Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Poll: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
Reluctance of too many schools to go with a Streaming Service
Demands for unequal Revenue Sharing from some schools
Refusal of several schools to sign a GoR
Inability to reach consensus on terms of media contract
Demand of some schools for significant exit fees
Grenades from the Big 12
Yearning for the old days of the Alliance
ESPN and/or others wont pay what Kliavkoff wants, no other bidders emerging
Other
[Show Results]
Note: This is a public poll, other users will be able to see what you voted for.
Post Reply 
When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
Author Message
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,188
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 229
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #41
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 01:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 02:13 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I think they'd be thrilled to go with an Amazon or Apple streaming service, if it would give them $40mil a year per team. At least until all the realignment settles down. Maybe as short as 2025.

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

I think they're closer to $25m with ESPN and about on par with the big 12 deal if they go with Amazon, and enough schools are balking at the Amazon deal that they're currently at an impasse.
01-19-2023 07:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,188
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 229
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #42
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 01:28 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 01:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 02:13 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I think they'd be thrilled to go with an Amazon or Apple streaming service, if it would give them $40mil a year per team. At least until all the realignment settles down. Maybe as short as 2025.

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

I wonder...

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

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

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

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

Perhaps a smaller conference could get more.

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

If they rolled as a 7 or 8 team Conference, while the other 4 had 14.5-16 members, it would only further the impression that the Pac is more g5 than p5. I'd be very surprised if they don't run with at least 12 long term. ie, if they lose those 3, they'd add SMU, Boise, Memphis, probably Fresno St and one other (Tulane? UTSA? UNLV? UNT?).
01-19-2023 07:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,188
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 229
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #43
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 01:29 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 10:55 AM)SMUstang Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 05:49 AM)Fresno Fanatic Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 12:05 AM)Acres Wrote:  Texas and Oklahoma made 10 schools work for the big12 until it didn’t. Boren”s “ psychological disadvantage “ proved true. Can’t see the pac12 staying 10 while three other power conferences are at 16 or 15.

Would expect a pac12 deal by end off January, expansion by end of March. San Diego state would need to give at least a years notice before July (I think) and work out it’s out of conference schedule.

Good point. So who do you think AAC would replace SMU with?

La Tech would make the most sense.

I'd guess either FIU or MTSU, depending on what USF and Memphis think about bringing in another in-state school. Wherever F_U goes, F_U seems to follow.


FIU is currently an AAC member in Men's Soccer and Women's Swimming.

MTSU is in the #18 TV market, which is what the AAC cares about. FIU is in the #29 TV market.

Miami-Dade has more people than the Nashville metro area. How big geographically is that "#18 tv market"?
01-19-2023 07:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PeteTheChop Online
Counting down the days
*

Posts: 2,353
Joined: Apr 2007
Reputation: 419
I Root For: C-A-N-E-S
Location: North Florida lifer
Post: #44
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
The Pac-12's potential media partners are insisting on a strong GoR to pay something on par with the Big XII's deal

The Pac-12 commissioner can't get all of his 10 remaining schools to agree to a GoR that would satisfy the potential media partners

Maybe that's a key part of the hold-up?
01-19-2023 07:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,188
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 229
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #45
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 04:08 PM)Big Foote Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 12:51 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 11:08 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 12:05 AM)Acres Wrote:  Texas and Oklahoma made 10 schools work for the big12 until it didn’t. Boren”s “ psychological disadvantage “ proved true. Can’t see the pac12 staying 10 while three other power conferences are at 16 or 15.

15 is wishful thinking

14.5 is cold, hard reality

I think people have made interesting points about why to not invite UNLV.

But, I think at this point, I don't think they're all in on recruiting only due to academics, when all it takes is an agreement of "work on it", and when geography seems to be a premium criteria.

I think taking SDSU and Fresno state as a pair to cover california is sounding more and more like a good idea.

If people really want SMU, then build a pod/division:

SMU, Tulane, and Rice would, I presume, at least mollify the academics.

I like the Trio - maybe UTSA instead of Rice. That being said, Rice does bring a lot to the table, just not very good football, but getting better!

