Realignment talk not going away

[Hurtlocker 2212]

2 hours ago, gmr548 said:

Very much doubt B1G presidents would have said no to Stanford, Cal, or Washington; or that they’d balk at Oregon if attached to Washington or all three of those.

They would have because they'd start getting diminishing returns.   And the only way to pay for it left was to put more games on bad slots.   The Purdues and Iowas and Indianas of the world know that would mean less exposure for them...or more time on BTN.

The only thing left for them to add to pay for the new schools is an after dark block with ESPN, which isn't paying $75m a team and is likely going to be made up of a lot of coastal + non brand match ups.

[billfromlaketravis 11478]

On 1/6/2023 at 11:52 PM, TKthunder2 said:

The new teams won’t get all get home games from Texas/OU. They can’t even vote yet before the schedule is made.

Texas will play 1 noob at home and 1 away Oklahoma will do the same with the other two.

The other schools want Texas/OU game at their house versus any of the new schools.

My gut says our schedule will skip one of the Kansas schools (since we just played them at their places) and either West Virginia or Iowa State will lose their home game with Texas (but since they are coming off rough seasons, they are really being allowed to duck us). The rest of the schedule remains the same and we play @UH (still pisses me off) and get BYU at DKR.

Home - Tech, Okie St, BYU, KSU (skips KU)
Away - BU, TCU, UH, WVU (skips ISU)

Oklahoma’s
Home - Iowa St, TCU, WVU, Cincy (skips Tech)
Away - K State, Kansas, Okie St, UCF (skips BU)

Good post. 
 

I know the joke is Texas is going to play at U of H, UCF, Cincy and BYU. 
 

The Irate8 desperately want one more home game against Texas. At Baylor and TCU are locks. Despite leaking it, Coug High will get a home game against Texas. That leaves maybe 1 or 2 away games remaining. 
 

Texas will be the home team against OU in 2023.

I doubt the Big 12 will only give us 3 true conference home games, but stranger things have happened and this is the f***ing Big 12 we’re talking about. 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

55 minutes ago, jinx said:

 

 

I don't even think this is possible.   I order to make two teams play all away games there would need to be something in the rules that says its ok, which means the 12 other teams could find themselves in that spot.   No one is going to agree to that, especially not on how it looks to the athlete.    There isn't really a need to either.   The new 4, well maybe not Houston, will sell out their stadiums regardless of who they play.   Its too new.   I also don't think the remaining eight want no more games.    

This battle for leverage isn't really between the Big 12 and OU/Texas, its between the Big 12/Fox and ESPN.   The River will remain, and Fox will get one more.   Everything else is "how can ESPN create value for Fox/B12 to leave early"

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

On 12/13/2022 at 1:38 PM, Trojan Man said:

I think the smaller programs will still be able to take care of their stars most of the time.  This exact situation could have happened with Deuce Vaughn but it didn't.  Maybe the presence of Bijan Robinson meant transferring to Texas was never on the table for Vaughn but still there are other bigger, richer programs than Kansas State where he would have been the unquestioned #1 RB yet he's spending his entire college career at KSU.  KSU/Manhattan will never match Texas/Austin dollar for dollar but they also aren't an apathetic, bankrupt fanbase with a crumbling local economy that can't afford any sponsorships or NIL deals.  The KSUs of the world won't outbid bigger programs for 5* recruits but they can offer enough to hang on to their diamonds in the rough after they're already in the program.  So far almost all portal movement seems to be one of the following categories:

-Player who balled out at FCS moving up to FBS

-Player who balled out at G5 moving up to P5

-Player who never saw the field at P5 dropping to G5, or blueblood to middle of the road P5

-Lateral moves because a player is unhappy about a coaching change or how he's used in the scheme or the general direction of the program

Off the top of my head I can only think of two moves similar to what you brought up where a star player left a smaller P5 program for a blueblood: RB Jahmyr Gibbs from Georgia Tech to Alabama and WR Jordan Addison from Pitt to USC.  You could make a plausible case both had reasons beyond NIL for the change.  Gibbs had to know his head coach was on the hot seat going into 2022 and didn't want to deal with that shit his last year in college.  It was the right call as GT did fire their coach during the season.  Addison went through spring practice catching dying ducks from Kedon Slovis after winning a Biletnikoff playing with a future first round QB and decided he'd have more fun finishing his college career in Riley's offense catching dimes from Caleb Williams.  If GT had a more stable coaching situation and if Pickett had another year at Pitt those two guys probably don't leave.

