CustersDoctor

This guy died. I mention it here because we were discussing him on this thread about a month ago

Kinda like referring to Stillwater as Dowisetrepla

A great thing about conference TV deals is that they always have stipulations about every team gets a certain number of good time slots. So TV ratings disaters like Northwestern, Rutgers & Maryland get some exposure. Iowa, which is 8th or 9th ratings wise knows that with the arrival of USC & UCLA, that they will be pushed to the 11 spot in the pecking order and would drop even further if OUW were added. The PAC10 has 4 teams that are ratings disasters. (OST, WST, CAL, STAN) Rumors this week make it sound like NO normal linear carrier is bidding on PAC10 Tier 1 rights. By not bidding ESPN increases the chances of a PAC10 collapse. This would spur the 6 gravy PAC10 teams to join the NEW12. ESPN has the rights to the Big12. ESPN wouldn't have to find good time slots for Cal, Stan, OSt & Wst if the PAC collapses.

Obviously he can't MATH. Together USC and UCLA will host nine East Block conference games a year. So there are five BIG schools that won't travel to California in any particular season. Being one of the five schools that doesn't travel west would be a slight advantage. If you add OUW then the west coast schools will host a combined total of 14 East Block schools meaning each east block school will make ONE and only one west coast trip in a season and nobody has the advantage of avoiding the stress of traveling to California.

When the Big12 added Cincy, UCF, BYU & UH the national perception is they were really good additions for the BIG12. Cincy had recently been in the playoffs, UCF had that undefeated season a while back, BYU is the best all white team around and the average Joe in America thinks that UH delivers the CFB market in Houston. (The average Joe doesn't know that UH is the #4 CFB team in Houston) So what is the national perception of SDSU? Does the average Joe know their stadium only seats 33,000 and would be the smallest in the Big12 by 7,000? Does SDSU get a bump for their recent deep March Madness success? Is the only SDSU football player you can name Marshall Faulk circa 1993? Does the average American know that San Diego is a city and not a state? If the PAC10 doesn't lose any more schools, then is the New12 better off with its current membership? Yormark, who is the best commissioner in the CFB wants PTZ teams in the conference and if we can't steal any PAC schools I think he will go for SDSU and Fresno.

If the Pac12 gets a good enough deal and OUW do NOT get a BIG invite, then they will NOT expand! Such a TV deal would have to be a 6 year 1.8 billion dollar contract. Which is 30mi a year per school, but only if they stay at 10 schools. So if they stay together they add nobody. Adding SDSU or Fresno or SMU dilutes the pay out and increases the infighting over the limited available linear exposure. Does that mean SDSU is off to the Big12? Not if the PAC collapses. If OUW get their wedding invitation then they are gone. Or if the best new deal is lousy then there may 6 PAC schools in line to come to the BIG12. So SDSU's only route to the BIG12 is if the PAC stays together. So if the Pac collapses the BIG12 ends up with 4-6 PAC schools then SDSU gets in to some third rate version of the PAC12 with OST, WST, CAL, STAN, FresnoSt and 4 to 6 more schools wanting to make what is now a vertical move. So the SDSU AD is correct. They either end up as the 13th team in the BIG12 or as a team the PAC12. A sad third rate version of what they have now. Such a revamped version of the PAC12 would be as big of a ratings blunder as putting Conan Obrien on the Tonight Show.

As I said, "Nobody signs until everybody signs". None of the 4 corners are going to sign away their GOR right now. Then a month from now OUW take off for the BIG.

