose NFL games under their carriage agreements.)

Quote:Con: ESPN drives the narrative in College football so I fully expect ABC/ESPN to really crank up the SEC bias and do everything they can to downplay or ignore B1G programs.

I don't think ESPN will ignore the Big Ten in the sense that they can't ignore all of the NFL games that are on FOX/CBS/NBC or the NBA games on TNT, just as ESPN has never ignored Notre Dame and, to their credit, does send the GameDay crew to South Bend when the Irish have a major game or other sites where a major game isn't on an ESPN network. (ESPN is honestly a lot less parochial than FOX, who strictly sends their Big Noon Kickoff crew to FOX game sites.) The Big Ten has too many big brands to ignore from an editorial perspective.

However, I do worry more about what I mentioned above that *Disney* has a multi-platform strategy that makes sense for the next 5 to 10 years while the other legacy media companies are floundering. I have a lot of faith that Disney is going to have full-fledged streaming capabilities in 5 years, whether it's continuing the current bundle or merging everything into an even larger Disney+ service. In contrast, I have zero idea whether Peacock will exist 5 years from. THAT is the part of losing the ESPN relationship that concerns me. It's not about talking heads on ESPN (as fans just perceive what they want to perceive), but rather being a part of the much larger and more powerful Disney ecosystem.

Quote:Con: Reduces likelihood of B1G expansion into ACC territory because why expand past 20?

Not sure if this is a con, but I agree with the conclusion that the bar for Big Ten expansion is higher than ever.

Quote:Neutral: Bad for Pac 12 but good for Big 12. ESPN now has more slots to fill and some extra money to burn. The Big 12 stands to pick up most of those slots along with a nice payday. The Pac 12 has a beautiful late window that only they can fill, if they can stay together, BUT that late window also makes them more attractive for B1G expansion.

It's too early to tell whether the Pac-12 or Big 12 will come out better (if either one ends up better at all). I can see the spin from both sides.

Quote:On to the main point. NBC has pitched and apparently sold the B1G on a prime time window. In other news, the B1G doesn't usually play prime time games in November for obvious reason.
Does this portend more West Coast teams being added? I think so, here are my reasons:
1. Keep a good amount of inventory available for the 7:00 EST slot. USC and UCLA will probably dominate late season prime time games but there is room for more potential content in that late slot from other Western teams.
2. Possibly create a super-late slot starting at 10 EST / 7 PST. I say limit this to 2 ish games per year. The east coast is starting to doze of to sleep so overall exposure suffers in the super late window, but it is still live content, and if it an important conference game, it may draw some east/central viewership.
3. Shut out ESPN from super-late start window, or bring them back to the table for that window. ESPN pioneered the After dark programing and is has been a success relative to other content in that window. It would hurt ESPN if the previously rumored combo of Cal, Oregon, Stanford, and Washington were gone from that window.
4. Grow Fox/CBS/NBC viewership in college football out West at the expense of ESPN and their associated properties. The SEC is great, but not everyone likes or watches the SEC...or B1G for that matter. ESPN is focusing on the South East almost to the exclusion of the rest of the country. By contrast the B1G is coast to coast and though mostly regional can still boast of NYC, DC, & LA. If the 4 aforementioned Pac-12 school go to the B1G, that would be the entire Left Coast not really caring what is going on with ESPN.

In the final analysis, I don't think another league could pull this off, the Big Ten/ESPN relationship is a long-standing one and no other league has (to my knowledge) walked away from ESPN. I don't think they are enemies but going West adds opportunities for the B1G and their partners while simultaneously removing them from ESPN and decimating the Pac12.

I honestly don't believe that this is what's happening. There might be other reasons for the Big Ten to expand with more Pac-12 teams (e.g. more cohesive region for non-football sports), but they're not going to be financial or TV-driven. From a TV perspective, the networks want as many USC/UCLA vs. Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State/Michigan State/Wisconsin/Iowa/Nebraska games as possible and that's very efficiently achieved with 16 schools in a 3-6-6 scheduling format. Any further expansion that doesn't include ND is actually going to decrease the number of marquee game combinations noted above.

(08-10-2022 11:27 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 08:07 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  I don't think P12 nor B12 are big losers here.