I'd take SMU/UTSA/Rice to get a footprint in every big metro in Texas. Tulane has had 2 good years in 50, they're Rice but in a much more remote location.
01-19-2023 07:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UCGrad1992 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,608
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 1745
I Root For: Cincy Bearcats
Location: North Carolina
Post: #46
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
The short of it...Kliavkoff [Cryin'Koff] will offer something when he has something final and tangible to share. Meanwhile, the cement in the truck mixer spins round and round...
01-19-2023 07:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,188
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 229
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #47
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 04:30 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 04:22 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 01:28 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 01:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 02:13 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I think they'd be thrilled to go with an Amazon or Apple streaming service, if it would give them $40mil a year per team. At least until all the realignment settles down. Maybe as short as 2025.

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

I wonder...

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

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

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

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

Perhaps a smaller conference could get more.

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

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

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

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

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

Maybe, but 250M goes farther amongst 8 schools than 10.

Suddenly what was seen as a bad deal, doesn't look quite so bad.

And I don't think losing arizona and colorado - while yes, different markets - would cause much of a reduction in offer, if any. The losses would be mountain, not pacific time zones. And San Francisco and Seattle, et al, would still be there.

You think that losing AZ and CO wouldn't cost them any money? Even though ESPN was willing to guarantee pro rata at 30m+ per if they're added? Maybe you're right though, ESPN doesn't care about money.
01-19-2023 07:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoCalBobcat78 Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,343
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 217
I Root For: TXST, UCLA, CBU
Location:
Post: #48
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 07:55 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 04:30 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  And I don't think losing arizona and colorado - while yes, different markets - would cause much of a reduction in offer, if any. The losses would be mountain, not pacific time zones. And San Francisco and Seattle, et al, would still be there.

You think that losing AZ and CO wouldn't cost them any money? Even though ESPN was willing to guarantee pro rata at 30m+ per if they're added? Maybe you're right though, ESPN doesn't care about money.

Colorado definitely has value now that Coach Prime is in Boulder. He just got a five-star recruit to flip from Miami to Colorado. Cormani McClain is the five-star recruit and the No. 1 ranked cornerback in the nation in the 2023 class. Sanders already has the No. 1 rated cornerback in the nation from the 2022 class in Travis Hunter, who transferred from Jackson State. They have the No. 19 ranked recruiting class in the nation in the 247sports overall rankings, which includes four-year recruits and transfers. Colorado's value has changed since Coach Prime got there.
01-19-2023 10:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Skyhawk Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,299
Joined: Nov 2021
Reputation: 177
I Root For: Big10
Location:
Post: #49
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 10:57 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 07:55 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 04:30 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  And I don't think losing arizona and colorado - while yes, different markets - would cause much of a reduction in offer, if any. The losses would be mountain, not pacific time zones. And San Francisco and Seattle, et al, would still be there.

You think that losing AZ and CO wouldn't cost them any money? Even though ESPN was willing to guarantee pro rata at 30m+ per if they're added? Maybe you're right though, ESPN doesn't care about money.

Colorado definitely has value now that Coach Prime is in Boulder. He just got a five-star recruit to flip from Miami to Colorado. Cormani McClain is the five-star recruit and the No. 1 ranked cornerback in the nation in the 2023 class. Sanders already has the No. 1 rated cornerback in the nation from the 2022 class in Travis Hunter, who transferred from Jackson State. They have the No. 19 ranked recruiting class in the nation in the 247sports overall rankings, which includes four-year recruits and transfers. Colorado's value has changed since Coach Prime got there.

never said they didn't have value. I just meant that not having them, shouldn't reduce the overall PAC conference media deal much.

My thought is that the difference between 8 and 10 when it isn't usc, ohio state, alabama, texas, etc., probably doesn't make that huge of a difference for overall payment to a conference.

but for the individual schools, dropping to 8, makes a big deal in the "per school" dollars.

if everyone was at 25 each for 10, dividing up the 50 for the other 8is over 5M extra, each. Which puts them in the range of the B12 deal.

And along those lines, another way the PAC could do this could be to retain those schools and wave goodbye to OSU and WSU instead.

Or just swap OSU for SDSU, or or or.

But in their current situation, they would seem to need to either go big or go small. Middle ground isn't likely going to cut it.

And going big means adding schools like SDSU and Fresno state, plus maybe a texas pod of UTSA, SMU, Rice, and then Tulane (aau) or maybe Air force.

And for some PAC schools that might be a tough pill to swallow. so going smaller might be their better option.

If they drop the Arizonas and Colorado, I think they reduce their need to add socal. Hence, AZ, AZ state, Colorado and SDSU to the B12.