Yeah, Deuce has commercial money, merchandise sales, and a deal that lets him drive a Porsche around Manhattan. I could see NIL pulling non-skill position players from mid-level programs to blue bloods, but I really don't see standout stars leaving.

[gmr548 16580]

They would have because they'd start getting diminishing returns.   And the only way to pay for it left was to put more games on bad slots.   The Purdues and Iowas and Indianas of the world know that would mean less exposure for them...or more time on BTN.
The only thing left for them to add to pay for the new schools is an after dark block with ESPN, which isn't paying $75m a team and is likely going to be made up of a lot of coastal + non brand match ups.

My point is that presidents see a huge athletic payday regardless and would probably love to scoop up additional top tier academic institutions.

[utee94 15823]

4 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

I don't even think this is possible. 

Yeah, since it would deny Texas the home gate + concessions and all other game-related revenues for half a season, which is probably $40M at the low end, I'd say it's not possible.  

 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

3 hours ago, gmr548 said:

My point is that presidents see a huge athletic payday regardless and would probably love to scoop up additional top tier academic institutions.

The assumption is there is a big payday.   If those 4 schools and USC/UCLA were work $75m per team, the Pac 12's media negotiations would have been A LOT different than they were.  You're talking a 450m/year contract for just those six.    They're barely sniffing $350m at ten without USC/UCLA, so there is no big payday.   Something has to give and money and exposure are it.   If you're not OSU/Michigan/Penn State/USC, you're already going to be giving up exposure in the current deal.   Adding 4 more erodes it further.

My point is the presidents likely knew this and that's why they pumped the brakes.  

[Hurtlocker 2212]

3 hours ago, utee94 said:

Yeah, since it would deny Texas the home gate + concessions and all other game-related revenues for half a season, which is probably $40M at the low end, I'd say it's not possible.  

 

And forcing athletes to never play at home, making it hard on employees who work games, etc etc etc.   It just doesn't seem likely in any stretch of the imagination, outside the fact that I don't think they could even do it that way.   Not to mention just invite lawsuits and put the buyout in question.   

Can they make OU travel to Orlando, yes.   Can they make OU travel to every game...of course not.

Edited January 9, 2023 by Hurtlocker

[jinx 2635]

I take it you guys don’t ever see Umlang posts. He lives to troll. Usually Aggies but I thought his shot at the Rig 12 with that proposed schedule was pretty funny. Everyone settle down, a zero home game schedule is a joke. 

[Tomatillo 354]

On 1/5/2023 at 9:50 AM, BurntOrange&White said:

The geographic or cultural similarities are they have the LA market and BIG wants that market. 

Just counterproductive and disingenuous that they would leave the P-12 for the B!G. That's sad. They are literally the heart of the P-12 and are leaving everyone else high and dry for a league that wins national titles in the major sports as often as there is snow in LA. At least the Texas/OU move makes sense geographically and culturally. 

[utee94 15823]

10 hours ago, jinx said:

I take it you guys don’t ever see Umlang posts. He lives to troll. Usually Aggies but I thought his shot at the Rig 12 with that proposed schedule was pretty funny. Everyone settle down, a zero home game schedule is a joke. 

Well sure-- except all things he posts about the ags, are facts.

 

[jinx 2635]

2 hours ago, utee94 said:

Well sure-- except all things he posts about the ags, are facts.

 

This is true. They are just hilarious facts. 

[TrashMaster G 17557]

On 1/8/2023 at 11:35 AM, Hurtlocker said:

I don't even think this is possible.   I order to make two teams play all away games there would need to be something in the rules that says its ok, which means the 12 other teams could find themselves in that spot.   No one is going to agree to that, especially not on how it looks to the athlete.    There isn't really a need to either.   The new 4, well maybe not Houston, will sell out their stadiums regardless of who they play.   Its too new.   I also don't think the remaining eight want no more games.    

This battle for leverage isn't really between the Big 12 and OU/Texas, its between the Big 12/Fox and ESPN.   The River will remain, and Fox will get one more.   Everything else is "how can ESPN create value for Fox/B12 to leave early"

Damn, you might be on to something.

[Trojan Man 429]

21 hours ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

Yeah, Deuce has commercial money, merchandise sales, and a deal that lets him drive a Porsche around Manhattan. I could see NIL pulling non-skill position players from mid-level programs to blue bloods, but I really don't see standout stars leaving.