It will be interesting to see if the pro-Big 10 bias goes away on ESPN. Big 10 fans insanely claim they are biased against the Big 10. Yes, they are a little more favorable to the SEC, but call back when you have 12 of the last 15 MNCs. There's a very pro Big 10 tilt. They tend to deliberately ignore the Pac 12 and Big 12 who signed with Fox in the 90s. They never seem to have forgiven them. Maybe they will get forgiven now that the Big 10 is off their network.

Its possible the massive gap in ratings and dollars with the P2 has been partly created (obviously there are some fundamental factors as well) by the ESPN biases towards the Big 10 and SEC.

Many of those championships were set up well before the games were being played. It's called setting up narratives for a reason, sport. Those impress recruits, who then crowd up the 4-letter monopsony's favorite programs, which then make it more likely for those teams to have on-field successes, which then "justify" the narratives that were set up in the first place. Rinse and repeat. Capiche?

Oh, and we're still in a world of polls and bowls, although that's been diminishing with the advent of the CFP.

The big test will come once the other networks have the opportunity to set up counter-narratives to the ones created by Disney.

(08-10-2022 01:45 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 11:27 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 08:07 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  I don't think P12 nor B12 are big losers here.

It will be interesting to see if the pro-Big 10 bias goes away on ESPN. Big 10 fans insanely claim they are biased against the Big 10. Yes, they are a little more favorable to the SEC, but call back when you have 12 of the last 15 MNCs. There's a very pro Big 10 tilt. They tend to deliberately ignore the Pac 12 and Big 12 who signed with Fox in the 90s. They never seem to have forgiven them. Maybe they will get forgiven now that the Big 10 is off their network.

Its possible the massive gap in ratings and dollars with the P2 has been partly created (obviously there are some fundamental factors as well) by the ESPN biases towards the Big 10 and SEC.

Many of those championships were set up well before the games were being played. It's called setting up narratives for a reason, sport. Those impress recruits, who then crowd up the 4-letter monopsony's favorite programs, which then make it more likely for those teams to have on-field successes, which then "justify" the narratives that were set up in the first place. Rinse and repeat. Capiche?

Oh, and we're still in a world of polls and bowls, although that's been diminishing with the advent of the CFP.

The big test will come once the other networks have the opportunity to set up counter-narratives to the ones created by Disney.

Yes. ESPN has promoted Ohio St. and Michigan very strongly, as well as much of the rest of the Big 10. Other than the potential rematch in 2007, its never Big 10 schools that miss the cut.

Some might argue this better for the P12. The B1G doesnt need to add any more P12 schools. ESPN needs/desires content. There is a west coast league with at 8 of 10 members being mentioned as desirable by others. Since B1G expansion plans have seemed to have cooled, those 8 would be better off remaining together than some combo of them going to the B12. I still think the P12 will be the survivor, or at least not the 1st of the remaining 3 P5 to undergo drastic change. There have been discussions, internal and with partners, about what they need to do to remain somewhat financially competitive with the B1G and SEC. At the very least i expect the P12 to make an offer to SDSU, BYU and Houston. That move would get B12 members anxious at least. The ACC inviting Cincy and "talking to" WVU would cause even more turmoil. When the time comes the P12 goes back to the B12 and makes a move before the ACC GOR expires. I've heard conflicting reports on ACC expansion having an impact and not having an impact on GOR. Some of you probably know what the truth is. I also expect that should the BIG decide to expand again at some point, they will look south. The SEC IMO will also stick to the southeast or go no further west than Kansas and OK State(provided the P12 doesn't make an offer a few years sooner)

Well with this deal, it might be hard to add extra schools. They have OTA for noon, 3:30 and 7:30 eastern. They would have to do ESPN or FS1 or do a Friday night or late Saturday game. Those just won't get the same viewership as network games. It isn't clear what "exclusive" means. Would ESPN infringe on that? Or only OTA? In any event, more games means more cannibalization of ratings.

They will have approximately 112 games with 16. (16X7 home games). Roughly 42 will be on BTN. 42 will be on the 3 networks. That leaves 28, 2 a week on average for FS1 or late night or Friday night. I don't think it makes sense without Notre Dame.

