Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)

[Klubber]

@Gonzo too

to add on to that Im guessing Fox being in the room means they get first pick at the game they want for Big Noon every single week. NBC/CBS will then draft for the remaining games in the same way they do now with B1G/B12.

There's also a possibility that FOX won't be allowed to broadcast B1G games after noon on their main channel to not conflict with CBS/NBC.

In addition, FOX MLB got extended thru 2028 so i don't think that late slot is open for CFB anyways until mid-November.

Either way, a lot of people are freaking out for Big 12 sake but there's plenty of programming to go around still.

Exactly. If ESPN is ready to step up and be a major media partner with the Big XII, that's great.

Let bygones be bygones. It's in their best interest to promote any and all games on ESPN networks, so I don't think we need worry about that as some are.

Broadcasting college football games is basically like a license to print money. There are plenty of eager media partners out there, and I'm confident the next Big XII deal will be a good one.

 

[GTO]

Now that the LHN is leaving, why can't we launch an actual B12 network? Does anybody know?

 

[sunset]

I watch a lot of AVP beach volleyball. They have tried distributing through both Amazon and YouTube in recent years, in my opinion neither one has been good. It seemed like production was left up to the AVP and the streaming service just aired whatever they came up with, which was not good. It’s probably not a coincidence that the golden years of beach volleyball were back in the day when they were carried by NBC and Fox Sports.

 

[cysmiley]

One has to think that ESPN wants to P12 to break up and thereby at least some of those schools move to the B12, it's in their interest for that to happen. If the P12 regroups and hangs around for another 5 to 10 years, the moment the B10 comes calling, Oregon, Washington and other schools are going to jump, which puts them on FOX and to their competitor. If not offering the P12 a contract or a dog crap rights deal, and then turning around and offering the B12 the same deal we are getting now to a little better, one would have to think that the Pac 12 members on the fence will jump, thereby forcing the B10 to either take/offer the schools they want from the P12 if any, or risk losing them forever.

Without a doubt, the B10 would rather now sit, finish up their deal, and then 5/10 years down the line when the ACC media rights are coming to an end to choose then. That is why it's important to force their hand, and ESPN could be thinking the same way.

I agree they want less power conferences, but I don't think they care if the breakup is B12 or P12, so hopefully we are the survivors. I think their plan of domination and control (including playoff) has been thwarted by both the BIG12 survival and expansion and B1G strategy and movement. That said, it doesn't eliminate their business desire for more control and less cost agreements (outside SEC) as their college football strategy. Hopefully, we have leverage as we begin formal negotiations next year, especially with ESPN. Go Yormack!

 

[StPaulCyclone]

Now that the LHN is leaving, why can't we launch an actual B12 network? Does anybody know?

See ACC and Pac12 Networks for why. It may have worked for the original B12, but….

 

[AuH2O]

Schools will get in by rankings. Media partner is irrelevant. Wins matter. If wins didn’t matter, the SEC and B1G would have been knocked years ago for playing less conference games and cupcakes non con.

Both conferences have gotten by from beating up on bad teams, and avoiding other good schools. The Big12 has been knocked from playing everyone and having the strongest bottom(other than Kansas).

No I’m saying that if your media partner also is a Big 10 or SEC partner, they can throw their weight around. If it’s in the best interest of ESPN to keep the Big 12 in the playoff picture, then they would not be too keen on SEC deciding with the Big 10 to break away. And if ESPN has rights to the Big 12 it will be in ESPNs best interest.

 

[Daserop]

Mid-American: ESPN owns all MAC games through June 2027. They sublicense a maximum of 12 per year to CBSSN.

ESPN and Mid-American Conference Extend Exclusive, Multi-Platform Agreement through 2026-27

• ESPN Acquires Rights to Every MAC Football Game and Men’s Basketball Game • Significant Increase in Basketball and Olympic Sports Coverage on ESPN3 ESPN and the Mid-American Conference (MAC) have announced an extension of their exclusive rights agreement that will deliver record coverage of...

espnpressroom.com

MAC & CBS Sports Network Announce Four Year Contract Extension

MAC and CBS Sports Network announce four-year contract extension through the 2022-23 season.

getsomemaction.com

Mountain West: CBS and FOX, through June 2026. Includes CBSSN, FS1, and FS2.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/sidearm.sites/mountainwest.sidearmsports.com/documents/2020/1/9/MW_Media_Rights_Agreements_Fact_Sheet.pdf

American: With ESPN through June 2032.
A minimum of 40 regular-season telecasts per season on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 and ESPNU, including at least 20 across ABC, ESPN and ESPN2, which represents increased annual exposure across those ESPN networks.

The American Championship game will be televised each year on ABC or ESPN.

