(04-05-2023 04:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-05-2023 03:27 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  Most of that reads like a PR piece, but there are a few things that concern me:

1. I was told on Wednesday by a CEO Group member that “the board likes the deal” that is taking shape, but the conference presidents and chancellors don’t seem to be in a hurry - The conference presidents don't seem to be in a hurry sounds like code for "some people think they have better options than the crap sandwich we're trying to feed them"

Or, the number attached to the Apple package is so high that it will make everything okay, and somehow half the games will still be on ESPN and Fox for pennies?

Which puts the PAC very much at the tender mercies of the whims of the Apple TV division.

Sounds fairly un-Apple like to pay a ridiculously high number for the games ESPN found unworthy of linear broadcast slots---but we will see. That said, I can see ESPN being ok with a package of what appears to be fairly umimpressive games---as long as they represent P5 content that will be locked into filling that late night window....assuming they can get for a pretty low ball price....but any idea that ESPN will broadcast 50% or more of the Pac12 content on linear networks after Apple takes the top two or three best each weekend seems horrifically unlikely. The dots that Canzano is charting just dont line up in a way that makes any logical sense. If Apple is the lead Network taking the prime content cuts---then Im not seeing how 50% is going to be on major linear networks.

If I was PAC I would add as many as possible before the TV $$ start to drop off dramatically.

SDSU, SMU, Fresno, Boise, UNLV, etc.

Very likely if you are the PAC..... you add the now or you add them later (after getting picked apart further). But you will add them.

So the quicker you get them in, build them up, give the P5 $$ resources....the stronger the individual schools will be in the future.

(04-05-2023 07:12 PM)Boots Wrote:  If I was PAC I would add as many as possible before the TV $$ start to drop off dramatically.

SDSU, SMU, Fresno, Boise, UNLV, etc.

Very likely if you are the PAC..... you add the now or you add them later (after getting picked apart further). But you will add them.

So the quicker you get them in, build them up, give the P5 $$ resources....the stronger the individual schools will be in the future.

The problem is at least 2 members have zero interest in building for the future if it reduces current payout by a single dime....and 2 is all it would take to block any new invites.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

(04-05-2023 07:12 PM)Boots Wrote:  If I was PAC I would add as many as possible before the TV $$ start to drop off dramatically.

SDSU, SMU, Fresno, Boise, UNLV, etc.

Very likely if you are the PAC..... you add the now or you add them later (after getting picked apart further). But you will add them.

So the quicker you get them in, build them up, give the P5 $$ resources....the stronger the individual schools will be in the future.

I agree. SDSU & Boise State would probably get my attention as a fan. But many seem to like SMU.

(04-05-2023 07:04 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-05-2023 04:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-05-2023 03:27 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  Most of that reads like a PR piece, but there are a few things that concern me:

1. I was told on Wednesday by a CEO Group member that “the board likes the deal” that is taking shape, but the conference presidents and chancellors don’t seem to be in a hurry - The conference presidents don't seem to be in a hurry sounds like code for "some people think they have better options than the crap sandwich we're trying to feed them"

Or, the number attached to the Apple package is so high that it will make everything okay, and somehow half the games will still be on ESPN and Fox for pennies?

Which puts the PAC very much at the tender mercies of the whims of the Apple TV division.

Sounds fairly un-Apple like to pay a ridiculously high number for the games ESPN found unworthy of linear broadcast slots---but we will see. That said, I can see ESPN being ok with a package of what appears to be fairly umimpressive games---as long as they represent P5 content that will be locked into filling that late night window....assuming they can get for a pretty low ball price....but any idea that ESPN will broadcast 50% or more of the Pac12 content on linear networks after Apple takes the top two or three best each weekend seems horrifically unlikely. The dots that Canzano is charting just dont line up in a way that makes any logical sense. If Apple is the lead Network taking the prime content cuts---then Im not seeing how 50% is going to be on major linear networks.

2 games on ESPN 8, the Ocho. First starts at 6 pm pacific, 2nd at 7:30 pm Pacific. $9m per school, nearly 50% of games. Apple Pay’s $23m for the good stuff. $32m, nearly half on linear. Ok, I can’t say this with a straight face. I guess it’s not impossible.

(04-05-2023 07:12 PM)Boots Wrote:  If I was PAC I would add as many as possible before the TV $$ start to drop off dramatically.

SDSU, SMU, Fresno, Boise, UNLV, etc.

Very likely if you are the PAC..... you add the now or you add them later (after getting picked apart further). But you will add them.

So the quicker you get them in, build them up, give the P5 $$ resources....the stronger the individual schools will be in the future.

SDSU and SMU already spend like they’re p5 though. That’s the trick, in order to join the p5, you have to spend years spending like you’re already there. Those others spend like pretty good g5 programs.

(04-05-2023 07:12 PM)Boots Wrote:  If I was PAC I would add as many as possible before the TV $$ start to drop off dramatically.

