This is my new sports media concept, and there's a possibility that it already exists, but we see:

Individual schools buy back their own tier 3 rights from conferences and/or media companies. The schools then create their own streaming platforms (much like Notre Dame is doing with Fighting Irish TV) and then partners with a well known media company for distribution (such as ESPN, Peacock, Paramount+, Amazon). It would be similar to how college radio networks partner with Learfield for radio distribution. Media companies can still bid on Tier 1 & Tier 2 right if they wish, but if they are using the individual schools' equipment for broadcast and the student broadcast equipment team staff, they have to account for that as well in the contract.

Good idea, or has it already been done??

The Big 12 has had this for its entire existence and still has it now.

It’s also the conference that got ripped completely apart.

Notre Dame has a stance on independence with a brand that can allow it to feel comfortable/confident to go it alone.

However, I think fans waaaay underestimate how much schools care about protecting against downside risk in down periods and waaaay overestimate how much schools care about maximizing upside revenue in peak periods. The protection against downside risk is what conference control of media rights provide. Fans think schools want incentive payments for winning and getting on TV more, but university presidents and ADs want steady consistent revenue whether they win or lose.

There’s no single better model for making money on sports than basic cable. At least no one in the Big Ten, SEC or ACC with strong conference network deals would ever think about diluting that revenue with trying to stream on their own (which makes waaaaaaay less money).

(09-25-2022 12:03 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The Big 12 has had this for its entire existence and still has it now.

It’s also the conference that got ripped completely apart.

If you're suggesting that the Big XII "got ripped completely apart" because it "has had this for its entire existence," or if you're suggesting that the former was caused by the latter, then that seems to come awfully close to suggest a "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" type of reasoning.

"post-hoc, ergo propter hoc" literally means "after, and therefore, because of."

Instead, it's possible that the two things have practically nothing to do with each other, but if you can come up with some reason for thinking they are related, give it a try.

Another point worth noting is that the idea sketched out by "Dawg" would be a very good one for certain conferences that don't have any better options, and may have been chosen by the Big 12 because it was the best option available to them. It's quite possible that the Big 12's location in the great plains region of the country, which has only recently become heavily populated due to the expansion of Texas, may have given them fewer media options than the eastern conferences had.

One other point: It's a matter of opinion whether or not the Big 12 and PAC 12 have been "ripped apart." That sounds like a rather extreme way of putting it, since "ripped apart" usually suggests complete destruction - - and it's more than obvious that neither the Big 12 nor the PAC have been "destroyed." A less hyperbolic description is that they lost two of their top teams. That's not quite the same as being "ripped apart."

.

Finally, I believe the Big XII is one of the top 3 conferences, and that it will remain so, and as such, the Big XII has been incredibly successful and is likely to continue to be incredibly successful.

If their media approach has worked out for them, as part of their spectacular prosperity, then perhaps it should be adopted by other conferences that would benefit the most by trying out this strategy, as sketched about by "Dawg."

(09-25-2022 12:27 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-25-2022 12:03 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The Big 12 has had this for its entire existence and still has it now.

It’s also the conference that got ripped completely apart.

If you're suggesting that the Big XII "got ripped completely apart" because it "has had this for its entire existence," or if you're suggesting that the former was caused by the latter, then that seems to come awfully close to suggest a "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" type of reasoning.

"post-hoc, ergo propter hoc" literally means "after, and therefore, because of."

Instead, it's possible that the two things have practically nothing to do with each other, but if you can come up with some reason for thinking they are related, give it a try.

Another point worth noting is that the idea sketched out by "Dawg" would be a very good one for certain conferences that don't have any better options, and may have been chosen by the Big 12 because it was the best option available to them. It's quite possible that the Big 12's location in the great plains region of the country, which has only recently become heavily populated due to the expansion of Texas, may have given them fewer media options than the eastern conferences had.

I think this strategy was adopted as an incentive to the "king programs", who would make a lot more money off of that Tier 3 content. It didn't take long at all after the Fox contract that allowed each school to hold one football game as T3 for most of the Big 12 to consolidate into a single Fox Sports Southwest media package (Oklahoma State, Texas TEch, TCU, Baylor)

Quote:One other point: It's a matter of opinion whether or not the Big 12 and PAC 12 have been "ripped apart." That sounds like a rather extreme way of putting it, since "ripped apart" usually suggests complete destruction - - and it's more than obvious that neither the Big 12 nor the PAC have been "destroyed." A less hyperbolic description is that they lost two of their top teams. That's not quite the same as being "ripped apart."

