IMO $2,000 suits are for people who have no clue what they are doing. Just one step up from a face tattoo.
Turmoil in the Pac-12 ... moving on from Larry Scott?
- Thread starter ChrisMWilliams
- Start date
IMO $2,000 suits are for people who have no clue what they are doing. Just one step up from a face tattoo.
This could potentially give CBS three broadcast games for 11:00, 2:30, and 7:00, (and maybe four if they wanted a night-owl game) each week.
Looks like his plans to raid 3/4 of the Big 12 and demote ISU to the American or MAC didn't go as planned.
I love living out here and I still love college sports, but the inevitable move to paid subscriptions is gonna kill P12 revenue.
A small population state like Nebraska or Iowa is going to buy more subscriptions than huge parts of their casual fan footprint.
I keep bringing up the ESPN+ reaction on here
Our traditional TV ratings aren't spectacular either
A pay to view model isn't a sure winner in my estimation
Yeah, there's a tech barrier for some...a general whining issue for others.
But I have to think if the only way to watch Huskers/Hawkeys/Cyclones/JHawks/Wildcats was to buy a $10/month subscription the people in those low population states are going to pony up.
West coast I'm thinking not as much.
Getting rid of Larry is the first step in the upcoming PAC12-Big XII merger in 2023.
That may be too many games for CBS to pay for on a weekly basis but it's hard to imagine CBS out of the the CFB picture. Their contract with the SEC was, by far, the most network friendly sports TV contract of them all. They were paying like only $55M/year for typically the highest rated games and ESPN/ABC reportedly will be paying over $300M/year to the SEC on the new deal.
In a P12/B12 alliance scenario, I could see CBS getting the #1 pick on a weekly basis from the alliance inventory for the 2:30 window. Like they did with SEC, they could televise some prime time games as well to compete against the Fox and ABC prime time games. Could also have one or two weekly games on CBSSN with the rest on YouTube TV, Apple TV or Amazon Prime (depending on who wins the rights).
The west coast has so many things going for it, and all the population and money you can imagine...but they'll never love college sports like fans in the midwest/south.
They had a legit "excuse", since PACN was 100% conference owned and not aligned with ESPN, Fox etc., they had very little negotiating leverage with CATV and SAT providers. Scott and the P12 Presidents never did fully comprehend that lack of leverage and Scott exacerbated that issue with excessive operating overhead to run PACN. ESPN could bundle SECN with their other channels for negotiations. Fox did likewise with BTN for theirs. I cannot envision a legit scenario where the P12 enters negotiations for the new TV deals with PACN remaining 100% wholly owned by the conference and the P12 Presidents permitting Scott to run PACN essentially as-is.
Because that was an extremely weak sellout move.
I was subscribed to Cyclones.TV since like the first month it was available. I cancelled and have subscribed to all of <1 month of ESPN+.
Just tapped my insider there (ie Pac12). Will be interesting to see the rebuttal from that.
https://news.stanford.edu/2020/07/08/athletics/
"For example, simply looking at sponsorship of the sports at a national level as one consideration:
- Of the 11 sports being discontinued, six (lightweight rowing, men’s rowing, co-ed and women’s sailing, squash, synchronized swimming) are not NCAA-sponsored championship sports.
- All 11 sports being discontinued are sponsored by less than 22% of the more than 350 Division I institutions, and nine (men’s and women’s fencing, lightweight rowing, men’s rowing, co-ed and women’s sailing, squash, synchronized swimming, men’s volleyball) are sponsored by less than 9%.
- There are only two other Division I field hockey programs on the West Coast, and there are no other fencing, lightweight rowing, sailing, squash or synchronized swimming programs on the West Coast.
Well that seems like big news. I mean there is a reason they dominate the All-Sports rankings but one big one is that they had a team for just about every sport that few schools could afford.
One thing I really hate about CFB coverage is the agendas. Mostly Big 10 and SEC homers badmouthing other conferences. In reality, they just want those conferences to fail so that they can poach teams and get their favorite schools more money. I for one just love watching CFB. If I'm able to watch all day, those P12 or MWC games starting at 9 or 10 are awesome. They play good FB out there and it's just another game that I can watch or bet on. Same for the MAC midweek games. More viewing windows means that I can catch more games without having to switch between them like I do for the Saturday 11/2:30/7 time slots.
Guess that's why I like listening to podcasts like Cover 3 or Solid Verbal. Those guys just like FB and don't seem to have an agenda.
Guess that's why I like listening to podcasts like Cover 3 or Solid Verbal. Those guys just like FB and don't seem to have an agenda.
The decision was made pre-Covid though. But, expect other schools to follow. The overhead of the conference office is also subject to further cuts.
SEC football I really don't mind because they generally back it up. They should get the most talking head coverage.
Big Ten in both major tv sports...it becomes insane to listen to the fantasy land homerism. Sure there are years here or there where it's an elite conference in either sport. But year after year the computer average analysis shows it's just not on par with the Big 12, especially in basketball where the Big 12 has been #1 pretty much every year since Neb/CO dead weight left.
A lot of it lately is just that sports journalists can't do math. If the Big 12 and Big Ten each get 5 bowl wins they think that's even, if they both have 4 teams ranked in the top 25 they think that's even, if they both get 3 teams to the Sweet 16 they think that's even.
In reality when our 10 team conference exceeds, matches or is even close to what the 14 and 15 team leagues are doing it means the Big 12 is drastically tougher. In football and basketball the only conference that is consistently as strong or stronger than the Big 12 on a per team basis is SEC football. Even ACC basketball when you look at it per our 10 teams and per their 15 teams the Big 12 consistently grades out as a tougher league.