The more you bring in, the more the per-school money drops. If TV is offering the PAC $250M for 10 teams, they're probably not going to offer $300M for adding 2 less-valuable teams, or $350M for 4 less-valuable teams. They'd probably be looking at say $280M for 12, $300M for 14.

No way does PAC add SMU. They do not fit culturally with the PAC. The presidents can’t like the religious evangelicals at SMU. The visit by colonel kliavkoff to SMU”s campus was an unmitigated disaster that induced projectile vomiting in the C suite pac offices. SMU should learn to love the AAC since that will be their home for years to come

(04-05-2023 08:03 PM)bearcat1970 Wrote:  No way does PAC add SMU. They do not fit culturally with the PAC. The presidents can’t like the religious evangelicals at SMU. The visit by colonel kliavkoff to SMU”s campus was an unmitigated disaster that induced projectile vomiting in the C suite pac offices. SMU should learn to love the AAC since that will be their home for years to come

Or you just made that up based on nothing.

Meanwhiile the Arizona president said this:

Quote:My personal opinion is we need to expand, and I think San Diego State and SMU are two good schools with two good teams that we should give strong consideration to, but we can’t do that until we get a deal.

https://www.si.com/college/stanford/foot...candidates

(04-05-2023 08:03 PM)bearcat1970 Wrote:  No way does PAC add SMU. They do not fit culturally with the PAC. The presidents can’t like the religious evangelicals at SMU. The visit by colonel kliavkoff to SMU”s campus was an unmitigated disaster that induced projectile vomiting in the C suite pac offices. SMU should learn to love the AAC since that will be their home for years to come

Since you’re so confident, would you be willing to make a ban bet?

(04-05-2023 08:03 PM)bearcat1970 Wrote:  No way does PAC add SMU. They do not fit culturally with the PAC. The presidents can’t like the religious evangelicals at SMU. The visit by colonel kliavkoff to SMU”s campus was an unmitigated disaster that induced projectile vomiting in the C suite pac offices. SMU should learn to love the AAC since that will be their home for years to come

I love this guy.

(04-05-2023 03:10 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-ti...ything-for

Quote:The Pac-12 Conference continues to negotiate its media rights deal and explore expansion. I was told on Wednesday by a CEO Group member that “the board likes the deal” that is taking shape, but the conference presidents and chancellors don’t seem to be in a hurry.

• The Pac-12 is working right now to manage and re-frame the expectations on the timing of its media-rights deal. The conference hasn’t made a public comment on the matter (and likely won’t), but the tone of the conversations I’m having feels measured. The CEO Group meets next week, but I’m skeptical the conference will vote to finalize its media rights deal this month.

• The presidents and chancellors don’t seem concerned about the delay. They continue to express solidarity. The hold up appears to be due mostly to media partners that are new to the live-sports programming space (Read: Apple/Amazon).

ESPN remains the Pac-12’s likely Tier 1 partner

I continue to be told by a source with direct knowledge that Fox is definitely “in the mix” ....

Pac-12 sources remain confident the conference will eclipse the annual $31.6 million media rights distribution the Big 12 negotiated for its members.

Is it me or did Canzano just walked back almost every single thing he has said for a the last 6-8 months?

Memphis and USF to the PAC... I love it. Haha.

(04-05-2023 08:03 PM)bearcat1970 Wrote:  No way does PAC add SMU. They do not fit culturally with the PAC. The presidents can’t like the religious evangelicals at SMU. The visit by colonel kliavkoff to SMU”s campus was an unmitigated disaster that induced projectile vomiting in the C suite pac offices. SMU should learn to love the AAC since that will be their home for years to come

You just made all that up, right?

You have zero clue about SMU, so 100% that the rest of your post is made up

(04-06-2023 08:09 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(04-05-2023 03:10 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-ti...ything-for

Quote:The Pac-12 Conference continues to negotiate its media rights deal and explore expansion. I was told on Wednesday by a CEO Group member that “the board likes the deal” that is taking shape, but the conference presidents and chancellors don’t seem to be in a hurry.

• The Pac-12 is working right now to manage and re-frame the expectations on the timing of its media-rights deal. The conference hasn’t made a public comment on the matter (and likely won’t), but the tone of the conversations I’m having feels measured. The CEO Group meets next week, but I’m skeptical the conference will vote to finalize its media rights deal this month.

• The presidents and chancellors don’t seem concerned about the delay. They continue to express solidarity. The hold up appears to be due mostly to media partners that are new to the live-sports programming space (Read: Apple/Amazon).

ESPN remains the Pac-12’s likely Tier 1 partner

I continue to be told by a source with direct knowledge that Fox is definitely “in the mix” ....

Pac-12 sources remain confident the conference will eclipse the annual $31.6 million media rights distribution the Big 12 negotiated for its members.

Is it me or did Canzano just walked back almost every single thing he has said for a the last 6-8 months?

Not really Canzano, but his sources sure did.

(04-06-2023 08:09 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(04-05-2023 03:10 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-ti...ything-for

Quote:The Pac-12 Conference continues to negotiate its media rights deal and explore expansion. I was told on Wednesday by a CEO Group member that “the board likes the deal” that is taking shape, but the conference presidents and chancellors don’t seem to be in a hurry.