No, they lost 6 of their original 12 teams--not just UT and OU but Missouri, Nebraska, Colorado and Texas A&M. And, off the top of my head, all three teams that have top 25 or top 30 attendance. Everybody else is along for the ride, and without one of those anchor programs, the wheels are liable to fall off the bus, Big East Football Conference style.

I'm not sure that an all-for-one one-for-all media strategy would have done much to save the Big 12, either in the 2010-12 or 2021-22 cycles. But the record is pretty clear that it didn't. The Big 12 has been all-but-officially demoted from the ranks of major conferences. (On the other hand, so has the ACC, which had a different media strategy. And the AAC dropped from a pretty clear No. 6 to parity with the other G5 conferences. )

Quote:Finally, I believe the Big XII is one of the top 3 conferences, and that it will remain so, and as such, the Big XII has been incredibly successful and is likely to continue to be incredibly successful.

That's the sort of thing I like to evaluate by counting trophies. National Championships, CFP appearances, NY6 bowl bids, BCS bowl bids over the lifetime of the CFP, the BCS-CFP era, the lifespan of hte Big 12.

I'll work on that gradually, maybe, later today. But off the top of my head, I think Clemson and Florida State's accomplishments would put them ahead of Oklahoma and more-or-less nobody-else-in-the-Big-12 for 3rd place, at least in the CFP era.

But I could be wrong, I haven't counted. I'll let the data decide that.

EDIT 1: NAtional Championships since 1996, Big 12 Year One.
ACC 4, Big 12 3.5, PAC-12 1.5.

Quote:If their media approach has worked out for them, as part of their spectacular prosperity, then perhaps it should be adopted by other conferences that would benefit the most by trying out this strategy, as sketched about by "Dawg."

(09-24-2022 11:25 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  Good idea, or has it already been done??

Penn had its own exclusive TV contract as far back as the early 1950's. Regardless of the format, it's a function of demand.

I think equal everything revenue sharing is overrated for stability. It is not that equal revenue sharing makes conferences stable; it's that stability allows less powerful members to push for it and the middle usually benefits too (even if no more money, more consistent money).

(09-24-2022 11:25 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  This is my new sports media concept, and there's a possibility that it already exists, but we see:

Individual schools buy back their own tier 3 rights from conferences and/or media companies. The schools then create their own streaming platforms (much like Notre Dame is doing with Fighting Irish TV) and then partners with a well known media company for distribution (such as ESPN, Peacock, Paramount+, Amazon). It would be similar to how college radio networks partner with Learfield for radio distribution. Media companies can still bid on Tier 1 & Tier 2 right if they wish, but if they are using the individual schools' equipment for broadcast and the student broadcast equipment team staff, they have to account for that as well in the contract.

Good idea, or has it already been done??

Arkansas did this back in 2000s. The ABC affiliate out of Little Rock carried a lot of games. RazorVision had a lot of stuff, too. Now they Hogs+ with interviews, old games, and other material that aren't a part of the rights deals with the SEC and ESPN.

(09-24-2022 11:25 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  This is my new sports media concept, and there's a possibility that it already exists, but we see:

Individual schools buy back their own tier 3 rights from conferences and/or media companies. The schools then create their own streaming platforms (much like Notre Dame is doing with Fighting Irish TV) and then partners with a well known media company for distribution (such as ESPN, Peacock, Paramount+, Amazon). It would be similar to how college radio networks partner with Learfield for radio distribution. Media companies can still bid on Tier 1 & Tier 2 right if they wish, but if they are using the individual schools' equipment for broadcast and the student broadcast equipment team staff, they have to account for that as well in the contract.

Good idea, or has it already been done??

Its the way it used to be done. Games were on PPV. It worked much better selling it to a conference network or a streaming service like ESPN+. Its basically the same idea of the Pac 12 thinking they can run a conference network better than Fox or ESPN.

(09-25-2022 09:11 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I think equal everything revenue sharing is overrated for stability. It is not that equal revenue sharing makes conferences stable; it's that stability allows less powerful members to push for it and the middle usually benefits too (even if no more money, more consistent money).

But there's a difference between it being over-rated and not working as a factor at all. It may be a false dichotomy to argue over whether the cause-effect goes from stability to equal revenue sharing or from equal revenue sharing to stability, if it's a feedback loop and the cause-effect goes both ways.

Now, there is one one way that cable is different from streaming with respect to the conference versus individual trade-off, in that conferences get to pool all serious fans of any conference school in a fight to get the carriage, and carriage fees, they want in a negotiation with cable service providers, so they are able to extract more on average. That fact that there can be a larger pie to cut up makes it easier to agree to equal sized slices.