Here's a summary of the three most reasonable PAC10 scenarios and outcomes. Probability 1: The new deal turns out to be around 25mill per year per team with a 60/40 split linear to streaming ratio. If this is the best they can do, then the conference is doomed and the 4 corners + OUW join the BIG12. (Unless of course OUW get the BIG invite) Probability 2: A 6 year 1.8billion dollar deal is on the table. That comes out to 30ill a year per school as long as they don't expand. This deal is also 60/40 split linear to streaming. The reason nobody has signed off on this deal is that nobody signs until everybody signs. Eight of the PAC10 schools are happy with this deal but OUW is lobbying for a BIG invite. Probability 3: The BIG invites OUW by the end of June. The odds of OUW getting into the BIG have increased recently for a few reasons: A. They quickly hired a new commissioner knowing that if they were going to expand they could do it now or in about 6 years. B. Originally the Eastern Block was uneasy about having four left coast schools to travel to and preferred to stay at two. But as it turns out it is more equal for the Eastern Block if there are four west coast schools. Here's why: The BIG plays 9 conference games. To lesson the stress on traveling, the left coast schools would host 5 conference games a season and only have to travel for 4 conference games a season. If you have only have two west coast schools those two schools would host a combined total of 10 home games and of course 1 of those games will always be USC VS UCLA so in that scenario NINE east block schools travel west every season. IF you add OUW then between the four WCS you'd have 20 home conference home conference games, Since the four WCS would play each other at home that would be 6 of the 20 home conference games that they'd play, leaving exactly FOURTEEN home games and there are FOURTEEN eastern block schools meaning every eastern block school goes west once each and every season. It is far more equitable for everybody to have to travel west once a year rather than just NINE east coast schools travel west. If there are two or four WCS the easten schools wouldn't take their football team out west more than once a year anyhow. But with four WCS no eastern block school would have the advantage of NOT having the stress of going out west. In the event OUW get the invite, then of course the 4 corners join the Big 12. CALSTAN and the State Schools have to coble something together with Fresno, SDSU, UNLV, Nevada, Boise, and some worthless sports programs like SMU. I've been thinking probability #2 is how it will turn out. The PAC stays at 10, they get 30mil a year, with 40% streaming. BTW 40% streaming is only a little worse than what they currently have. Their current deal is about 66/33 and most of the streaming is on the PAC12 network with its 15,000,000 subscribers. Any new deal will have a streamer like Apple or Amazon so the potential audience is much much more than the PAC12 NETWORK.

This is outstanding information. My biggest take away is how the PAC10 already has an exposure problem. Over the last five years the BIG12 has had 84 rated games while the PAC12 has had 59. That's FIVE fewer rated games a season. Also on the surface the PAC12 boasts that their viewership is better than the BIG12 (1.5MIL average per game vs 1mil average per game) But the reason for this is in the fewer games that get broadcast. So the Big12s worst potential ratings games are getting picked up and broadcast, the worst potential games for the PAC12 did not get broadcast therefore those ratings turds didn't crash their average rating.

There is a lot of credence to the idea that the eastern block wants to see how the west coast travel stress affects their teams, especially in the non revenue sports and the sports with 30 or more games in a season like softball, baseball and basketball. If the BIG stands pat with two Interstate 5 schools then only NINE BIG football teams will travel out west every year. How do you decide who those nine schools will be? Of course USC can't wait to host UM, OST, MST, WIS, PENNST. Just imagine the disappointment when two or three of the 5 BIG games that you host are Northwestern, Rutgers, Illinois, Minnisota or Maryland or even the moderately successful or previously successful schools like Purdue, Indiana, Iowa & Nebraska. The reality is that the BIG will have to send some real crappy football teams to Cali every year. Teams that you have ZERO history with, teams that are NOT your rivals. And in turn USC & UCLA will each make 4-5 trips east every season. And some of those trips will be to play the lower two thirds of the conference.

The YouTube echo chamber guys who were pushing the Amazon deal today, obviously haven't thought through the implications of adding oregon in washington to the big. What you just wrote makes sense and what I wrote makes sense, I can't see OUW Going to the big.

So lets say today's rumor about Amazon coming onboard have merit. They are coming on board with the idea of backing OUW to the BIG. The there would be FOUR west coast BIG schools. Amazon would want to be the West Coast late night media provider. If each of the four schools have seven home games a season that's 28 West Coast games a year. There are 13 weeks in a CFB season so Amazon would have a couple of options for late night football every week. If the BIG has NINE conference games a year then Doing the math, the 4 West Coast Schools could have 4-5 home BIG games a year. The four schools between them would host 18 BIG games a seasons. But since you'd want to keep the regional rivalries alive SIX of the 18 home games would be against the other three west coast schools. This would mean there would be one west coast road trip per season for the eastern block schools. Amazon has to calculate if CFB fans are going to sign up for this kind of extra content. Amazon barely got enough subscriber increase for their weekly NFL game, will adding 12 night time BIG games increase the subscriber base enough? Especially when one considers that three of those 12 games west coast games are Northwestern, Rutgers and Maryland. The west coast schools would go East for 4-5 games a year, those would be day games or prime time and the OTA & Cable outlets would carry those games.