So it all depends.
01-19-2023 11:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Yosef181 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 802
Joined: Sep 2021
Reputation: 168
I Root For: Appalachian State
Location:
Post: #50
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 07:50 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 01:29 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 10:55 AM)SMUstang Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 05:49 AM)Fresno Fanatic Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 12:05 AM)Acres Wrote:  Texas and Oklahoma made 10 schools work for the big12 until it didn’t. Boren”s “ psychological disadvantage “ proved true. Can’t see the pac12 staying 10 while three other power conferences are at 16 or 15.

Would expect a pac12 deal by end off January, expansion by end of March. San Diego state would need to give at least a years notice before July (I think) and work out it’s out of conference schedule.

Good point. So who do you think AAC would replace SMU with?

La Tech would make the most sense.

I'd guess either FIU or MTSU, depending on what USF and Memphis think about bringing in another in-state school. Wherever F_U goes, F_U seems to follow.


FIU is currently an AAC member in Men's Soccer and Women's Swimming.

MTSU is in the #18 TV market, which is what the AAC cares about. FIU is in the #29 TV market.

Miami-Dade has more people than the Nashville metro area. How big geographically is that "#18 tv market"?

Nielsen defines the Miami TV market as Monroe, Miami-Dade, and Broward counties, enough for #18 on their list of top TV markets.

The Nashville TV market includes more counties. Here's a map: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c...et_Map.svg

And the market ranking from Nielsen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_te...dia_market
(This post was last modified: 01-20-2023 01:53 PM by Yosef181.)
01-20-2023 01:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,188
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 229
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #51
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 11:22 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 10:57 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 07:55 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 04:30 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  And I don't think losing arizona and colorado - while yes, different markets - would cause much of a reduction in offer, if any. The losses would be mountain, not pacific time zones. And San Francisco and Seattle, et al, would still be there.

You think that losing AZ and CO wouldn't cost them any money? Even though ESPN was willing to guarantee pro rata at 30m+ per if they're added? Maybe you're right though, ESPN doesn't care about money.

Colorado definitely has value now that Coach Prime is in Boulder. He just got a five-star recruit to flip from Miami to Colorado. Cormani McClain is the five-star recruit and the No. 1 ranked cornerback in the nation in the 2023 class. Sanders already has the No. 1 rated cornerback in the nation from the 2022 class in Travis Hunter, who transferred from Jackson State. They have the No. 19 ranked recruiting class in the nation in the 247sports overall rankings, which includes four-year recruits and transfers. Colorado's value has changed since Coach Prime got there.

never said they didn't have value. I just meant that not having them, shouldn't reduce the overall PAC conference media deal much.

My thought is that the difference between 8 and 10 when it isn't usc, ohio state, alabama, texas, etc., probably doesn't make that huge of a difference for overall payment to a conference.

but for the individual schools, dropping to 8, makes a big deal in the "per school" dollars.

if everyone was at 25 each for 10, dividing up the 50 for the other 8is over 5M extra, each. Which puts them in the range of the B12 deal.

And along those lines, another way the PAC could do this could be to retain those schools and wave goodbye to OSU and WSU instead.

Or just swap OSU for SDSU, or or or.

But in their current situation, they would seem to need to either go big or go small. Middle ground isn't likely going to cut it.

And going big means adding schools like SDSU and Fresno state, plus maybe a texas pod of UTSA, SMU, Rice, and then Tulane (aau) or maybe Air force.

And for some PAC schools that might be a tough pill to swallow. so going smaller might be their better option.

If they drop the Arizonas and Colorado, I think they reduce their need to add socal. Hence, AZ, AZ state, Colorado and SDSU to the B12.

So it all depends.

It doesn't work that way. Networks need a critical mass of games to fill all of their slots. Going from 17 to 16 schools by taking out the 8th most valuable Brand probably would have little if any impact on the media rights. But going from 10, which is already marginal to fill all slots, down to 7...that's a scary drop, and they won't stay together if they drop down to 7 then add 1 to get to 8.

Think of it:

P2 - 16 each
ACC- 14.5
nbig 16 (after stealing from the Pac and grabbing sdsu) - 16
nPac 8

Keep in mind that the Pac no longer has an "Alpha". No Texas, No USC, No OU, No UCLA. What they do have is some good Betas and a bunch of pretty good but not great Brands. One of those betas is ASU, and possibly CU now that they've gotten serious again about Athletics. And UArizona isn't bad, either. Losing both AZ schools could very well be terminal in fact. The Pac has good value still, but those 3 schools represent about 30% of that value, and the revised media rights deal would reflect that.
01-20-2023 03:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,188
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 229
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #52
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-20-2023 01:45 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 07:50 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 01:29 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 10:55 AM)SMUstang Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 05:49 AM)Fresno Fanatic Wrote:  Good point. So who do you think AAC would replace SMU with?