During the most recent portal cycle I didn't see any of these "bluebloods raiding midlevel P5 rosters of their superstars" Chicken Little outcomes.  It's looking more and more like the portal will just be another way for talent to efficiently disperse and portal management will be a new skill coaches have to learn.  It will filter out some dinosaur coaches who don't want to adjust (Dabo comes to mind) but most of them will learn and adapt.  I also think the portal will force coaches to be a little more honest when recruiting high schoolers.  If you sell a bunch of bullshit to a recruit now it's a lot easier for him to leave your program than it was 10+ years ago once he realizes coaches will say anything to get your commitment.

At the P5 level I think the portal will be a net positive for everyone as long as you don't have one of those dinosaur coaches.  You could even argue KSU-type teams will benefit the most from it.  You need to have a keen eye for talent to win at that kind of program.  If you can identify undervalued high school recruits the bigger schools passed on you can do the same with transfers, effectively doubling your recruiting base.  At the G5 level I think it's more of a wash.  It really hurts when they lose an overlooked recruit they developed into a star player to a P5 program but for every one guy like that G5 programs will get 10 P5 transfers who would have never considered a G5 school when they were coming out of high school.

11 hours ago, Tomatillo said:

Just counterproductive and disingenuous that they would leave the P-12 for the B!G. That's sad. They are literally the heart of the P-12 and are leaving everyone else high and dry for a league that wins national titles in the major sports as often as there is snow in LA. At least the Texas/OU move makes sense geographically and culturally. 

Hell with the Pac 12.  This conference never did a fucking thing to help the LA schools and took it for granted they could live off LA in perpetuity.  The rest of the Pac 12 constantly used their numbers to vote for policies that would help them at the expense of the LA schools and ignored every concern the LA schools had.  All USC/UCLA ever got in return for giving the rest of the conference a massive amount of relevance and attention and money and recruits was hatred and bitterness and egalitarian nonsense that treated Corvallis and Tucson and Pullman like they were just as important to the Pac 12 as LA.  Good to see the B1G's next media deal and the Pac's current media negotiations are showing them how fucking stupid it was to act like the nutswinger schools were as valuable as the LA schools.

It wouldn't bother me at all if USC never played another Pac 12 school in any sport after 2023-24.  I'll miss Washington, they're the closest thing USC has to a peer in the Pac 12.  Besides the financial realities and hurt feelings on both sides that's another huge problem with Pac 12 membership from USC's perspective.  USC is the only football blueblood in the Pac 12, which is not a good position to be in.  You need some other powerhouses to help out with revenue generation and conference prestige/respect and to make sure the nutswingers don't hijack the conference.  Support from other big time football programs is something USC will finally have in the B1G with Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State.

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

2 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

Hell with the Pac 12.  This conference never did a fucking thing to help the LA schools and took it for granted they could live off LA in perpetuity.  The rest of the Pac 12 constantly used their numbers to vote for policies that would help them at the expense of the LA schools and ignored every concern the LA schools had.  All USC/UCLA ever got in return for giving the rest of the conference a massive amount of relevance and attention and money and recruits was hatred and bitterness and egalitarian nonsense that treated Corvallis and Tucson and Pullman like they were just as important to the Pac 12 as LA.  Good to see the B1G's next media deal and the Pac's current media negotiations are showing them how fucking stupid it was to act like the nutswinger schools were as valuable as the LA schools.

It wouldn't bother me at all if USC never played another Pac 12 school in any sport after 2023-24.  I'll miss Washington, they're the closest thing USC has to a peer in the Pac 12.  Besides the financial realities and hurt feelings on both sides that's another huge problem with Pac 12 membership from USC's perspective.  USC is the only football blueblood in the Pac 12, which is not a good position to be in.  You need some other powerhouses to help out with revenue generation and conference prestige/respect and to make sure the nutswingers don't hijack the conference.  Support from other big time football programs is something USC will finally have in the B1G with Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State.

It seems to me that this kind of reality, similar to the current Big 12, is what will eventually drive something like a 64-team super division. I could see this leading to much more difficult schedules, more losses by top teams, and something closer to the NFL playoffs.

[Trojan Man 429]

1 hour ago, Doc Daneeka said:

It seems to me that this kind of reality, similar to the current Big 12, is what will eventually drive something like a 64-team super division. I could see this leading to much more difficult schedules, more losses by top teams, and something closer to the NFL playoffs.

