Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[cyIclSoneU]

Colorado board of regents don't meet for the heck of it. This guy doesn't know anything more than anyone else.

He knows more than most people because he has talked to people in the know. That’s how reputable journalists know more than people **** posting on a message board. Not that complicated.

There are conflicting reports from good journalists. Believe whatever you want. Most people here believe whatever happens to be good for ISU. I guess that’s human nature

 

[WhoISthis]

He knows more than most people because he has talked to people in the know. That’s how reputable journalists know more than people **** posting on a message board. Not that complicated.

There are conflicting reports from good journalists. Believe whatever you want. Most people here believe whatever happens to be good for ISU. I guess that’s human nature

He spent a lot of time on a forum doing the same act about USC rumors.

He’s just as likely to be manipulated as any.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

He spent a lot of time on a forum doing the same act about USC rumors.

He’s just as likely to be manipulated as any.

Sure, same is true about Olsen and whoever else is saying good news for the Big 12/ISU, but people run with that full steam and call BS whenever there’s a real story that might not be as positive.

I have shared a handful of tweets ITT and whenever it’s not unmitigated good news is imminent for the B12 there are always replies that this guy doesn’t know ****.

Maybe he doesn’t but also maybe your guys doesn’t. Nobody knows anything. Maybe don’t be so confident that you know what’s gonna happen. My only point here

 

[Boxerdaddy]

Question here.... Could a streaming giant purchase all T1 rights, then resell game packages to OTA stations. So you would have your premier games on OTA and everything or everything else on say Amazon?

In this scenario, CBS and NBC are big partners purchasing rights to select games, giving the streaming company additional cash flow back?

Streams could have additional views or something online to choose from but the OTA would have the main production. Wondering if we'd see something like that. They'd still have produce the non OTA games though.

 

[exCyDing]

Here is the thing - if the ACC deal is going to get better, they need to open everything up again. And if they do that, their top brands are gone immediately. I just don't believe anything with the ACC.

My understanding is the GOR is separate from the media deal and redoing the media deal wouldn't invalidate the GOR.

Either way, ESPN only has to negotiate between themselves and their future plans if they want to up the ACC deal to get members of the PAC. Of course, doing so could prompt Fox to do the same with the Big XII.

Getting the #3 conference would be a priority for both Fox and ESPN, but neither would put themselves in a financial position where they wouldn't be able to get the #1 conference should the blue bloods from the Big 10 and SEC want to break away down the road. That's the real prize.

My understanding was that ESPN's had some financial issues recently. They've had some debacles like the Longhorn Network among others in the not to distant past showing they've made some decisions that didn't work out in their favor. On the other hand, Disney is backing them so who the **** knows.

 

[06_CY]

Colorado board of regents don't meet for the heck of it. This guy doesn't know anything more than anyone else.

But nearly double digit sources!

 

[theshadow]

Question here.... Could a streaming giant purchase all T1 rights, then resell game packages to OTA stations. So you would have your premier games on OTA and everything or everything else on say Amazon?

Both Fox and ESPN have sublicensed basketball games to CBS/CBSSN, so there's some precedent.

 

[CascadeClone]

My understanding is the GOR is separate from the media deal and redoing the media deal wouldn't invalidate the GOR.

Either way, ESPN only has to negotiate between themselves and their future plans if they want to up the ACC deal to get members of the PAC. Of course, doing so could prompt Fox to do the same with the Big XII.

Getting the #3 conference would be a priority for both Fox and ESPN, but neither would put themselves in a financial position where they wouldn't be able to get the #1 conference should the blue bloods from the Big 10 and SEC want to break away down the road. That's the real prize.

My understanding was that ESPN's had some financial issues recently. They've had some debacles like the Longhorn Network among others in the not to distant past showing they've made some decisions that didn't work out in their favor. On the other hand, Disney is backing them so who the **** knows.

Bingo.

The good news though, is 75% of the current P5 will be in the B League and there will be plenty of interest (and money) in that, so ISU will be OK in the long run.

 

[HFCS]

The only thing I worry about at all is access to the playoff. Personally, I will start getting nervous when the Big 10 and SEC start looking to add multiple teams that don't really seem to make sense from a per team media value perspective, and between the SEC and Big 10 they get over 40 members.