La Tech would make the most sense.

I'd guess either FIU or MTSU, depending on what USF and Memphis think about bringing in another in-state school. Wherever F_U goes, F_U seems to follow.


FIU is currently an AAC member in Men's Soccer and Women's Swimming.

MTSU is in the #18 TV market, which is what the AAC cares about. FIU is in the #29 TV market.

Miami-Dade has more people than the Nashville metro area. How big geographically is that "#18 tv market"?

Nielsen defines the Miami TV market as Monroe, Miami-Dade, and Broward counties, enough for #18 on their list of top TV markets.

The Nashville TV market includes more counties. Here's a map: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c...et_Map.svg

And the market ranking from Nielsen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_te...dia_market

That Nashville map looks almost like the San Antonio one, even though ours has a bunch of very large counties in desolate areas. Miami's seems...very small by comparison. Though perhaps if Miami was in the middle of the country instead of surrounded by water on 3 sides they'd have more reach I suppose.
01-20-2023 03:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Skyhawk Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,299
Joined: Nov 2021
Reputation: 177
I Root For: Big10
Location:
Post: #53
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-20-2023 03:46 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 11:22 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 10:57 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 07:55 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 04:30 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  And I don't think losing arizona and colorado - while yes, different markets - would cause much of a reduction in offer, if any. The losses would be mountain, not pacific time zones. And San Francisco and Seattle, et al, would still be there.

You think that losing AZ and CO wouldn't cost them any money? Even though ESPN was willing to guarantee pro rata at 30m+ per if they're added? Maybe you're right though, ESPN doesn't care about money.

Colorado definitely has value now that Coach Prime is in Boulder. He just got a five-star recruit to flip from Miami to Colorado. Cormani McClain is the five-star recruit and the No. 1 ranked cornerback in the nation in the 2023 class. Sanders already has the No. 1 rated cornerback in the nation from the 2022 class in Travis Hunter, who transferred from Jackson State. They have the No. 19 ranked recruiting class in the nation in the 247sports overall rankings, which includes four-year recruits and transfers. Colorado's value has changed since Coach Prime got there.

never said they didn't have value. I just meant that not having them, shouldn't reduce the overall PAC conference media deal much.

My thought is that the difference between 8 and 10 when it isn't usc, ohio state, alabama, texas, etc., probably doesn't make that huge of a difference for overall payment to a conference.

but for the individual schools, dropping to 8, makes a big deal in the "per school" dollars.

if everyone was at 25 each for 10, dividing up the 50 for the other 8is over 5M extra, each. Which puts them in the range of the B12 deal.

And along those lines, another way the PAC could do this could be to retain those schools and wave goodbye to OSU and WSU instead.

Or just swap OSU for SDSU, or or or.

But in their current situation, they would seem to need to either go big or go small. Middle ground isn't likely going to cut it.

And going big means adding schools like SDSU and Fresno state, plus maybe a texas pod of UTSA, SMU, Rice, and then Tulane (aau) or maybe Air force.

And for some PAC schools that might be a tough pill to swallow. so going smaller might be their better option.

If they drop the Arizonas and Colorado, I think they reduce their need to add socal. Hence, AZ, AZ state, Colorado and SDSU to the B12.

So it all depends.

It doesn't work that way. Networks need a critical mass of games to fill all of their slots. Going from 17 to 16 schools by taking out the 8th most valuable Brand probably would have little if any impact on the media rights. But going from 10, which is already marginal to fill all slots, down to 7...that's a scary drop, and they won't stay together if they drop down to 7 then add 1 to get to 8.