• The Pac-12 is working right now to manage and re-frame the expectations on the timing of its media-rights deal. The conference hasn’t made a public comment on the matter (and likely won’t), but the tone of the conversations I’m having feels measured. The CEO Group meets next week, but I’m skeptical the conference will vote to finalize its media rights deal this month.

• The presidents and chancellors don’t seem concerned about the delay. They continue to express solidarity. The hold up appears to be due mostly to media partners that are new to the live-sports programming space (Read: Apple/Amazon).

ESPN remains the Pac-12’s likely Tier 1 partner

I continue to be told by a source with direct knowledge that Fox is definitely “in the mix” ....

Pac-12 sources remain confident the conference will eclipse the annual $31.6 million media rights distribution the Big 12 negotiated for its members.

Is it me or did Canzano just walked back almost every single thing he has said for a the last 6-8 months?

It sure seems to jive with what Ive been saying. We've all done the math and we now all understand that accepting a low contract immediately destabilizes the Pac12 conference---and Kiavkoff knows this as well. Thus, his only option right now is to delay and hope something on the negotiating landscape changes in the next 15 months. If they had a deal that was acceptable----they would lock it up and let the lawyers hammer out the details. Yeah--Apple has never done it before---but they have all the money in the world and thus have access to plenty of lawyers who have done athletic contracts before. There is no reason it should take an unusually extended period to hammer out the details---unless they cant come together on the key components of the deal----namely compensation.....and I think we all know compensation is where the real trouble lies.

(04-05-2023 08:03 PM)bearcat1970 Wrote:  No way does PAC add SMU. They do not fit culturally with the PAC. The presidents can’t like the religious evangelicals at SMU. The visit by colonel kliavkoff to SMU”s campus was an unmitigated disaster that induced projectile vomiting in the C suite pac offices. SMU should learn to love the AAC since that will be their home for years to come

SMU spends like a P5 school already, they're in Dallas ( 4 miles from SW Airlines HQ in fact ), they're academically elite (1390 avg SAT score, nearly the same as Tulane), they have a successful history of major conference membership from their decades in the SWC, and they care a lot about winning. On the flip side, projectile vomiting is bad, so now I'm on the fence about this.

(04-06-2023 11:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-06-2023 08:09 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  

(04-05-2023 03:10 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-ti...ything-for

Quote:The Pac-12 Conference continues to negotiate its media rights deal and explore expansion. I was told on Wednesday by a CEO Group member that “the board likes the deal” that is taking shape, but the conference presidents and chancellors don’t seem to be in a hurry.

• The Pac-12 is working right now to manage and re-frame the expectations on the timing of its media-rights deal. The conference hasn’t made a public comment on the matter (and likely won’t), but the tone of the conversations I’m having feels measured. The CEO Group meets next week, but I’m skeptical the conference will vote to finalize its media rights deal this month.

• The presidents and chancellors don’t seem concerned about the delay. They continue to express solidarity. The hold up appears to be due mostly to media partners that are new to the live-sports programming space (Read: Apple/Amazon).

ESPN remains the Pac-12’s likely Tier 1 partner

I continue to be told by a source with direct knowledge that Fox is definitely “in the mix” ....

Pac-12 sources remain confident the conference will eclipse the annual $31.6 million media rights distribution the Big 12 negotiated for its members.

Is it me or did Canzano just walked back almost every single thing he has said for a the last 6-8 months?

It sure seems to jive with what Ive been saying. We've all done the math and we now all understand that accepting a low contract immediately destabilizes the Pac12 conference---and Kiavkoff knows this as well. Thus, his only option right now is to delay and hope something on the negotiating landscape changes in the next 15 months. If they had a deal that was acceptable----they would lock it up and let the lawyers hammer out the details. Yeah--Apple has never done it before---but they have all the money in the world and thus have access to plenty of lawyers who have done athletic contracts before. There is no reason it should take an unusually extended period to hammer out the details---unless they cant come together on the key components of the deal----namely compensation.....and I think we all know compensation is where the real trouble lies.

Compensation x Exposure is the issue I think. $25m a year with everything on ESPN would probably work today, but there's a multiplier involved with streaming. What's that multiplier? .9? .75? .66? I don't know, but I know that there is one. Let's call it a hybrid broadcast/streaming deal with a perceived multiplier (from the Presidents' perspectives) of .75. $25m is no longer acceptable. $30m? You're close.

Realistically, if it's largely or primarily streaming, they need to beat the big 12 and be $32m+, or there will be defections. However, delaying for 15 months won't work, either. If we get into May and early June with no new developments, some of the 4c will, however reluctantly, get serious about talks with Yormark. Once UArizona and CU start talking to them, Utah and ASU will feel like they need to or risk getting replaced by SDSU and left behind. Kliavkoff might be hoping that he can stall this thing for 15 months, but I'd say that his time frame is more like 1.5 months.