(08-10-2022 03:57 PM)bullet Wrote:  Well with this deal, it might be hard to add extra schools. They have OTA for noon, 3:30 and 7:30 eastern. They would have to do ESPN or FS1 or do a Friday night or late Saturday game. Those just won't get the same viewership as network games. It isn't clear what "exclusive" means. Would ESPN infringe on that? Or only OTA? In any event, more games means more cannibalization of ratings.

They will have approximately 112 games with 16. (16X7 home games). Roughly 42 will be on BTN. 42 will be on the 3 networks. That leaves 28, 2 a week on average for FS1 or late night or Friday night. I don't think it makes sense without Notre Dame.

Notre Dame and Stanford and call it a day.

I think ND signs a deal with NBC and stays inde. Big won't add anyone else for a while. No one from Pac nor B12 would move the ball for the BIG

(08-10-2022 03:59 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Notre Dame and Stanford and call it a day.

Yes, it's a no brainer. More money. Rivals all there. Better for Olympic travel. Clear path to playoffs instead of ambiguity. Showcased in primetime every Thanksgiving Saturday on NBC.

PAC 9 can still be viable, barely. Would definitely expand with at least one school at that point.

(08-10-2022 04:15 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 03:59 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Notre Dame and Stanford and call it a day.

Yes, it's a no brainer. More money. Rivals all there. Better for Olympic travel. Clear path to playoffs instead of ambiguity. Showcased in primetime every Thanksgiving Saturday on NBC.

PAC 9 can still be viable, barely. Would definitely expand with at least one school at that point.

SDSU, and wait to see what their deal is, or needs to be, and also wait and watch to see how the B12 negotiations/deal go

(08-10-2022 04:15 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 03:59 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Notre Dame and Stanford and call it a day.

Yes, it's a no brainer. More money. Rivals all there. Better for Olympic travel. Clear path to playoffs instead of ambiguity. Showcased in primetime every Thanksgiving Saturday on NBC.

PAC 9 can still be viable, barely. Would definitely expand with at least one school at that point.

Of course it's a no brainer for the Big Ten... but it's not up to the Big Ten here. This is entirely Notre Dame's decision and I just don't think they're doing anything. As long as their TV money is in the ballpark of the Big Ten and SEC, they'll stay independent.

(08-10-2022 04:47 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 04:15 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 03:59 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Notre Dame and Stanford and call it a day.

Yes, it's a no brainer. More money. Rivals all there. Better for Olympic travel. Clear path to playoffs instead of ambiguity. Showcased in primetime every Thanksgiving Saturday on NBC.

PAC 9 can still be viable, barely. Would definitely expand with at least one school at that point.

Of course it's a no brainer for the Big Ten... but it's not up to the Big Ten here. This is entirely Notre Dame's decision and I just don't think they're doing anything. As long as their TV money is in the ballpark of the Big Ten and SEC, they'll stay independent.

I don't disagree,

Though I do think Stanford is still likely to happen.

It just then becomes a question of who else.

I personally think AZ state would be the best over-all choice for various reasons.

If ND doesn't join, it's just a matter of the ego being too big... or they simply get c*** blocked by the ACC contract. There is no reason not to go there with Stanford. Do they prefer alternating with UNC/FSU/Clemson or former rivals in their back yard? Maybe they don't want the tougher competition. But I don't see any way they turned down a deal that's 20% higher and growing. NBC holds all the cards. If ESPN makes an offer, they are going to want series with SEC teams and lock up every ND game except @USC. ND would clearly have a southern slant for the first time in its history in that case, which makes no sense, but maybe they'd prefer that (along with NE ties). Jack Swarbrick is losing sleep right now deliberating this.

(08-10-2022 06:07 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  If ND doesn't join, it's just a matter of the ego being too big...

That's not wrong. Don't underestimate ego though.

And I'll say again, I think a big chunk of Notre Dame's value is in being independent. It makes them special. Some of y'all hate that they get to be independent and special, but that's okay--it makes you hate them, which makes (some of) you watch.

Put them in a conference, and they're just another Penn State.

Quote:or they simply get c*** blocked by the ACC contract. There is no reason not to go there with Stanford.

What I said again. Notre Dame wants to be independent.

Quote:Do they prefer alternating with UNC/FSU/Clemson or former rivals in their back yard?