For now I think ESPN and Fox both understand that cutting off a chunk of the plains (low population by very high interest in CFB), Washington, Northern CA, Arizona, CO and Utah from the playoff would jeopardize growth. None of these areas are absolutely critical, but all of which, they are either high population or high interest. All together it starts to matter. Bigger pieces of the pie for those that remain, but cutting those areas out limits how much that pie might grow in the future. I think football growth rate is tenuous. I don't think we've seen the hit that the massive decrease in kids participating in football will eventually have.

If the Big 10 adds Oregon, UW, and say Stanford, with a spot open for ND, while the ACC starts to take steps toward dissolution with UNC, UVA, FSU and Clemson all Big 10 or SEC bound, I'm starting to get worried. Then you might see a couple Big 12 brands poached. That's why I would rather see the Big 12 get aggressive, add the four corners schools and make a push for UW. I don't think the Big 12 can sit looking to optimize media dollars per team. The conference needs critical mass and enough critical geography locked up to help stabilize the conference and playoff access.

That also suggests to me that the Big 12 better be careful if they stray from ESPN or Fox in media deals. Like it or not, if you sign a decent media deal with one of those two, the Big 12 becomes a co-product of one of the P2, and that media partner becomes motivated to keep the Big 12's playoff access. If you sign outside of those two, they probably push the P2 to poach enough to blow up the remaining leagues.

I'm not convinced the actual football quality of the Big Ten is going to be that great or significantly better than it is now.

Maryland, Illinois and Rutgers were already making more in media rights than 90% of college football and they always suck. NW and Iowa are competitive because they have their ideal coaching hire, their Bill Snyder if you will, not because they have all that media money.

SEC is another story, even with a 4 team playoff the argument that 2-3 teams be SEC had some worth. The top half of SEC is now potentially so good that it could actually pull away from the rest of college football on SOS if it wanted to, kind of like how Big 12 basketball has pulled away in our SOS even though the media ignore the reality. If Big 12 basketball played even more conf games and less non conf games with the quality it's had recently, it would look like a league above all others from a computer model standpoint.

If the Big Ten, especially middle and low tier, actually keeps playing games against Big 12/ACC/Pac teams hopefully that would help any decent SOS calculation from getting out of hand if that's involved with playoff births.

The SEC could have always upped its SOS if it thought it was needed, probably to a point of undisputed dominance. They just collectively chose to have a pretty easy 4 game non conf and it worked for them. Everyone acknowledges they are factually the best conference, without really having to always have the toughest schedules top to bottom.

 

[Clonehomer]

Question here.... Could a streaming giant purchase all T1 rights, then resell game packages to OTA stations. So you would have your premier games on OTA and everything or everything else on say Amazon?

In this scenario, CBS and NBC are big partners purchasing rights to select games, giving the streaming company additional cash flow back?

Streams could have additional views or something online to choose from but the OTA would have the main production. Wondering if we'd see something like that. They'd still have produce the non OTA games though.

Depends on how the contract is written. If it details which channels or platforms the games need to be on, then no. But if you look at the previous contract, ESPN was able to put games that were intended for the main channels on LHN. So I guess it isn't out of the question that the rights owner would split up the games and sell them individually. But again, I'd think that would be spelled out in the contract.

 

[snowcraig2.0]

But nearly double digit sources!

Sourcez

 

[simply1]

Jon Wilner mailbag

Hotline mailbag: WSU and OSU on the brink, why Oregon got left behind and loads more

The Cougars and Beavers could lose their Power Five status if the conference fractures.

www.ksl.com

 

[Clark]

I'm not convinced the actual football quality of the Big Ten is going to be that great or significantly better than it is now.

Maryland, Illinois and Rutgers were already making more in media rights than 90% of college football and they always suck. NW and Iowa are competitive because they have their ideal coaching hire, their Bill Snyder if you will, not because they have all that media money.

SEC is another story, even with a 4 team playoff the argument that 2-3 teams be SEC had some worth. The top half of SEC is now potentially so good that it could actually pull away from the rest of college football on SOS if it wanted to, kind of like how Big 12 basketball has pulled away in our SOS even though the media ignore the reality. If Big 12 basketball played even more conf games and less non conf games with the quality it's had recently, it would look like a league above all others from a computer model standpoint.