New to ESPN’s TV rights beginning in 2020-21 are all Navy-controlled football games versus Notre Dame, plus first pick of the remaining Navy-controlled football games each year (excluding any games versus Army and Air Force). Beyond select Navy football games and select men’s basketball games, all conference controlled football and men’s basketball games from The American will air on an ESPN network or ESPN+. All women’s basketball controlled games will also be carried across ESPN’s platforms

American Athletic Conference and ESPN Agree to 12-Year Media Rights Extension

PROVIDENCE, RI – American Athletic Conference Commissioner Mike Aresco and ESPN Executive Vice President of Programming and Scheduling Burke Magnus have announced that The American and ESPN have reached agreement on a 12-year media rights extension beginning in 2020-21. ESPN has been the...

theamerican.org

Conference USA: ESPN (~45 FB games), CBSSN and Stadium. Expiration dates not listed.

C-USA Inks Expansive ESPN Deal

IRVING, Texas – Conference USA Commissioner Judy MacLeod announced today a new multi-year contract with ESPN. The agreement triples ESPN’s inventory of C-USA events from the previous deal to include more than 175 events on ESPN+ and ESPN3 for the upcoming 2018-19 season. More than 100 of those...

conferenceusa.com

C-USA Announces Multimedia Rights Partnerships

C-USA ANNOUNCES MULTIMEDIA RIGHTS PARTNERSHIPS

conferenceusa.com

Sun Belt: ESPN through June 2031.

Sun Belt & ESPN Expand Media Rights Partnership

NEW ORLEANS — Sun Belt Commissioner Keith Gill announced during his annual State of the Conference on Thursday that the conference has extended its media rights deal with ESPN. The deal now runs through the 2030-31 academic year. The new agreement will result in a more than 50 percent increase...

sunbeltsports.org

Sun Belt & ESPN Announce Expanded Media Rights Relationship

NEW ORLEANS — For the second-straight year, Sun Belt Conference Commissioner Keith Gill announced during his annual State of the Conference address at Sun Belt Football Media Days that the conference has expanded its media rights deal with ESPN.

sunbeltsports.org

Good stuff right here!

 

[Acylum]

Exactly what is the gov’t going to do?

Again, how did NIL come about?

 

[AuH2O]

I absolutely think ESPN would try to destroy the Big 12 if another scenario came along that would be a net benefit to ESPN. They had an active media deal with the Big 12 and tried to do it when the OU/UT opprotunity came along, so why wouldn't they do it again if something else came along that would provide similar benefit?

Just because you don't foresee a scenario today that might cause them to try again doesn't mean one won't come along in the future. Did you foresee the OU/UT scenario?

Like you said, it's just business, and ESPN has shown themselves to be a business partner that will completely forsake the well-being of a smaller partner to benefit their flagship partner. It's not "personal", it's just slimy...

And again, they had upcoming exclusive rights with SEC, exclusive rights with the AAC, and partial rights to the Big 12 along with their main competitor. Dissolving their conference for which they had partial rights to boost value of their current and upcoming exclusive deals would make sense for them. It would never under any circumstance make sense for ESPN or anyone else to get exclusive rights to a league only to destroy or devalue it.

 

[ISUcyclones11]

Now that the LHN is leaving, why can't we launch an actual B12 network? Does anybody know?

Unless they spin LHN into a B12Net I don't think it happens if ESPN is pushing ESPN+

 

[exCyDing]

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.

Streaming is more likely than not the future, and it's already a viable option for whichever conference wants to take the plunge, in my opinion.

Technology isn't the issue. Nor is viewer adoption. More households have a streaming service (95.5 million) than cable (76.1 million). In fact, there are slightly more households with Amazon Prime (76.6 million) than cable and Netflix isn't far behind (75m, but that includes Canada). One of these options is trending down, while the other is trending up.

The Big 10 and SEC revenue models both make a boatload off of their networks because they get a slice of each and every monthly subscription regardless of if the subscriber actually ever turns to that channel. Offering streaming would cut into their Big 10/SEC network viewership, which would imperil their ability to stay on the first tier package, which would imperil the whole operation. In short, they have a model that's working quite well and why mess with it?

If anything, going to streaming could make games more accessible than cable. I have no problem dropping another $20 a month for football and basketball season if it was an option to add it to my Prime or Netflix subscriptions. There's no way in hell I'm going back to paying $100 a month for cable, though. Just going to put this here, but the average cable bill in 2021 was $217 a month.

The Big 10 and SEC will continue with the current model for as long as it makes them more money. When we get to a point where enough people have cut cable that they can make more money streaming than not, I'd expect them to go that way.

I'd be very happy if the Big XII could get a deal to put 2-3 conference games on OTA networks a week and the rest all go to a streaming platform, even if it's an add-on subscription (which seems inevitable). The big matchups would still draw network audiences, but all the rest of the games would probably be more easily accessible than they would if they were on FS1/TNT/USA/ESPN2 and just as accessible if they were on ESPN+.

 

[jbhtexas]

And again, they had upcoming exclusive rights with SEC, exclusive rights with the AAC, and partial rights to the Big 12 along with their main competitor. Dissolving their conference for which they had partial rights to boost value of their current and upcoming exclusive deals would make sense for them. It would never under any circumstance make sense for ESPN or anyone else to get exclusive rights to a league only to destroy or devalue it.