Notre Dame isn't hyped up about "their backyard." They see themselves as national. They've had rivalries with Michigan, they've had rivalries with Miami and Florida State.

Quote:Maybe they don't want the tougher competition. But I don't see any way they turned down a deal that's 20% higher and growing.

then you don't know Notre Dame. Unless independence becomes untenable--not just less money, either orders of magnitude less money or a conference-champions-only playoff, they're staying independent.

Or if independence means that they can't put a schedule together that puts them in the playoffs at 12-0.

Quote:NBC holds all the cards. If ESPN makes an offer, they are going to want series with SEC teams and lock up every ND game except @USC.

Your hate is blinding you. Sure, ESPN would want Notre Dame vs SEC series. So would Notre Dame, but ESPN wouldn't need to lock ND into a rotation. ND can easily sign home-and-homes or home-and-home-and-neutral sites with SEC schools if ESPN is greasing the wheels.

Quote:ND would clearly have a southern slant for the first time in its history in that case, which makes no sense, but maybe they'd prefer that (along with NE ties). Jack Swarbrick is losing sleep right now deliberating this.

You're under-rating the amount of agency the colleges and conferences have. They're not just puppets of ESPN and Fox. They have their own agendas.

(08-10-2022 04:52 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 04:47 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 04:15 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(08-10-2022 03:59 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  Notre Dame and Stanford and call it a day.

Yes, it's a no brainer. More money. Rivals all there. Better for Olympic travel. Clear path to playoffs instead of ambiguity. Showcased in primetime every Thanksgiving Saturday on NBC.

PAC 9 can still be viable, barely. Would definitely expand with at least one school at that point.

Of course it's a no brainer for the Big Ten... but it's not up to the Big Ten here. This is entirely Notre Dame's decision and I just don't think they're doing anything. As long as their TV money is in the ballpark of the Big Ten and SEC, they'll stay independent.

I don't disagree,

Though I do think Stanford is still likely to happen.

It just then becomes a question of who else.

I personally think AZ state would be the best over-all choice for various reasons.

If ND is not included in this deal, granting NBC BIG content was either a white flag on ND, or a misstep imo.

Why be in a conference when you can just be aligned via network and get NBC to use the better shoulder to justify paying ND more? And with ESPN pulling out on BIG, if NBC doesn't pay, ESPN can and will, and now they get aligned with the other P2.

FOX could still try to go scorch earth to get ND, adding some PAC and ACC, but that may have to wait another GOR cycle.

I think the chance the BIG gets bigger went up. More PAC schools, and even ACC, leads to better flexibility in scheduling prime matchups. Oregon-Ohio St was Ohio St's 2nd most viewed regular season game. Oregon may not be elite outside the BIG, but their matchups with top BIG expands the footprint. Not non-zero that CBS and NBC are in, in part because FOX can make it so there isn't anything really left to bid on. Get all the non-disney OTAs on to buy your conference T1 via concurrently removing all other content of any substance.

Granted, being tied to the same network functions a little as being in the same league, so maybe a Big 18 or 20 serving as a FOX-CBS-maybe NBC timeslot filler at a far discounted rate is initially cheaper. But the macros of having the regional games BIG games competing against the national BIG games better long term. The NFL model. By adding 3-4 more PAC and eventually ACC, FOX gets into nearly every relevant CFB and CBB market and a national footprint/population all feeding into 3 national OTA timeslots, one of which aligned with ND. Adding 3-4 PAC, maybe 1 Big 12, cheaper than a Big 16 conference imo

Compared to SEC which is largely confined to cable and a south/SE regional niche, albeit the most passionate and successful region. from a corporate sponsorship and advertising perspective, most would go with the BIG model. ESPN is going to desperately need to further consolidate their top brands and make a play to combine the three leftover conferences. ESPN is in a viewership battle with OTA as a cable company- they need to rig as many top matchups as possible. I don't see them wanting to waste Clemson on ACC middle-weights, and their strength is in having all but USC and Ohio St in one conference, maybe basketball side too.

Or maybe the Big Ten strategy is not dependent on the Domers. I hope that's the case because I don't like where this is going lately. The Big Ten should just finish up the West and then not think about realignment for another 7 years.