I think there is a happy middle ground you can find between the haves and the have nots.  I personally believe it would be tragic for the sport if the biggest schools all broke away to make their own league and exclusively play each other.  I've described why earlier in this thread but the chiefs need the indians as much as the indians need the chiefs.  6 autobids in the expanded playoff is a big step in keeping the sport together instead of coalescing around a handful of powerhouses.

The Big 12 and Pac 12 just couldn't find that balance to make coexistence possible because both conferences have too many nutswinger schools, which means they're the ones dictating policy and setting the tone and deciding the conference's direction.  Even before realignment too much of each conference based their decisions and their entire season on giving the middle finger to Texas/USC, which caused a lot of bitterness and hatred on each side.  But look at the B1G and SEC.  Their bluebloods and their middle of the road schools and their bottom feeders all work together pretty harmoniously without the constant drama and bullshit you see between the Big 12/Pac 12 and Texas/USC.  They all row their boat in the same direction while the Big 12 and Pac 12 have sizable "Fuck Texas/Fuck USC" factions that would happily do whatever they can to kneecap their big bad wolves.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

And just like that, conference realignment has ended:

Sources: Chicago Bears to hire Kevin Warren as president, CEO

Quote

The Chicago Bears will name Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren as their president and CEO, sources have confirmed to ESPN.

Warren will replace outgoing president and CEO Ted Phillips, who announced his retirement last September following the 2022 season. The Bears, who could announce the hiring as early as Thursday, interviewed Warren in person last month.

Warren has informed Illinois chancellor Robert Jones, chair of the Big Ten council of presidents/chancellors, of his departure, according to sources.

The Big Ten presidents and chancellors are set to meet later Thursday morning. The Bears' plan to hire Warren was first reported Thursday by NFL Network.

Warren has been with the Big Ten since June 2019 but recently was not given a contract extension by the conference, according to ESPN's Pete Thamel. His extensive experience in the NFL includes stints with the Rams, Lions and Vikings, where he worked from 2005 to 2019. He spent 2005-14 as the Vikings' executive vice president of legal affairs and chief administrative officer before being promoted to Minnesota's chief operating officer in 2015.

Sources told ESPN that Warren's impact in helping the Vikings build U.S. Bank Stadium in 2016 has been appealing to the Bears, who are also looking to construct a new stadium in the coming years after 50 seasons at Soldier Field. The Bears aim to close on their 326-acre purchase of Arlington Heights during the first quarter of 2023 and unveiled initial plans for the development, which is set to include a domed stadium, last fall.

 

[SimkinsMan 4387]

This is good. I don't want two MEGA conferences. It will be fine, I think, to have the two major conferences and then two to three other decent conferences.

I wonder if this settles things down now until the GOR expires for the ACC. 

[mdmost 43001]

So the Chicago Bears might've given the Pac 12 a little bit more life.

[Bozo_Casanova 26460]

Michigan to NFC Central 

[BurntOrange&White 39932]

1 hour ago, SimkinsMan said:

This is good. I don't want two MEGA conferences. It will be fine, I think, to have the two major conferences and then two to three other decent conferences.

I wonder if this settles things down now until the GOR expires for the ACC. 

I think Big 12 will still try to poach a couple of PAC schools.

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

29 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I think Big 12 will still try to poach a couple of PAC schools.

I don't see it at this point.  The Pac schools don't seem to care about money or exposure.  They really don't want to associate with a bunch of red state prairie trash.

['stache 21815]

32 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I think Big 12 will still try to poach a couple of PAC schools.

If the Big 12 could get Oregon, the new conference would have two programs who have played for a national title in the BCS/CFP era (TCU, UO), same as the new Big 10 (tOSU, USC). If Washington joined too, that would be 4 teams who have made a championship or playoff game (TCU, UO, UW, Cincy) to the Big's 2 (tOSU, USC). 

Edited January 12, 2023 by 'stache

[Texas Wahoo 3395]

6 minutes ago, 'stache said:

If the Big 12 could get Oregon, the new conference would have two programs who have played for a national title in the BCS/CFP era (TCU, UO), same as the new Big 10 (tOSU, USC). If Washington joined too, that would be 4 teams who have made a championship or playoff game (TCU, UO, UW, Cincy) to the Big's 2 (tOSU, USC). 

