Hurtlocker

Been knee deep in it for like a year with realignment, but after watching this game its hard to fathom how they fucked up so colossally, but great last game.

Yeah its why they went from 8 to 9 when they dropped to ten. They had to keep the total inventory count up. They likely kept that in the pro rata payment, OOC games aren't worth shit.

When rivalries sell, it is kind of dumb that the Big 12 didn't lean into marketing what they have more. All have been overshadowed by the River and Bedlam, but with those gone, start shining a light. The BigTen whores out the dumbest trophy games imaginable and it works. It seems the B12 wants parity more than anything else.

Yes, Oklahoma was moving to the south and would play Texas every year and it wasn't fair to be the only team to have to play Texas and Nebraska every year, since, at the time Nebraska was actually good and everyone thought Colorado would stay national champ level too. Not solving that was sort of the first crack in the foundation. Also kind of dumb from a TV standpoint.

True, but what part of the contract isn't being performed? Or do you mean that the contract is only for today and tomorrow doesn't count? That's not really true. Especially if something was provided for that future, in this case the development of a cable channel. That's like saying you're not bound to pay off a debt you signed up for, because tomorrow isn't enforceable. It is, otherwise they'd never get anything done, they'd have horrible credit, and capital projects couldn't be financed.

It's basically how Learfield exists, colleges sign them all the time and have for ages for merchandising, broadcasts, or really any avenue to monetize their IP. Logoed T-Shirts don't end up all over Walmart unless someone went through this process.

Not sure what the relief is for, currently they're being paid quite a bit of money on the contract and are not harmed in anyway, outside the wish they had more. Also, the ACC has been through this before, though with a buyout, which is likely the easier to claim foul on:

What locked them into the deal was that FSU/Clemson and others wanted an ACC Network because they thought the SEC made more than them because of the T3 content. Did they make more than the ACC on T3 content, yes, but we're talking $5-7ms here. The big money is the T1 content and the SEC took theirs to market and made a lot more (then the B1G blew that out of the water). So the ACC extended their deal so ESPN could absorb the cost of building a network for T3 content that they could have just let go to ESPN+ for free, and went to market in a few years from now instead of 13.

Getting cameras into the stadium is like the lowest concern here. Could FSU stream their sports to bypass the agreement? Sure, they could try, though, at a minimum they'd take on all the production and marketing costs too. And, just like how things get pulled off YouTube all the time, the rights holder can go after internet distribution. ISPs cannot knowingly allow pirated content to go through their pipeline any more than CBS can over the air. Rights need to be secured to be broadcast either way. And if you think broadcasts go to die on T3 channels or ESPN+, just wait until the only way you see it is a university website that likely isn't designed to handle mass media. Even if they were allowed to broadcast on their website without concern, it would also have an effect on if they could even put together an independent schedule worth watching if none of their games are T1. Why would ND swap that home and home when one year it's in a void. They'd get a bigger audience traveling to Ball State. What not allowing the cameras into the stadium does do, however, is put them into breach of contract, for another level of expense, regardless of if one believes sovereign immunity or government immunity would protect them against the liability of breaking said contract they entered into in good faith. Just find a big pile of money laying around that already isn't laying around just so you can go to court about not making money over the internet. Which brings us to the crux of this, FSU wants to leave to make more money, not less. That's what all their whining is about. Adding more expenses and getting less exposure on an outlet that pays out pennies on the dollar in value isn't the way to do that. They want to take them back to sell to BTN or the SEC. Well ESPN clearly cannot broadcast them if the ACC holds the rights and BTN isn't going to get into a legal battle over it. They'll just sit back and let it play out, on FSU's dime. No major provider who can offer to hand FSU money is going to do that. This is why Texas/OU cut a deal just to get out a year early and USC/UCLA set it up to go when their contract was over. They either need to do what hasn't been done and prove that the contract isn't binding, or they need to settle out of it, or they just need to STFU and wait.

Right on both points, however two things of note: 1) The ACC doesn't have to sue FSU, so sovereign immunity doesn't come into play. If FSU wants them back, they need to sue the ACC. 2) What makes GoR's extremely tight is that they have an end date. In this case, FSU gets all their rights back...in 2036, and will make hundreds of millions in the process, which negates the argument that someone fleeced FSU. FSU actually asked for this deal, they wanted the ACC Network, and this is what it cost. They're not in the best position. As for Taylor, kind of. That situation wasn't a grant of rights where she didn't control the ownership of her songs, she just didn't own the masters to the original recordings. Usually this is done so the recording companies can continue to release those recordings on either new copies of the same album or make a compilation. Each time they did that, they'd still have to pay her, she just can't tell them they can't release it. And, unless you're a massive act, you don't own them. I think Ray Charles was the first to win that in a contract and it was after he was a huge act and didn't pertain to previously recorded materials. A better example would be George Michael, who signed a rights agreement. but hated the terms after. He tried to fight it, but the case was dismissed because, basically, while he may not have liked the terms now, he signed them in good faith and has adequate access to legal advice prior, they were standard operating procedure in the industry, the terms were fair and had an end date, and he had basically reaffirmed all this by taking an advance on the deal. FSU is not some underage music star with no representation who signed their life away for some magic beans. It got exactly what it wanted in the deal, until it didn't want it. Buyer's remorse because the Joneses signed a better deal later, doesn't make for a solid case.