If the Big Ten, especially middle and low tier, actually keeps playing games against Big 12/ACC/Pac teams hopefully that would help any decent SOS calculation from getting out of hand if that's involved with playoff births.

The SEC could have always upped its SOS if it thought it was needed, probably to a point of undisputed dominance. They just collectively chose to have a pretty easy 4 game non conf and it worked for them. Everyone acknowledges they are factually the best conference, without really having to always have the toughest schedules top to bottom.

You're ignoring the part about being able to buy players with that extra 70 million dollars a year.

 

[Cyclonepride]

Jon Wilner mailbag

Hotline mailbag: WSU and OSU on the brink, why Oregon got left behind and loads more

The Cougars and Beavers could lose their Power Five status if the conference fractures.

www.ksl.com

As much as I want us to kill the PAC 12 and feast on their bones, I do feel bad about schools that are left hanging. I think we know how that potentiality feels.

 

[Pope]

Not sure how UCLA will ever play a road game at the University of Iowa (in any sport) as California Assembly Bill 1887 prohibits the use of public funds for UCLA athletic teams to travel to any state deemed discriminatory against the LGBT community, and Iowa is one of 22 states on the banned list.

If UCLA would manage to use private funding to cover all their travel costs to Iowa City, the UCLA athletes and staff are required to be educated about this law and to be given the option to not make the trip with no risk of adverse consequences.

 

[Clark]

Question here.... Could a streaming giant purchase all T1 rights, then resell game packages to OTA stations. So you would have your premier games on OTA and everything or everything else on say Amazon?

In this scenario, CBS and NBC are big partners purchasing rights to select games, giving the streaming company additional cash flow back?

Streams could have additional views or something online to choose from but the OTA would have the main production. Wondering if we'd see something like that. They'd still have produce the non OTA games though.

Yes that's possible but I'd be absolutely floored if any major conference (including Big 12) gave their t-1 rights to a streamer. I'd also be stunned if a streamer paid the premium they would have to pay to get a deal for those rights to then sell off the most valuable part of that deal.

I think potentially several conferences will have tier 2 or 3 rights with a streamer (including Big 10)

 

[PickSix]

Jon Wilner mailbag

Hotline mailbag: WSU and OSU on the brink, why Oregon got left behind and loads more

The Cougars and Beavers could lose their Power Five status if the conference fractures.

www.ksl.com

What I found most interesting from this is he doesn’t think adding the Arizona schools to the Big 12 would be enough to increase each member’s slice of TV revenue. I’m no tv exec, but that surprised me.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Not sure how UCLA will ever play a road game at the University of Iowa (in any sport) as California Assembly Bill 1887 prohibits the use of public funds for UCLA athletic teams to travel to any state deemed discriminatory against the LGBT community, and Iowa is one of 22 states on the banned list.

If UCLA would manage to use private funding to cover all their travel costs to Iowa City, the UCLA athletes and staff are required to be educated about this law and to be given the option to not make the trip with no risk of adverse consequences.

The Wilner mailbag includes a quote from UCLA about this. Any games in Iowa, Indiana, Ohio will be privately funded and any student athlete can opt out of traveling to those states with no consequences.

 

[Clonehomer]

Not sure how UCLA will ever play a road game at the University of Iowa (in any sport) as California Assembly Bill 1887 prohibits the use of public funds for UCLA athletic teams to travel to any state deemed discriminatory against the LGBT community, and Iowa is one of 22 states on the banned list.

If UCLA would manage to use private funding to cover all their travel costs to Iowa City, the UCLA athletes and staff are required to be educated about this law and to be given the option to not make the trip with no risk of adverse consequences.

I assume they will be self sufficient with the Big10. So is the money gained from the conference private money or is it public once the athletic department receives it?

Otherwise, I'm sure there are ways to setup a donor fund for this. Really just diverting do ated money to this and using other funds to cover it.

In the end, any athletic department that's earning Big10 money that is also taking money from the University or state is doing something wrong and an audit should be ran.

 

[snowcraig2.0]

He knows more than most people because he has talked to people in the know. That’s how reputable journalists know more than people **** posting on a message board. Not that complicated.

There are conflicting reports from good journalists. Believe whatever you want. Most people here believe whatever happens to be good for ISU. I guess that’s human nature

That's what I said he doesn't know more than anyone else rather than saying he's a moron or something like that.