Michigan (multiple times) and Michigan State have both made it to the playoffs.

['stache 21815]

1 minute ago, Texas Wahoo said:

Michigan (multiple times) and Michigan State have both made it to the playoffs.

I knew that, so still tied at 4.

[TKthunder2 4991]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

If the Big 12 could get Oregon, the new conference would have two programs who have played for a national title in the BCS/CFP era (TCU, UO), same as the new Big 10 (tOSU, USC). If Washington joined too, that would be 4 teams who have made a championship or playoff game (TCU, UO, UW, Cincy) to the Big's 2 (tOSU, USC). 

When did USC make the playoffs?

['stache 21815]

1 minute ago, TKthunder2 said:

When did USC make the playoffs?

Playoff or BCS title game.

[TKthunder2 4991]

4 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Playoff or BCS title game.

Gotcha, then you’re missing Nebraska too.

[Fudbelty 2788]

Gotcha, then you’re missing Nebraska too.

Why you have to bring that up?

[billfromlaketravis 11478]

8 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

And just like that, conference realignment has ended:

Sources: Chicago Bears to hire Kevin Warren as president, CEO

 

Warren was over his skis in the Covid “season”. I’m surprised Ohio State didn’t apply some soft pressure to shitcan the guy. 

He wasn’t a genius or a visionary. Just right place, right time to get a big ass TV contract and poach the LA schools. 

I think he sold Fox : Ohio State, Michigan, USC, Penn State, and a bunch of shit. So well done. 
 

Have fun managing the weekly Bryce Young concussions with the Bears. 

[bullet 1597]

9 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

And just like that, conference realignment has ended:

Sources: Chicago Bears to hire Kevin Warren as president, CEO

 

Pete Thamel on ESPN said the Big 10 movers and shakers were ticked with Warren that he kept pushing expansion beyond LA and kept talking about it.  And that was part of the reason he left.  As long as he was there, I still thought UW and Oregon happen this year.  Now it sounds like no more now.

[Valmy77 13226]

What? We are playing Wyoming next year?

Well that's weird.

[Hank Chinaski 6315]

5 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Gotcha, then you’re missing Nebraska too.

Sometimes I think about how Mack Brown (of all people) single-handedly destroyed that program and I chuckle to myself.

[Hagbard Celine 10864]

dr. tom destroyed that program

[camel at sea 589]

12 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I think Big 12 will still try to poach a couple of PAC schools.

If the PAC deal is almost entirely on Amazon (that's what the reporting on that has said so far), all bets are off as to how that plays out.  Viewers won't be switching apps / changing their TV input to find PAC games.  That's too inconvenient when you can keep the interface on a superior game from one of the other power conferences  It took years for cfb fans to demonstrate a willingness to merely change the channel to FS1 and that did not require changing the viewing interface on the TV.  So an Amazon deal basically condemns PAC members to a massive exposure hit.  I can't imagine Oregon would be okay with being buried on Amazon.  Arizona has already done legwork with their local media getting their fans onboard with switching conferences. 

All of that said, the PAC media rights talk got quiet after the "all in with Amazon" stories a while back.  My guess is that the feedback from the member schools was far from positive.  But if their alternative is better exposure (via ESPN) but making less money than the Big 12, that might ultimately leave them getting poached, too.

[HornsofBevo 122]

I think if what people are assuming is true and the big ten is done now that Warren is gone then you have to go aggressively after the best assets left from the PAC. The Big 12 would have to sell Oregon and Washington on the fact that with there being no Big ten option now, they will most likely be capped at making in the low 30’s for a tv deal that last longer than they want and will lead to less exposure on Amazon hurting their brands overall. By joining the 12 and adding two to four other schools, the Big 12 teams could negotiate a deal for the add on teams and eventually get to 40-50 a year payouts which would narrow the gap between the Sec and B1G making them the unquestioned 3 of the big 3. Add Arizona, Colorado for sure and then 2 more from Utah, ASU and San Diego state if you think getting them will bring in the souther California market. 

[BachelorTrek 2975]

2 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

dr. tom destroyed that program

And then salted the earth on his way out like the roman legions of old.