Think of it:

P2 - 16 each
ACC- 14.5
nbig 16 (after stealing from the Pac and grabbing sdsu) - 16
nPac 8

Keep in mind that the Pac no longer has an "Alpha". No Texas, No USC, No OU, No UCLA. What they do have is some good Betas and a bunch of pretty good but not great Brands. One of those betas is ASU, and possibly CU now that they've gotten serious again about Athletics. And UArizona isn't bad, either. Losing both AZ schools could very well be terminal in fact. The Pac has good value still, but those 3 schools represent about 30% of that value, and the revised media rights deal would reflect that.

the number of schools is not equal to the number of games.

this is about matchups. and if the conference can show a certain amount of games. 2 less schools is not going to impact that much.

and one example of a value for espn here is that there's a decent chance PAC school will have games against big 10 schools. and espn doesn't currently have a media deal with the big 10. so that's also a value.

these deals aren't just a counting of heads and weighing the seeming value of a school. they are not that at all.
01-20-2023 06:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,188
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 229
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #54
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-20-2023 06:05 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-20-2023 03:46 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 11:22 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 10:57 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 07:55 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  You think that losing AZ and CO wouldn't cost them any money? Even though ESPN was willing to guarantee pro rata at 30m+ per if they're added? Maybe you're right though, ESPN doesn't care about money.

Colorado definitely has value now that Coach Prime is in Boulder. He just got a five-star recruit to flip from Miami to Colorado. Cormani McClain is the five-star recruit and the No. 1 ranked cornerback in the nation in the 2023 class. Sanders already has the No. 1 rated cornerback in the nation from the 2022 class in Travis Hunter, who transferred from Jackson State. They have the No. 19 ranked recruiting class in the nation in the 247sports overall rankings, which includes four-year recruits and transfers. Colorado's value has changed since Coach Prime got there.

never said they didn't have value. I just meant that not having them, shouldn't reduce the overall PAC conference media deal much.

My thought is that the difference between 8 and 10 when it isn't usc, ohio state, alabama, texas, etc., probably doesn't make that huge of a difference for overall payment to a conference.

but for the individual schools, dropping to 8, makes a big deal in the "per school" dollars.

if everyone was at 25 each for 10, dividing up the 50 for the other 8is over 5M extra, each. Which puts them in the range of the B12 deal.

And along those lines, another way the PAC could do this could be to retain those schools and wave goodbye to OSU and WSU instead.

Or just swap OSU for SDSU, or or or.

But in their current situation, they would seem to need to either go big or go small. Middle ground isn't likely going to cut it.

And going big means adding schools like SDSU and Fresno state, plus maybe a texas pod of UTSA, SMU, Rice, and then Tulane (aau) or maybe Air force.

And for some PAC schools that might be a tough pill to swallow. so going smaller might be their better option.

If they drop the Arizonas and Colorado, I think they reduce their need to add socal. Hence, AZ, AZ state, Colorado and SDSU to the B12.

So it all depends.

It doesn't work that way. Networks need a critical mass of games to fill all of their slots. Going from 17 to 16 schools by taking out the 8th most valuable Brand probably would have little if any impact on the media rights. But going from 10, which is already marginal to fill all slots, down to 7...that's a scary drop, and they won't stay together if they drop down to 7 then add 1 to get to 8.

Think of it:

P2 - 16 each
ACC- 14.5
nbig 16 (after stealing from the Pac and grabbing sdsu) - 16
nPac 8

Keep in mind that the Pac no longer has an "Alpha". No Texas, No USC, No OU, No UCLA. What they do have is some good Betas and a bunch of pretty good but not great Brands. One of those betas is ASU, and possibly CU now that they've gotten serious again about Athletics. And UArizona isn't bad, either. Losing both AZ schools could very well be terminal in fact. The Pac has good value still, but those 3 schools represent about 30% of that value, and the revised media rights deal would reflect that.

the number of schools is not equal to the number of games.

this is about matchups. and if the conference can show a certain amount of games. 2 less schools is not going to impact that much.

and one example of a value for espn here is that there's a decent chance PAC school will have games against big 10 schools. and espn doesn't currently have a media deal with the big 10. so that's also a value.

these deals aren't just a counting of heads and weighing the seeming value of a school. they are not that at all.

Only 8 schools runs a much higher risk of several consecutive down years by all programs. With 12, you'll always have some ranked, UW or UO is up when USC and Utah are down, etc etc. But with 8? You could have a 7-5 or 8-4 team win the conference 3 years in a row, and no good content for TV partners. If I'm a TV partner, and I can have a 12 team big 12 that's in a great Football footprint, just had a solid season, and put a team in the Title Game for $30m, then what's an 8 team Pac worth? $18m? $21m? The Pac needs 10 for sure, and 12 is probably better, for their next media rights deal. They'll sign the new deal (if they ever get everything sorted out) with 10 teams but a wink-wink agreement on who the 11th and 12th will be, with all terms worked out ahead of time with both the broadcast partner(s) and the new schools.
01-21-2023 02:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
PeteTheChop Online
Counting down the days
*

Posts: 2,353
Joined: Apr 2007
Reputation: 419
I Root For: C-A-N-E-S
Location: North Florida lifer
Post: #55
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 07:55 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  The short of it...Kliavkoff [Cryin'Koff] will offer something when he has something final and tangible to share. Meanwhile, the cement in the truck mixer spins round and round...