Nullifying would be massively expensive and would basically affect the entire entertainment industry. So many organizations outside of college football would be funding this fight the numbers are staggeringly huge, likely a factor of 1,000x more than FSU could dream of coming up with. So with you that the settle would likely be cheaper to just buy the rights back. But if that went to court, damn would there be a lot of expensive suits lining up to fight them.

truth

Agreed, and most of those rage talk shows draw less than reruns of sportcenter anyway. This is where that detethering of ESPN from cable makes the most sense. You have your live area and your content area. You don't need to fill a 24 hour cycle, just own what you're good at.

All of them compete against each other in all the slots....all the time. This isn't some new feature at the advent of television. And its not like all B12 games have been isolated to single, non-competitive slots, even interconference. The only thing that is going to change for the remaining B12 teams is they'll get more T1 opportunities than today. For the past 5+ years, the bulk of the B12's T1 games have been Texas, Oklahoma, and whoever is playing them. The top spots for college football are Prime, Noon and afternoon, in that order. The slots draw between 9-13m on average in total viewership, spread over the channels. How many watch is a combination of time, channel (T1 channels will always outperform T2, which outperforms T3, regardless of who is on), brand, competitiveness, and how many other games are on at that time. Alabama/Georgia won't draw 9m viewers on the SEC Network, but will on ABC, nor will they draw 9m viewers if Georgia beats Bama 54-0, especially if other games are on. People will flip around when games aren't nail biters. You need all to work together for the big numbers. You can also kind of back into the numbers. If you assume being the apex of all five (Alone on prime time, end of season, 10-0 vs 10-0, playing for something big on the line, coming down to the last play to win it, between two big brands) is 10m viewers, then taking one out gets you to about 80% of that, take out two, 60%. The only one that is likely more than a fifth is channel, because you could put the two biggest brands on FS1 and it still won't pull 7.5m, not enough homes have it, people hate searching, etc. So with that in mind, here's how games break down: 8m+ = extremely rare, massive brands, with great records, in close games in best spots, top 1% of regular season games. 4m+ = elite content, probably 5-10% of all CFB games 3m+ = extremely good content, this and above is likely 20% of all games. Usually non-big brands having great games or a Globetrotter playing a General. 2m+ = You did the job if on a T1 channel. Not awesome, but not terrible, top 30% 1mish = disappointing T1 content, fucktabulicious T2 content, this and below is the bulk of all CFB games, regardless of conference. 500k-1m = standard T2 content <500k = T3 content, fodder. Games between two bullshittery hapless teams who can't wait for the season to end to put them out of their misery. Will the B12 still need to compete with the B10, SEC, and ACC for viewers, yes. Will the new B12 need to compete with the eyeballs of Texas/BlowU in the SEC, yes. Will they get 2 viewers while Oklahoma/Missouri gets 13m? Uh, no. The SEC will have more elite content then the new Big 12, no argument there, that's why they and the B1G are paid more, but that's only 3-4 games a week. Depending on if the Buffs PR machine keeps this up, the B12 likely will only see a handful of games ever reach that high elite and rare level. Maybe 3-4 a year, tops, with one being the CCG. The B12 could easily live in the 2-4m range of T1 content and the 500k-1m range for T2 without Texas and Oklahoma. They'll still need to use this opportunity of more windows than before to do well, if they hope to grow their contract in 6 years, but they shouldn't see all their viewers evaporate.

one of the greatest gifs of all time

That is the crazy piece here, Oregon and Washington may end up on After Dark Fox, or FS1 in Prime...a lot.

When they go to 16, you'll likely see 2 Big 12 games each Saturday on either ABC, Fox or ESPN. ESPN isn't taking that A package to put them on the Ocho. I think you'll also see them take over the Pac AfterDark on ESPN and also the Pac's Friday night game, which you're seeing already. And, while late night and Friday are not noon/afternoon/prime on Saturday, they are a hell of a lot better than ESPN2 or FS1 That should put 2-3 games a week on ESPN2/u/+/FS1

With 4 Texas schools. playing 4.5 home conference home games a year, you can get all sixteen either playing in Texas every year, or every other year, that's why they did it.

Can't find it now, but saw some post where a girl said she "Wanted someone who looks at her the way Riley looks at Grinch"

USC has to be super excited that Oregon and Washington are making the leap to the Big Ten with them, as both seem capable to throttling them handedly.

That is insane, multiplied by the fact that they are 6-1.