[BurntOrange&White 39932]

5 hours ago, camel at sea said:

If the PAC deal is almost entirely on Amazon (that's what the reporting on that has said so far), all bets are off as to how that plays out.  Viewers won't be switching apps / changing their TV input to find PAC games.  That's too inconvenient when you can keep the interface on a superior game from one of the other power conferences  It took years for cfb fans to demonstrate a willingness to merely change the channel to FS1 and that did not require changing the viewing interface on the TV.  So an Amazon deal basically condemns PAC members to a massive exposure hit.  I can't imagine Oregon would be okay with being buried on Amazon.  Arizona has already done legwork with their local media getting their fans onboard with switching conferences. 

All of that said, the PAC media rights talk got quiet after the "all in with Amazon" stories a while back.  My guess is that the feedback from the member schools was far from positive.  But if their alternative is better exposure (via ESPN) but making less money than the Big 12, that might ultimately leave them getting poached, too.

That's my thoughts exactly and that Amazon deal just seems so bad for pulling in numbers.

NFL viewership is already seeing this effect.

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2023/01/nfl-ratings-season-decline-cbs-fox-nbc-hit-highs/#:~:text=The 2022-23 NFL regular,linear TV to Amazon Prime.

 

Now add in a regional based college football conference in a region that doesn't love football as much as others and it's a recipe for shit viewership. 

 

I know they said they would also work with a network to have a primetime like game on weekly but you're alienating the majority of the conference for a 2 teams a week seems crazy.

 

I believe someone said in this thread earlier it's essentially their current pac 12 network but on steroids. 

[bolverk 29672]

6 hours ago, camel at sea said:

If the PAC deal is almost entirely on Amazon (that's what the reporting on that has said so far), all bets are off as to how that plays out.  Viewers won't be switching apps / changing their TV input to find PAC games.  That's too inconvenient when you can keep the interface on a superior game from one of the other power conferences  It took years for cfb fans to demonstrate a willingness to merely change the channel to FS1 and that did not require changing the viewing interface on the TV.  So an Amazon deal basically condemns PAC members to a massive exposure hit.  I can't imagine Oregon would be okay with being buried on Amazon.  Arizona has already done legwork with their local media getting their fans onboard with switching conferences. 

All of that said, the PAC media rights talk got quiet after the "all in with Amazon" stories a while back.  My guess is that the feedback from the member schools was far from positive.  But if their alternative is better exposure (via ESPN) but making less money than the Big 12, that might ultimately leave them getting poached, too.

 

49 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

That's my thoughts exactly and that Amazon deal just seems so bad for pulling in numbers.

NFL viewership is already seeing this effect.

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2023/01/nfl-ratings-season-decline-cbs-fox-nbc-hit-highs/#:~:text=The 2022-23 NFL regular,linear TV to Amazon Prime.

 

Now add in a regional based college football conference in a region that doesn't love football as much as others and it's a recipe for shit viewership. 

 

I know they said they would also work with a network to have a primetime like game on weekly but you're alienating the majority of the conference for a 2 teams a week seems crazy.

 

I believe someone said in this thread earlier it's essentially their current pac 12 network but on steroids. 

I dunno. Anecdotal account here, but as an early cord cutter since 2009, I've been able to watch just about any game I've wanted by streaming from my laptop for the past several years. Gimme more sports on Hulu or Amazon, and I'm extra happy because I don't have to find some sketchy stream.

Don't know what the numbers might be, but I sure don't feel like I'm alone. So, the audience might be there even if they haven't been accounted for in the past, especially going forward as fewer young'uns want to see, or pay, the cable guy fuck my ex-wife in the ass between 10am & 2pm or which ever time he's scheduled to arrive.

In other words, I could see a streaming model from an internet platform being highly lucrative, but that's just me.

[DCLonghorn 244]

6 hours ago, camel at sea said:

If the PAC deal is almost entirely on Amazon (that's what the reporting on that has said so far), all bets are off as to how that plays out.  Viewers won't be switching apps / changing their TV input to find PAC games.  That's too inconvenient when you can keep the interface on a superior game from one of the other power conferences  It took years for cfb fans to demonstrate a willingness to merely change the channel to FS1 and that did not require changing the viewing interface on the TV.

There is truth here. Other than CFB, I watch only one sport/league where I will tune in to most any game that's on. All games (no blackouts) are aired on one cable channel, a broadcast channel, and a streaming app. We will routinely watch a slightly less interesting match up that is on YTTV (better interface/controls/DVR/lead in, etc) than switch over to the app and have to hunt around to find the game, often starting late, or missing pregame, etc. And there can be a better game on from another league on ESPN+. We watch the lesser game on cable/broadcast. This has more to do with interface than which service has the rights, but I can't imagine any casual fan turning off an SEC/B1G/ND match up on TV to go hunting around in Amazon Prime to find a game. We've become more of a fan of this league as a whole beyond our favorite team because it's all available and easy to find.