This factor is not there in the same force with streaming, but it remains the case that when you are in a conference streaming channel, your home games and your away conference games will both drop down to the streaming service if they are not OTA or cable. It's going to be less money for streaming on both sides, because your school is going to be in the most streaming games when it is doing the worst, and the bandwagon fans that provide extra audience for whichever school is doing well will have less reason to sign up for streaming when the school is doing well, but whatever the revenue potential of streaming, that is a boost for the school's share of a streaming platform versus going it alone.

(09-25-2022 07:08 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(09-25-2022 12:27 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-25-2022 12:03 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The Big 12 has had this for its entire existence and still has it now.

It’s also the conference that got ripped completely apart.

If you're suggesting that the Big XII "got ripped completely apart" because it "has had this for its entire existence," or if you're suggesting that the former was caused by the latter, then that seems to come awfully close to suggest a "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" type of reasoning.

"post-hoc, ergo propter hoc" literally means "after, and therefore, because of."

Instead, it's possible that the two things have practically nothing to do with each other, but if you can come up with some reason for thinking they are related, give it a try.

Another point worth noting is that the idea sketched out by "Dawg" would be a very good one for certain conferences that don't have any better options, and may have been chosen by the Big 12 because it was the best option available to them. It's quite possible that the Big 12's location in the great plains region of the country, which has only recently become heavily populated due to the expansion of Texas, may have given them fewer media options than the eastern conferences had.

I think this strategy was adopted as an incentive to the "king programs", who would make a lot more money off of that Tier 3 content. It didn't take long at all after the Fox contract that allowed each school to hold one football game as T3 for most of the Big 12 to consolidate into a single Fox Sports Southwest media package (Oklahoma State, Texas TEch, TCU, Baylor)

Quote:One other point: It's a matter of opinion whether or not the Big 12 and PAC 12 have been "ripped apart." That sounds like a rather extreme way of putting it, since "ripped apart" usually suggests complete destruction - - and it's more than obvious that neither the Big 12 nor the PAC have been "destroyed." A less hyperbolic description is that they lost two of their top teams. That's not quite the same as being "ripped apart."

No, they lost 6 of their original 12 teams--not just UT and OU but Missouri, Nebraska, Colorado and Texas A&M. And, off the top of my head, all three teams that have top 25 or top 30 attendance. Everybody else is along for the ride, and without one of those anchor programs, the wheels are liable to fall off the bus, Big East Football Conference style.

I'm not sure that an all-for-one one-for-all media strategy would have done much to save the Big 12, either in the 2010-12 or 2021-22 cycles. But the record is pretty clear that it didn't. The Big 12 has been all-but-officially demoted from the ranks of major conferences. (On the other hand, so has the ACC, which had a different media strategy. And the AAC dropped from a pretty clear No. 6 to parity with the other G5 conferences. )

Quote:Finally, I believe the Big XII is one of the top 3 conferences, and that it will remain so, and as such, the Big XII has been incredibly successful and is likely to continue to be incredibly successful.

That's the sort of thing I like to evaluate by counting trophies. National Championships, CFP appearances, NY6 bowl bids, BCS bowl bids over the lifetime of the CFP, the BCS-CFP era, the lifespan of hte Big 12.

I'll work on that gradually, maybe, later today. But off the top of my head, I think Clemson and Florida State's accomplishments would put them ahead of Oklahoma and more-or-less nobody-else-in-the-Big-12 for 3rd place, at least in the CFP era.

But I could be wrong, I haven't counted. I'll let the data decide that.

EDIT 1: NAtional Championships since 1996, Big 12 Year One.
ACC 4, Big 12 3.5, PAC-12 1.5.

Quote:If their media approach has worked out for them, as part of their spectacular prosperity, then perhaps it should be adopted by other conferences that would benefit the most by trying out this strategy, as sketched about by "Dawg."

ACC isn't a very good example. If you looked at the BCS era, the ACC was 5-16 in BCS games--and two of those wins came in the final year of the BCS, 2013. From 1998-2012 the conferences win total of 3 was matched by West Virginia alone. Clemson has done real well. Their 6 playoff wins and one BCS bowl win exceeds that of the rest of the conference combined.

(09-25-2022 09:49 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-25-2022 07:08 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(09-25-2022 12:27 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  

(09-25-2022 12:03 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The Big 12 has had this for its entire existence and still has it now.

It’s also the conference that got ripped completely apart.

If you're suggesting that the Big XII "got ripped completely apart" because it "has had this for its entire existence," or if you're suggesting that the former was caused by the latter, then that seems to come awfully close to suggest a "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" type of reasoning.

