Damn, this is what I’ve been saying the whole time and I just hate the messenger it’s coming from
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Damn, this is what I’ve been saying the whole time and I just hate the messenger it’s coming from
The overall payout wouldn’t have been lowered with CBS, it would have increased, especially given that ESPN and Fox didn’t always have the best weekly B12 games on their OTA outlets and the fact that Fox didn't even kick in money to add the 4 corner schools.
Last edited:
LOL, Tuberville is a SEC puppet. No B10/SEC expansion restrictions that kneecap the B12/ACC and no codification of House is Sankey’s (and Petitti’s) best case scenario.
Rutgers getting tax money now for NIL
If, if.
First, CBS couldn't have been part of a Big 12 deal because the Big12 didn't take the negotiations out to bid. Yormark just extended the existing deal. The only way CBS could have been added is ESPN/Fox sublicensee (ala Big 10).
Yormark's other option would have been taking media rights package to open market. Obviously, the consultants Yormark was relying, recommended the ESPN/Fox extension as most $. So that means CBS had no interest.
Lastly, your highlighted text. What are you smoking tonight? If ESPN or FOX didn't get the ability to televise the 2:30 game, they definitely would have lowered their bid significantly!! Having prime timeslot is VERY valuable inventory.
It's why NBC & CBS were willing to pay $350M each for a Big 10 game. And Fox got the other 7 games (including Big Noon) for $400M.
Your replies to my posts continue to display a total lack of comprehension. I previously clearly mentioned CBS was off the table due to the B10 closing the deal with them before the B12 ever had a chance to engage with them or NBC. And that was primarily a function of contract expiration timing for the two conferences. Both CBS and NBC were off the table for the B12's #1 game. Got it?
And also as previously mentioned, neither ESPN or Fox have had a consistent weekly window for the top B12 GOTW so that devalued the #1 game for the B12. If CBS was engaged for that weekly #1 game, the value of that game increases and CBS pays a premium accordingly. And given that ESPN and Fox devalued the #1 game anyway by not having a consistent weekly OTA window for it, the rest of the weekly game inventory was not going to be devalued that much (if at all) as you suggest since all the B12 games are essentially backfill for both ESPN and Fox after slotting their SEC and B10 games.
Last edited:
Pretty sure I comprehend how the TV business works.
If FOX/ESPN were improperly valuing Big 12 game inventory that would go back to media rights deal signed around 2017 when Big12 included Texas/OU. So not buying your #1 game valuation spin.
Plus the Big 12's #1 window exists, it's just not a set time. You link Sport Media Watch website. Look at the most watched games each week whether for P4. Some weeks it's a noon game, other weeks 2:30/3:00 and other weeks 6:30/7:00.
The key to high viewership is getting on an OTA (ABC/CBS/NBC) for one of those 3 timeslots and the Big12 got that.
No, you don't fully comprehend how the TV business works.
The key to optimize viewership is a consistent weekly window on the same network, not by having 3 possible OTA windows on two different OTA networks and playing 2nd fiddle to two other conferences for those windows.
Are your comments business experience or something you read on Awful Announcing?
Hate to tell you, there is NO scenario where Big 12 isn't 3rd fiddle. Just look at Sports Media Watch top 3-5 games each week.
Once again, you failed to comprehend what I posted,
Last edited:
And Tommy's bill doesn't have the other PCSA stuff that the SEC doesn't like. Tommy's a tool.
I still don't understand how on earth a league that gets worse ratings was going to get CBS to pay MORE for it?
Come on, the top Big 12 game can easily go head to head with the B10's 3rd or 4th best game any week. What dont you comprehend?
Already explained it to you and not surprised you're struggling again with understanding.
If CBS (or NBC) was engaged, they would have paid a premium to the B12 in order to have the #1 B12 GOTW every week in the same time slot. Under the current B12 contract, that premium obviously doesn't exist given that the #1 GOTW shuffles between ESPN and Fox and the timeslots vary from week to week after ESPN slots SEC games and Fox slots B10 games.
Now would CBS (or NBC) have paid more for the #1 B12 GOTW instead of the #2/#3 B10 GOTW in their deal with Fox. Already posted I doubt it (since Fox fleeced both) but they would have got more net value for their deal given their disappointing B10 ratings and dissatisfaction with their Fox deals and the B12 would have likely got more money by adding CBS for its GOTW with ESPN/Fox for the rest. And the B12 would have certainly got better ratings for their GOTW on the same OTA in the same timeslot unlike the weekly current shuffling of GOTW OTA/timeslot.
And the goal for the B12's next deal should be to engage an OTA network for the GOTW on a weekly basis in the same timeslot unlike the current ESPN/Fox deal. Even better if they merge/pool in some fashion with the ACC.
Last edited:
I agree. If the SEC and BIG 10 actually want to split off, as much as it may not be good for the sport I am to the point where I am like fine, just go do your own thing.
Yeah, if it does happen it needs to be for all sports as JP previously suggested. NCAA and other conferences cannot cave on that.
SEC can do its own thing if they want.
Both B10 and SEC doing it in tandem will result in major anti-trust implications which the SEC has acknowledged.
So, again, all conjecture that you want to be true. Plus, you're completely ignoring that there wouldn't have been anywhere near as much money from ESPN/FOX with the #1 game off the table.
I need a source on that other than 'they had anti-trust lawyers at a meeting' like every other large corporation does.