Kliavkoff sighting moments ago ...

[Image: getting-rid-of-a-groundhog.jpg]
01-21-2023 02:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
46566 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 644
Joined: Dec 2019
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Gonzaga
Location: California
Post: #56
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
I think it's a combination of no agreement for the media deal and maybe potential expansion. Someone like Amazon might offer more money but the schools may want more games on TV. I can see the PAC 12 want a minimum number of games guaranteed a week for football and basketball.

With expansion I think San Diego State is a given but #12 is a question. Let alone if they go to #13 and #14. With more potential content this could change the required minimum number of games a week offering.
01-21-2023 03:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Skyhawk Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,299
Joined: Nov 2021
Reputation: 177
I Root For: Big10
Location:
Post: #57
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-21-2023 02:23 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-20-2023 06:05 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-20-2023 03:46 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 11:22 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 10:57 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  Colorado definitely has value now that Coach Prime is in Boulder. He just got a five-star recruit to flip from Miami to Colorado. Cormani McClain is the five-star recruit and the No. 1 ranked cornerback in the nation in the 2023 class. Sanders already has the No. 1 rated cornerback in the nation from the 2022 class in Travis Hunter, who transferred from Jackson State. They have the No. 19 ranked recruiting class in the nation in the 247sports overall rankings, which includes four-year recruits and transfers. Colorado's value has changed since Coach Prime got there.

never said they didn't have value. I just meant that not having them, shouldn't reduce the overall PAC conference media deal much.

My thought is that the difference between 8 and 10 when it isn't usc, ohio state, alabama, texas, etc., probably doesn't make that huge of a difference for overall payment to a conference.

but for the individual schools, dropping to 8, makes a big deal in the "per school" dollars.

if everyone was at 25 each for 10, dividing up the 50 for the other 8is over 5M extra, each. Which puts them in the range of the B12 deal.

And along those lines, another way the PAC could do this could be to retain those schools and wave goodbye to OSU and WSU instead.

Or just swap OSU for SDSU, or or or.

But in their current situation, they would seem to need to either go big or go small. Middle ground isn't likely going to cut it.

And going big means adding schools like SDSU and Fresno state, plus maybe a texas pod of UTSA, SMU, Rice, and then Tulane (aau) or maybe Air force.

And for some PAC schools that might be a tough pill to swallow. so going smaller might be their better option.

If they drop the Arizonas and Colorado, I think they reduce their need to add socal. Hence, AZ, AZ state, Colorado and SDSU to the B12.

So it all depends.

It doesn't work that way. Networks need a critical mass of games to fill all of their slots. Going from 17 to 16 schools by taking out the 8th most valuable Brand probably would have little if any impact on the media rights. But going from 10, which is already marginal to fill all slots, down to 7...that's a scary drop, and they won't stay together if they drop down to 7 then add 1 to get to 8.

Think of it:

P2 - 16 each
ACC- 14.5
nbig 16 (after stealing from the Pac and grabbing sdsu) - 16
nPac 8

Keep in mind that the Pac no longer has an "Alpha". No Texas, No USC, No OU, No UCLA. What they do have is some good Betas and a bunch of pretty good but not great Brands. One of those betas is ASU, and possibly CU now that they've gotten serious again about Athletics. And UArizona isn't bad, either. Losing both AZ schools could very well be terminal in fact. The Pac has good value still, but those 3 schools represent about 30% of that value, and the revised media rights deal would reflect that.

the number of schools is not equal to the number of games.

this is about matchups. and if the conference can show a certain amount of games. 2 less schools is not going to impact that much.

and one example of a value for espn here is that there's a decent chance PAC school will have games against big 10 schools. and espn doesn't currently have a media deal with the big 10. so that's also a value.

these deals aren't just a counting of heads and weighing the seeming value of a school. they are not that at all.

