Unless you have Oregon, Washington and the 4 corners jump to the league, "pushing the limits with streaming" probably means make ALL the major media networks your competitors and guarantee you get explicitly locked out of a playoff.
Sorry, having a media partner that also has a piece of the SEC or Big 10 pie is the boring but probably best move during this deal. Media deals and expansion have to start and end with increasing odds to have access to the playoff. If you get officially locked out of that club, you might as well close up shop in football and try to join the Big East.
I just want to see a little meat on this bone of "pushing the limits with streaming" because I see little evidence that it's a viable strategy.
You can interpret "pushing the limits with streaming" a couple different ways, maybe more. It can mean you partner exclusively with streaming/tech companies, or it could mean traditional media partners who want to expand streaming capabilities.
But it's pretty telling that ESPN, the biggest broadcasting brand in sports, has put a ton of effort into building out its streaming product and the B1G wanted no part of it. Or that the leagues best positioned to lead everyone into this brave new streaming world - the B1G and the SEC, who have done this before, a decade-plus ago when they created their own TV networks - are pretty content with where things are right now. Or that Apple or Amazon's role in the B1G's new deal, if they have a role at all, seems like an afterthought.
Now, to argue against myself, perhaps even the B1G and SEC think that the future is in streaming but that it's still one media deal away (6-7 years) from really taking hold. Maybe the Big 12 can pioneer the space in that time. But that feels like we'd be out in the wilderness for a few years until the rest of the media landscape catches up, and I don't feel like we can afford that.
As always, I have no idea, and I'm open to having my mind changed.