There's a lot of rhetoric that B1G did it right emulating the NFL in spreading out their rights. I think the SEC did better by moving everything to one family across multiple verticals. I won't be checking NBC/Fox/CBS/B1G every window... I'll likely just leave it on a Mouse channel and stay there. Slive/Sankey play/ed chess. Warren played catch up.

There is a wide gulf in viewing habits between rabid fans that will seek out their team and the casual fan that might tune in if then conditions are right. The latter is where the money is as the rabid fans tend to be a consistent number/range coinciding with how well the team is doing. The more splintered CFB viewing becomes, the more lazy loyalty to the channel you are already on comes into play.

Amazon NFL is a bit apples to oranges as that is an exclusive window that CFB won't have. Amazon PAC won't have that. If Amazon creates a PAC hub where you can easily see all games in a day and the league gets a premiere match up or two on a broadcast channel (but who?), That may be a good move for them.

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

21 minutes ago, DCLonghorn said:

There's a lot of rhetoric that B1G did it right emulating the NFL in spreading out their rights. I think the SEC did better by moving everything to one family across multiple verticals. I won't be checking NBC/Fox/CBS/B1G every window... I'll likely just leave it on a Mouse channel and stay there. Slive/Sankey play/ed chess. Warren played catch up.

There is a wide gulf in viewing habits between rabid fans that will seek out their team and the casual fan that might tune in if then conditions are right. The latter is where the money is as the rabid fans tend to be a consistent number/range coinciding with how well the team is doing. The more splintered CFB viewing becomes, the more lazy loyalty to the channel you are already on comes into play.

I don’t know about that. Take your YTTV example as, well, an example. Its interface tracks recently watched channels and provides much better access than the typical “previous channel” on most providers or multi-tuner option on satellite.

I can tune to NBC… but I don’t, because fuck ND… or Fox, CBS, B1G, SEC, ABC, ESPN and then with 2 clicks on my remote I can see what’s playing on any of those channels and tune directly to it. It’s pretty slick compared to how broken the rest of the YTTV interface seems to me (my kingdom for a better way to jump around in the guide or even a way to assign channel numbers).

Edited January 13, 2023 by Doc Daneeka

[DCLonghorn 244]

21 minutes ago, Doc Daneeka said:

I don’t know about that. Take your YTTV example as, well, an example. Its interface tracks recently watched channels and provides much better access than the typical “previous channel” on most providers or multi-tuner option on satellite.

I can tune to NBC… but I don’t, because fuck ND… or Fox, CBS, B1G, SEC, ABC, ESPN and then with 2 clicks on my remote I can see what’s playing on any of those channels and tune directly to it. It’s pretty slick compared to how broken the rest of the YTTV interface seems to me (my kingdom for a better way to jump around in the guide or even a way to assign channel numbers).

I don't disagree with anything you said, but you either missed my point or I didn't make it well. I'm saying casual viewers/people not looking for a specific game will stay on YTTV as you described, or whatever their primary viewing platform is, instead of popping over to Amazon Prime, or Peacock, or Apple, or ESPN+ to see what games might be on (unless they are seeking out their team or an amazing matchup they know is on that platform). I'm staying on YTTV with a dozen channels with CFB which is much easier than launching each app with a half dozen clicks at least to see what games are on. I know my CFB team and conference will have the most interesting games on networks available on YTTV. I'm not heading to E+ for a Iowa State or Oklahoma match up...as it's likely not the best of match ups or it'd be on E, E2, EN, ABC, Fox, FS1, FS2, etc.

Although we are making the same point, bolverk just pointed out the opposite in his viewing habits/preference. I guess those that don't have a cable replacement/old school cable/satellite who are already bouncing around streaming apps, it's not that big a deal. Just keep all those tabs open! (2/3rds of Americans still have traditional cable/satellite...which does not include those of us that replaced that with a streaming cable replacement service like YTTV/Hulu/Fubo/etc).