Only 8 schools runs a much higher risk of several consecutive down years by all programs. With 12, you'll always have some ranked, UW or UO is up when USC and Utah are down, etc etc. But with 8? You could have a 7-5 or 8-4 team win the conference 3 years in a row, and no good content for TV partners. If I'm a TV partner, and I can have a 12 team big 12 that's in a great Football footprint, just had a solid season, and put a team in the Title Game for $30m, then what's an 8 team Pac worth? $18m? $21m? The Pac needs 10 for sure, and 12 is probably better, for their next media rights deal. They'll sign the new deal (if they ever get everything sorted out) with 10 teams but a wink-wink agreement on who the 11th and 12th will be, with all terms worked out ahead of time with both the broadcast partner(s) and the new schools.

the first part of your response is a completely different argument. And I disagree with your supposition there. Every school wants to think they can win the conference, and having more schools in a conference are more steps in my way of winning the conference.

And the second part that you build on from it, that the possibility of the schools getting to winning the conference, gains them more money, is immaterial.

I hate to break it to fans, but media companies don't care if you win or lose.

Just ask the Cubs, the Red Sox, and any number of other sports groups.

Media companies just want eyeballs - ad revenue.

And to ask the question directly - Would you continue to watch Texas A&M if they had less than a stellar season this year, next year, and every year until the end of the media contract?

If yes, then your argument fails on all counts.
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2023 04:21 PM by Skyhawk.)
01-21-2023 04:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
pablowow Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,413
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation: 34
I Root For: TULANE/AAC
Location: Louisiana
Post: #58
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 07:53 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 04:08 PM)Big Foote Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 12:51 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 11:08 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 12:05 AM)Acres Wrote:  Texas and Oklahoma made 10 schools work for the big12 until it didn’t. Boren”s “ psychological disadvantage “ proved true. Can’t see the pac12 staying 10 while three other power conferences are at 16 or 15.

15 is wishful thinking

14.5 is cold, hard reality

I think people have made interesting points about why to not invite UNLV.

But, I think at this point, I don't think they're all in on recruiting only due to academics, when all it takes is an agreement of "work on it", and when geography seems to be a premium criteria.

I think taking SDSU and Fresno state as a pair to cover california is sounding more and more like a good idea.

If people really want SMU, then build a pod/division:

SMU, Tulane, and Rice would, I presume, at least mollify the academics.

I like the Trio - maybe UTSA instead of Rice. That being said, Rice does bring a lot to the table, just not very good football, but getting better!

I'd take SMU/UTSA/Rice to get a footprint in every big metro in Texas. Tulane has had 2 good years in 50, they're Rice but in a much more remote location.

Not true.. not even close to being right.. we are larger than TCU in school size plus we do have a recent history the last 10 yrs of success.. we also took your wide receiver in the portal.. you must be salty..

We will more than likely end up in a reconfigured ACC if I had to guess or the BIG 12
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2023 04:42 PM by pablowow.)
01-21-2023 04:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goodknightfl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,056
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 402
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #59
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-19-2023 07:55 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 04:30 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 04:22 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 01:28 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 01:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I dont think they are going to get that much. That number assumes they can take the very best games from Amazon---without Amazon lowering the bid---and give CBS a package of CBS-OTA worthy games (one per week) at a premium price. Lets just use common sense----if anything near 40 million was currently on the table this deal would have long ago been done. The reason it hasnt been done yet is they are probably much closer to 20 million per team than they are to the Big12's 32 million per team----and thats a problem for the Pac12.....so the Pac12 continues to move the pieces around hoping to find a magic formula to get Big12 money or better.

ESPN pro rata is more in the low 20's than 30. FOX would have to agree to get it to 30 unless ESPN was willing to take all the extra games involved.

I wonder...

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

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

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

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

Perhaps a smaller conference could get more.

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

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

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

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

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

Maybe, but 250M goes farther amongst 8 schools than 10.

Suddenly what was seen as a bad deal, doesn't look quite so bad.

And I don't think losing arizona and colorado - while yes, different markets - would cause much of a reduction in offer, if any. The losses would be mountain, not pacific time zones. And San Francisco and Seattle, et al, would still be there.

You think that losing AZ and CO wouldn't cost them any money? Even though ESPN was willing to guarantee pro rata at 30m+ per if they're added? Maybe you're right though, ESPN doesn't care about money.
01-21-2023 06:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,188
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 229
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #60
RE: When are we going to hear something from the Pac?
(01-21-2023 04:20 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 02:23 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-20-2023 06:05 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-20-2023 03:46 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-19-2023 11:22 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  never said they didn't have value. I just meant that not having them, shouldn't reduce the overall PAC conference media deal much.