"post-hoc, ergo propter hoc" literally means "after, and therefore, because of."

Instead, it's possible that the two things have practically nothing to do with each other, but if you can come up with some reason for thinking they are related, give it a try.

Another point worth noting is that the idea sketched out by "Dawg" would be a very good one for certain conferences that don't have any better options, and may have been chosen by the Big 12 because it was the best option available to them. It's quite possible that the Big 12's location in the great plains region of the country, which has only recently become heavily populated due to the expansion of Texas, may have given them fewer media options than the eastern conferences had.

I think this strategy was adopted as an incentive to the "king programs", who would make a lot more money off of that Tier 3 content. It didn't take long at all after the Fox contract that allowed each school to hold one football game as T3 for most of the Big 12 to consolidate into a single Fox Sports Southwest media package (Oklahoma State, Texas TEch, TCU, Baylor)

Quote:One other point: It's a matter of opinion whether or not the Big 12 and PAC 12 have been "ripped apart." That sounds like a rather extreme way of putting it, since "ripped apart" usually suggests complete destruction - - and it's more than obvious that neither the Big 12 nor the PAC have been "destroyed." A less hyperbolic description is that they lost two of their top teams. That's not quite the same as being "ripped apart."

No, they lost 6 of their original 12 teams--not just UT and OU but Missouri, Nebraska, Colorado and Texas A&M. And, off the top of my head, all three teams that have top 25 or top 30 attendance. Everybody else is along for the ride, and without one of those anchor programs, the wheels are liable to fall off the bus, Big East Football Conference style.

I'm not sure that an all-for-one one-for-all media strategy would have done much to save the Big 12, either in the 2010-12 or 2021-22 cycles. But the record is pretty clear that it didn't. The Big 12 has been all-but-officially demoted from the ranks of major conferences. (On the other hand, so has the ACC, which had a different media strategy. And the AAC dropped from a pretty clear No. 6 to parity with the other G5 conferences. )

Quote:Finally, I believe the Big XII is one of the top 3 conferences, and that it will remain so, and as such, the Big XII has been incredibly successful and is likely to continue to be incredibly successful.

That's the sort of thing I like to evaluate by counting trophies. National Championships, CFP appearances, NY6 bowl bids, BCS bowl bids over the lifetime of the CFP, the BCS-CFP era, the lifespan of hte Big 12.

I'll work on that gradually, maybe, later today. But off the top of my head, I think Clemson and Florida State's accomplishments would put them ahead of Oklahoma and more-or-less nobody-else-in-the-Big-12 for 3rd place, at least in the CFP era.

But I could be wrong, I haven't counted. I'll let the data decide that.

EDIT 1: NAtional Championships since 1996, Big 12 Year One.
ACC 4, Big 12 3.5, PAC-12 1.5.

Quote:If their media approach has worked out for them, as part of their spectacular prosperity, then perhaps it should be adopted by other conferences that would benefit the most by trying out this strategy, as sketched about by "Dawg."

ACC isn't a very good example. If you looked at the BCS era, the ACC was 5-16 in BCS games--and two of those wins came in the final year of the BCS, 2013. From 1998-2012 the conferences win total of 3 was matched by West Virginia alone. Clemson has done real well. Their 6 playoff wins and one BCS bowl win exceeds that of the rest of the conference combined.

It's another data point. Do you look at that as "21 BCS appearances in 14 years" or "5 BCS bowl wins in 14 years"? And I don't know what we mean by "ACC isn't a very good example"--if ACC isn't the Big 12's competitor for #3, who is?

And, without looking it up yet, I feel like you could say the same about the Big 12 and Oklahoma--a big chunk of the Big 12's playoff, BCS, NY6 appearances/ wins are Oklahoma, with a sprinkling of others. My memory-impression could be wrong though, that's why I like to surf through the old results and count.

(09-25-2022 09:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-24-2022 11:25 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  This is my new sports media concept, and there's a possibility that it already exists, but we see:

Individual schools buy back their own tier 3 rights from conferences and/or media companies. The schools then create their own streaming platforms (much like Notre Dame is doing with Fighting Irish TV) and then partners with a well known media company for distribution (such as ESPN, Peacock, Paramount+, Amazon). It would be similar to how college radio networks partner with Learfield for radio distribution. Media companies can still bid on Tier 1 & Tier 2 right if they wish, but if they are using the individual schools' equipment for broadcast and the student broadcast equipment team staff, they have to account for that as well in the contract.

Good idea, or has it already been done??