What about if they only get a partial rights deal with the Big 12 in the next negotiation?

Full rights or partial rights...it really doesn't matter. You, like the rest of us, have no clue what will "make sense" for ESPN in the future.

In any case, barring something totally bizaare like a football/futbol double-header on Telemundo, ESPN is probably going to have at least some of the Big 12 media rights in the future, so we shall see...

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

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.

The B10 already has their own streaming service BTNgo, which requires you to sign up and pay them, so I doubt the B10 would want that content to shifted over to ESPN+

 

[ISUcyclones11]

The B10 already has their own streaming service BTNgo, which requires you to sign up and pay them, so I doubt the B10 would want that content to shifted over to ESPN+

If anything the B1G fans that will be hit the hardest with streaming fees. They're going to have at least a few or all of BTNgo, Para+, Peacock, and Apple/Amazon. That would be in addition to their TV service and many will also have to keep ESPN+ for all the pro bball, hockey, and baseball on there.

I get that we all hate ESPN and Im with people on this, but if we can keep it to where ESPN+ is the only streaming service we have then i see that as a big win

 

[SEIOWA CLONE]

I absolutely think ESPN would try to destroy the Big 12 if another scenario came along that would be a net benefit to ESPN. They had an active media deal with the Big 12 and tried to do it when the OU/UT opprotunity came along, so why wouldn't they do it again if something else came along that would provide similar benefit?

Just because you don't foresee a scenario today that might cause them to try again doesn't mean one won't come along in the future. Did you foresee the OU/UT scenario?

Like you said, it's just business, and ESPN has shown themselves to be a business partner that will completely forsake the well-being of a smaller partner to benefit their flagship partner. It's not "personal", it's just slimy...

Without a doubt I am sure that ESPN would like to kill off both the B12 and the P12, but is that possible? In the future maybe, but now, it's not. One of the two if not both are going to be damaged but will survive, and it would make financial sense now, for ESPN to pick one and try and destroy the other, and move the better teams to the conference that survives. Right now, it looks like the B12 is in a better position to survive than the P12. We have already expanded, picking up 2 very good teams, and 2 teams that should continue to grow now that they have moved into the P5.
While the P12 has to be looking over its shoulder and wondering when and if Stanford, Oregon or Washington are going to jump to the B10? That alone has to make the 4 corner schools worry about their future. I am sure they would all rather stay in the P12, but if the conference does not look like it's going to be their long term, I am sure they will pull a Missouri and jump now, as opposed to ending up in the Mountain West.

 

[Pope]

They Discussed it as a defensive move for B12 and not additive.

No, they discussed it as an offensive move to obstruct Pac expansion, greatly enhancing the Big 12's chances for gaining the 4 corner schools. Wilner, who is a staunch Pac proponent, said he thinks the Big 12 would be wise to grab SDSU before the PAC does, and I agree with him.

Like Wilner, I believe the Big 12 would be better off taking SDSU and 3 Pac schools than to do nothing and allow the Pac to expand.

 

[isucy86]

Now that the LHN is leaving, why can't we launch an actual B12 network? Does anybody know?

The Pac12 Network is available in 15M homes nationwide. They have no partner like ESPN (ACCN & SECN) or Fox (BTN) who can bundle the conference networks with their other channels.

But conference networks are small dollars. They exist to show the worst FB games and give visibility to Olympic sports.

ESPN, Fox, NBC, etc pay huge $ so they can put high profile matchups on: ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox. Then show 2nd tier games on ESPN, FS1, etc.

Personally, I have no issue if Big12 3rd tier games are on ESPN+, Prime, Paramount+, etc. If a person has internet access there are no barriers to watching other than paying a subscription fee.

Conversely with BTN, SECN and ACCN you better hope the cable/streaming service includes the channel. Even BTN is only available in 50M homes in base package. More US customer have Amazon Prime!

 

[RustShack]

Now that the LHN is leaving, why can't we launch an actual B12 network? Does anybody know?

Our negotiating rights come up in a few years, and it will probably come up. But odds are it ends up on a streamer like Amazon.

 

[Gonzo]

If anything the B1G fans that will be hit the hardest with streaming fees. They're going to have at least a few or all of BTNgo, Para+, Peacock, and Apple/Amazon. That would be in addition to their TV service and many will also have to keep ESPN+ for all the pro bball, hockey, and baseball on there.

I get that we all hate ESPN and Im with people on this, but if we can keep it to where ESPN+ is the only streaming service we have then i see that as a big win

Peacock is free. Apple is $4.99/month. BTN+ isn't a factor for football season.

 

[HFCS]

Our negotiating rights come up in a few years, and it will probably come up. But odds are it ends up on a streamer like Amazon.

The sooner the better for a program like ISU that has real paying fans compared to most FBS teams, but only 35-40% of an already small cable TV market.

Get this thing closer to who is actually streaming from where and ISU suddenly isn't on the fringes. It's better now than it was in 2010, but not all the way there.