My thought is that the difference between 8 and 10 when it isn't usc, ohio state, alabama, texas, etc., probably doesn't make that huge of a difference for overall payment to a conference.

but for the individual schools, dropping to 8, makes a big deal in the "per school" dollars.

if everyone was at 25 each for 10, dividing up the 50 for the other 8is over 5M extra, each. Which puts them in the range of the B12 deal.

And along those lines, another way the PAC could do this could be to retain those schools and wave goodbye to OSU and WSU instead.

Or just swap OSU for SDSU, or or or.

But in their current situation, they would seem to need to either go big or go small. Middle ground isn't likely going to cut it.

And going big means adding schools like SDSU and Fresno state, plus maybe a texas pod of UTSA, SMU, Rice, and then Tulane (aau) or maybe Air force.

And for some PAC schools that might be a tough pill to swallow. so going smaller might be their better option.

If they drop the Arizonas and Colorado, I think they reduce their need to add socal. Hence, AZ, AZ state, Colorado and SDSU to the B12.

So it all depends.

It doesn't work that way. Networks need a critical mass of games to fill all of their slots. Going from 17 to 16 schools by taking out the 8th most valuable Brand probably would have little if any impact on the media rights. But going from 10, which is already marginal to fill all slots, down to 7...that's a scary drop, and they won't stay together if they drop down to 7 then add 1 to get to 8.

Think of it:

P2 - 16 each
ACC- 14.5
nbig 16 (after stealing from the Pac and grabbing sdsu) - 16
nPac 8

Keep in mind that the Pac no longer has an "Alpha". No Texas, No USC, No OU, No UCLA. What they do have is some good Betas and a bunch of pretty good but not great Brands. One of those betas is ASU, and possibly CU now that they've gotten serious again about Athletics. And UArizona isn't bad, either. Losing both AZ schools could very well be terminal in fact. The Pac has good value still, but those 3 schools represent about 30% of that value, and the revised media rights deal would reflect that.

the number of schools is not equal to the number of games.

this is about matchups. and if the conference can show a certain amount of games. 2 less schools is not going to impact that much.

and one example of a value for espn here is that there's a decent chance PAC school will have games against big 10 schools. and espn doesn't currently have a media deal with the big 10. so that's also a value.

these deals aren't just a counting of heads and weighing the seeming value of a school. they are not that at all.

Only 8 schools runs a much higher risk of several consecutive down years by all programs. With 12, you'll always have some ranked, UW or UO is up when USC and Utah are down, etc etc. But with 8? You could have a 7-5 or 8-4 team win the conference 3 years in a row, and no good content for TV partners. If I'm a TV partner, and I can have a 12 team big 12 that's in a great Football footprint, just had a solid season, and put a team in the Title Game for $30m, then what's an 8 team Pac worth? $18m? $21m? The Pac needs 10 for sure, and 12 is probably better, for their next media rights deal. They'll sign the new deal (if they ever get everything sorted out) with 10 teams but a wink-wink agreement on who the 11th and 12th will be, with all terms worked out ahead of time with both the broadcast partner(s) and the new schools.

the first part of your response is a completely different argument. And I disagree with your supposition there. Every school wants to think they can win the conference, and having more schools in a conference are more steps in my way of winning the conference.

And the second part that you build on from it, that the possibility of the schools getting to winning the conference, gains them more money, is immaterial.

I hate to break it to fans, but media companies don't care if you win or lose.

Just ask the Cubs, the Red Sox, and any number of other sports groups.

Media companies just want eyeballs - ad revenue.

And to ask the question directly - Would you continue to watch Texas A&M if they had less than a stellar season this year, next year, and every year until the end of the media contract?

If yes, then your argument fails on all counts.

You think that the ACC CCG has 3m viewers the past 2 years if Clemson is #1? Or that A&M-bama draws so many fans if we never beat them? Certainly, A&M is going to draw a lot more fans than, say, TCU, all things being equal. But if we win 5 games a year for a decade and TCU wins 10, they'll get a lot more "big" games and, thus, a lot more viewers. If you had an 8 team conference with huge state schools then you could get away with a 7-5 champ every year, maybe, but without any games of national or even regional importance, the viewership would have a cap on it. And in the new 12 team CFP format, 7-5 or 8-4 won't get you even 1 team into the Playoff. How many years must that happen before your conference is relegated to g5 payouts instead of p5 payouts?
01-21-2023 09:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2023 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, © 2002-2023 MyBB Group.