Its the way it used to be done. Games were on PPV. It worked much better selling it to a conference network or a streaming service like ESPN+. Its basically the same idea of the Pac 12 thinking they can run a conference network better than Fox or ESPN.

Yep. Nebraska had conference games on PPV towards the end of their Big 12 run. It became a question of whether you wanted to shell out to pay for the game or show up to a bar a couple hours early so you could have a seat, and pay for the inevitable tab. The games were terribly produced and would sometimes cut in and out. BTN has been a godsend, and it couldn't be done without OSU, Michigan, Penn State more or less subsidizing the rest of the conference.

(09-25-2022 11:31 AM)Mav Wrote:  

(09-25-2022 09:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-24-2022 11:25 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  This is my new sports media concept, and there's a possibility that it already exists, but we see:

Individual schools buy back their own tier 3 rights from conferences and/or media companies. The schools then create their own streaming platforms (much like Notre Dame is doing with Fighting Irish TV) and then partners with a well known media company for distribution (such as ESPN, Peacock, Paramount+, Amazon). It would be similar to how college radio networks partner with Learfield for radio distribution. Media companies can still bid on Tier 1 & Tier 2 right if they wish, but if they are using the individual schools' equipment for broadcast and the student broadcast equipment team staff, they have to account for that as well in the contract.

Good idea, or has it already been done??

Its the way it used to be done. Games were on PPV. It worked much better selling it to a conference network or a streaming service like ESPN+. Its basically the same idea of the Pac 12 thinking they can run a conference network better than Fox or ESPN.

Yep. Nebraska had conference games on PPV towards the end of their Big 12 run. It became a question of whether you wanted to shell out to pay for the game or show up to a bar a couple hours early so you could have a seat, and pay for the inevitable tab. The games were terribly produced and would sometimes cut in and out. BTN has been a godsend, and it couldn't be done without OSU, Michigan, Penn State more or less subsidizing the rest of the conference.

Actually, the real killer financial aspect of BTN isn’t just about the top brands, but rather it greatly monetized schools like Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Maryland and Rutgers with the Chicago, Indianapolis, NYC and DC markets. That is part of the reason why the equal revenue sharing in the Big Ten up to this point hasn’t been an issue: schools like Michigan and Ohio State *are* making money off of Illinois, Rutgers, Maryland, etc. because they’re getting revenue from much larger TV markets compared to their own home markets.

The Big 12, in contrast, was totally imbalanced: their most valuable national brand, 4 of its 5 largest TV markets, top recruiting area, and top academic school was all wrapped in the single program of Texas. That’s why UT had such unique power and leverage over that entire league.

People get the chicken and the egg mixed up when they claim that unequal sharing caused the Big 12 instability. It’s not that the Big 12 was unstable because of unequal sharing. It’s that because the conference was unstable, they had to have unequal sharing to prevent the conference from falling apart. Blaming unequal sharing for a conference falling apart makes zero logical sense if you think about it for just two seconds. The teams that were considered valuable enough to get invited by other conferences (especially Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas A&M) were the very teams that benefitted from unequal sharing. Without unequal sharing, I suspect the Big 12 might have fallen apart at around the same time that Miami joined the ACC. (Especially since the PAC and Big 10 might have felt they needed a championship game now that the ACC was getting one.)


I suspect the ACC will soon go to unequal sharing just to eliminate any possibility a team will challenge the GOR. Oregon and Washington are already pushing for unequal sharing in the PAC.

(09-25-2022 12:03 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The Big 12 has had this for its entire existence and still has it now.

It’s also the conference that got ripped completely apart.

Notre Dame has a stance on independence with a brand that can allow it to feel comfortable/confident to go it alone.

However, I think fans waaaay underestimate how much schools care about protecting against downside risk in down periods and waaaay overestimate how much schools care about maximizing upside revenue in peak periods. The protection against downside risk is what conference control of media rights provide. Fans think schools want incentive payments for winning and getting on TV more, but university presidents and ADs want steady consistent revenue whether they win or lose.

There’s no single better model for making money on sports than basic cable. At least no one in the Big Ten, SEC or ACC with strong conference network deals would ever think about diluting that revenue with trying to stream on their own (which makes waaaaaaay less money).

You buy way too much into the reasons that schools pretend they leave conferences.


Miami spent months in 2003 pretending that the Big East’s unequal revenue sharing (and a desire to protect the program in leaner years) was a reason they considering leaving the Big East. But then, at the last possible second, they considered staying in the Big East because the Big East offered some package where revenue would be shared even more unequally. (Miami accepted the ACC invite on literally the last possible day.)

Unequal revenue sharing is just PR talk that schools use to cover their ass when leaving conferences.