So many of you keep talking about realignment that reduces the number of Division I schools to 64. That all sounds good but CFB already has a limited audience. CFB in many areas has an elitist snob vibe that doesn't appeal at all to the blue collar masses. Fans who have their local favorite cut out of the big time DO NOT migrate over to some other team. Schools like Rutgers and Maryland have terrible viewership, but it's good for the Division I to have a team in New Jersey and Maryland. Kicking out the poor viewership teams would decrease the overall viewership of CFB and that is bad for the game. I just don't see the ACC getting poached of their big names and leaving the dead wood behind. The only reduction possibility would be from a PAC10 collapse where the ratings disaster schools of OST, WST, CAL, & STAN get left behind.

I never thought much of CKK's ability to watch film. In 2016 Tech lost at OkSt 45-44. We missed a game winning field goal as the clock ran out. The holder flinched and moved the ball at the last second. Coaches watch the game film on Sunday's and he and his assistants didn't notice that the holder messed up on the kick. A reporter asked him about the hold at the Monday press conference and CKK was at a loss. He had watched game film for hours and missed something so basic that even the ESPNU announcers noticed during the game.

You are absolutely correct about the CFP money. The WAC10 will almost NEVER get two teams into the 12 team playoff. The BIG12 & the ACC will usually have two but almost never three. The BIG and the SEC will usually have three. The WAC10 will get their automatic bid and that's about it, then they'll divide that revenue by 10. Their total income per team will be far behind the BIG12 because their 10 team league wont receive as much playoff money. But their new deal is more about appearing to be as good at the BIG12s, its about saving face, its about being able to claim that they own the late late time slot.

I now firmly believe the WAC10 deal will be a 6yr 1.8 billion dollar contract. They will stand pat with 10 teams. Therefore they will each get 30mil a year and can save face by by saying they have practically the same deal as the Big12 and a better deal than the ACC. But they can't expand because it dilutes the revenue. They shouldn't expand because the ten remaining teams know they are competing for limited OTA slots. They don't want to share their few daytime slots with two newbies. We've discussed in detail how no expansion option exists that brings good viewership. We all know that the WAC10 hopes to have three games a day on linear TV. If they have 12 schools, that puts 3 games on streaming. That 50/50 split is unacceptable! But if they only have 10 teams, that puts 3 games on linear and two on streaming which is a 60/40 split. This is way.

How history will remember Kliavkoff

I saw this on another chat room and since its on the internet it must be true. "The new PAC10 media rights deal will be announced on April 12th. It will be a six year 2.4billion deal. That comes out to 30million a year per team, BUT ONLY IF THEY DON'T EXPAND! They will stay at ten teams. This is the strategy the Big12 employed when we lost our first two teams. We stayed at ten and therefore our payout per team went up with only ten mouths to feed. There is absolutely ZERO reason for them to expand considering the teams available. All the schools that the PAC has considered will be left at the alter. The conference leaders will be able to claim that they did their due diligence to get back to 12 teams but none of the options passed to high standards for admission into the conference of champions." So everybody stays, no expansion, and their media rights deal will be smaller than the Big12's, but with just 10 teams they'll each get almost as much as a Big12 team.

This guy's literally doing his PAC10 update from a hotel room while on vacation with his parents. I'm pretty sure that after the podcast he's got to go sit in the cuck chair while his GF gets some BBC.

Dodd being a PAC mouthpiece totally letting UA president Robbins take the "What me worry" approach. How do you not follow up with any meaningful questioning of Robbins expression of letting the process continue pretty much indefinitely.

Literally

Or you can literally hang a PAC12 flag on the basement door and viola, you're an expert.

I hate these basement broadcasters who act like they has some sort of inside knowledge. When in reality they know less than Wayne's World. This guy has to be the worst one out there. He spends the first five minutes of his video talking about his mini helmet collection. Then he spouts off made up BS about realignment.

1st. I don't for a second think that the PAC12 deal will be equal to or superior to the NEW12 deal. 2nd Once the deal is revealed to the current PAC12th members they will probably have about a week to review it before signing their GOR. I guarantee you that if too much of the revenue promises are performance based some will reject it if those performance bonuses are likely to be unreasonable. And I guarantee you that even if the revenue promises are solid but rely to heavily on not yet viable formats (like streaming) some will reject it. 3rd Can you imagine the fit that FSU is going to throw if the ACC contract is all the sudden the dead last revenue generator of the P5.

Drove to Phoenix from Lubbock this weekend to see my daughter. It's a 12 hour drive. UA in Tucson is a little closer than that. I will certainly go to Tempe and Tuscon at least once if either join the New12.