Adults ? That’s actually quite funny. Remember when you started with espn being able to never have to pay these schools a dime because of their lawyers.
Big 12 Expansion (new thread)
- Thread starter Gilbyone
- Start date
Adults ? That’s actually quite funny. Remember when you started with espn being able to never have to pay these schools a dime because of their lawyers.
Actually, that is great in that you won't go years without playing a team. If you miss them this year, you will see them the next 2. And you will go home-away-skip, and right back to it. So you will have them in your house every 3rd year. Love that.
Question becomes, how do you do the CCG? Do you make it 4 teams, can you get away with that? Obviously lots of cash if you can.
If you do 2 teams, then how? Take the 2 best division winners? If 2, do you use rankings to try help your CFP contenders? Or do you have tie breakers like head to head, etc? Will be interesting to see how it shakes out.
Pac12 already gets even worse spots, that’s how.
The Big 12 won’t be the SEC, but get a grip, it’ll be relevant, and likely the 3rd best P5 conference. Soon the 3 in the P3.
ISU and Okie State weren't "provided" any slots or channels as part of being in the Big 12. Just like Stanford, Cal, WSU, Oregon State, BC, Syracuse, Vandy, etc. aren't for being in their conferences with national brands. Disney and Fox put the games they have rights to that they think will give them viewership in those slots. Look at Cincy's or BYU's slots vs. the dogs of the power conferences last year.
Not sure how you can argue the top names in a conference are a big driver in viewership when within or across conferences bad teams with fans that don't show up to games have poor viewership regardless of the big names at the top of their conference. Stature of the conference matters. The names at the top of the conference impact conference status. But you are WAY overestimating the impact. What you are talking about is turning a game with two good teams from a 2M viewership game into a 4M plus game.
Again, If OU and UT were not in the league in 2020, how much does that reduce the Okie St. - ISU game last year? Give me a percentage.
The Ok st brand will go up when they’re competing for the auto bid rather than competing for OU’s bridesmaid
I get there are different values of different time slots when also coupled with the emphasis of the network and competition from other games. We have seen the 11 a.m. CST window for FOX evolve. They are putting their best game in that slot and its getting them monster ratings. The SEC will continue to showcase the 2:30 game. The 7pm will probably be ABC's focus. While FOX and ESPN properties want ratings in all spots they have their focus and then will compete secondarily in the other spots.
You have complained and moaned about ISU's spot as much as anyone but the new B12 won't get any of ABC or FOX's prime spots. They may get ABC/ESPN 11 a.m. opposite the FOX 11 a.m. broadcast, or the FOX 2:30 or 7p.m. game occasionally but the SEC/B1G will have pretty good T2 to fill those spots also. I guess CBS or someone else could want to do a B12 game of the week in a spot anywhere from 1:30- 5pm start time but it will be up against a lot of competition.
So the question is what showcases the league best in a B12 game of the week or solid T2 games in the B12. What is your goal maintaining tradition or finding a time slot that gets the best tv ratings and gets paid the best the B12 can by being flexible?
I want to make sure this is clear. You’re saying that networks don’t assign tv games and networks based on tv contracts they signed with the individual conferences?
Because they do. And Iowa State and Oklahoma State absolutely do benefit from the perceived value brought to the conference by its brand name teams
As far as that one game, would it still have been at 2:30? World it still have been on tier one fox?
Can you link the contract language that states that the new big 12 is guaranteed a spot in the cfp?
That could change my whole perception of this new league
the problem is that everyone is assuming all of these great new exposures and opportunities without anything being guaranteed.
Everyone here is close because it’s the new reality and they need to shine it up as much as they can.
the national perception is every single bit of those Atlantic and espn articles everyone gets mad at.
none of this matters until you see what the media is willing to give a conference that they have been trying to kill for ten years now. Except now, we have none of the teams that brought the real value, and adding teams that have been playing at a lower conference level.
No, I'm saying ISU or Oklahoma State aren't guaranteed a certain number of ABC/Fox games or 2:30 kickoffs as being part of the Big 12. I'm not aware of anything that says ISU can't have every game on FS1, ESPN2, etc.
I'm saying if they are good and are anticipated to draw viewers they will get those spots, and that's what happened. Likewise Purdue, Vandy, Oregon State, and BC DON"T get those types of spots regardless of their conference prestige, or who is at the top of their conference.
Cincy, Coastal, and BYU got some good slots last year. Better slots than Ole Miss, Miss St., Illinois, Syracuse, GT, Vandy, Rutgers, Maryland, Cal, Oregon St., Washington St, BC, Purdue, on and on. If the "conference prestige" and the members at the top of the conference drive viewership at the level you seem to think it does, this simply would never happen. Not only would that not happen, you wouldn't have such a drastic spread of viewership across a single conference.
Viewership and the placement of teams in the slots suggests VERY strongly that the merit of the teams themselves - on the field quality, local/regional interest, national interest absolutely dwarfs what viewership can be attributed to "conference prestige" or the bump a team gets simply for being in this or that Blue Bloods conference.
So again, what percentage of fans from ISU - Okie State were only watching because OU and UT were in the conference?
There is a huge difference in ISU-Okie St. benefiting from being in the same conference as OU and UT. Every team has some benefit from the top names in their conference. No one argues that. But you seem to be assigning a massive part of viewership to this. The numbers within a conference simply refute that.
I'm trying to understand your motive for your position in all this. Short of some good information, for the most part it seems like you're crying over spilled milk. Since you're hell bent on the demise of the B12, what do you propose is the best path for Iowa State?
Playoffs can’t expand without the big 12’s vote, and it is impossible to remove autonomy from the conference.
So where in the contract does it state that there is a guaranteed spot in the cfp for the big 12 champion?
There is no motivation at all. Just watching Rome burn
did you see that okie state and KState are going to be on espn plus? Two 3-0 teams and they can’t get on a network
Notre Dame played on Peacock - must be a tiny brand with no value.
Its probably better than these 3 PAC games being on the PACN
WSU vs Utah, UCLA vs Stanford, Ca vs UW
With all the content ESPN+ is getting pretty soon it will be in most households.
If OSU vs KSU can do any kind of numbers, it will give the B12 a selling point for the next contract because they are overcoming a lot of channel disadvantages to attain any kind of broadcast number but as I mentioned it will be easier in the future.
What a ridiculous comparison
That’s kind of the point. Worse games are being shown on networks while a premier game in the big 12 is on subscription service
4 of those PAC brands feel they deserve to be in a P4 conference even if only 2 or 3 make it.
How so? NBC put ND on Peacock to try to grow the subscriber base? Can’t compare that to ESPN Plus at all.
Kansas basketball played on ESPN Plus - same thing.