I check this website ...https://www.livesportsontv.com/ to see what's on and I tend to ignore a decent game that is streamed on an app (on my TV) over a lesser game that is on a YTTV channel. Right now I see a game I'd like to watch on Paramount+, and another, lesser game between smaller teams at the same time on a cable channel. I'm going with the cable channel as the viewing experience is better, I can DVR it/rewind or pause as I'm watching, they have a pregame/post game show, and the game on cable won't start 3 minutes after the game starts (which is not uncommon with streaming games). This plays out every Sat in the fall as well. Unless I'm invested in a specific game somehow, I'm not heading to a streaming service over YTTV...yet. I'm sure the UIs will get there eventually. 

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

1 minute ago, DCLonghorn said:

I don't disagree with anything you said, but you either missed my point or I didn't make it well. I'm saying casual viewers/people not looking for a specific game will stay on YTTV as you described, or whatever their primary viewing platform is, instead of popping over to Amazon Prime, or Peacock, or Apple, or ESPN+ to see what games might be on (unless they are seeking out their team or an amazing matchup they know is on that platform). I'm staying on YTTV with a dozen channels with CFB which is much easier than launching each app with a half dozen clicks at least to see what games are on. I know my CFB team and conference will have the most interesting games on networks available on YTTV. I'm not heading to E+ for a Iowa State or Oklahoma match up...as it's likely not the best of match ups or it'd be on E, E2, EN, ABC, Fox, FS1, FS2, etc.

Although we are making the same point, bolverk just pointed out the opposite in his viewing habits/preference. I guess those that don't have a cable replacement/old school cable/satellite who are already bouncing around streaming apps, it's not that big a deal. Just keep all those tabs open! (2/3rds of Americans still have traditional cable/satellite...which does not include those of us that replaced that with a streaming cable replacement service like YTTV/Hulu/Fubo/etc).

I check this website ...https://www.livesportsontv.com/ to see what's on and I tend to ignore a decent game that is streamed on an app (on my TV) over a lesser game that is on a YTTV channel. Right now I see a game I'd like to watch on Paramount+, and another, lesser game between smaller teams at the same time on a cable channel. I'm going with the cable channel as the viewing experience is better, I can DVR it/rewind or pause as I'm watching, they have a pregame/post game show, and the game on cable won't start 3 minutes after the game starts (which is not uncommon with streaming games). This plays out every Sat in the fall as well. Unless I'm invested in a specific game somehow, I'm not heading to a streaming service over YTTV...yet. I'm sure the UIs will get there eventually. 

Yeah, I thought your point was “I’m just sticking with the mouse” not “I’m just sticking with my primary source of content.” You specifically mentioned the former. You said you wouldn’t be checking channels that are explicitly on, for example, YTTV because they aren’t the mouse, not because they’re on other apps.  

I’m really not interested in flipping between apps, either. I know that each app has its reasons to avoid aggregation, but an app that could aggregate, say, live feeds across all your authenticated apps would great. But I get it’s not happening, which is, imo, probably the biggest downside to the multiple streaming sources.  

[Thiefery 4995]

If the big 12 added current pac schools, they wouldn't be getting the same cut as the schools in the conference now would receive. At least that's what I remembered in the details of the new Big12 media deal. Espn would pay it's share but Fox wouldn't. 

[BurntOrange&White 39932]

1 hour ago, Thiefery said:

If the big 12 added current pac schools, they wouldn't be getting the same cut as the schools in the conference now would receive. At least that's what I remembered in the details of the new Big12 media deal. Espn would pay it's share but Fox wouldn't. 

It would have been pretty stupid to not have a renegotiation clause if you added more members.

[thunderlounge 7832]

Wasn’t there also something about escalators for certain schools joining, or something to that effect?

[Francisco 2.0 32392]

Related:

 

 

 

[BrazilHorn 6605]

Just such a joke Texas will be back in this shitty conf next season. 
Longest breakup ever. 
Can’t OU have a bake sale or something to raise the money for buyout? 

[Nueces River Rat 5538]

5 minutes ago, BrazilHorn said:

Just such a joke Texas will be back in this shitty conf next season. 
Longest breakup ever. 
Can’t OU have a bake sale or something to raise the money for buyout? 

Well.... If it's inevitable,  I just hope we get to play Tech at home and absolutely dog stomp them.    Tech fans have been almost aggy like since they beat us and then topped that off with a win over Ole Miss who they seem to forget lost four of their last five games.  Beating TCU on the way out would be a good thing too.  

[Saint Austin 745]

Just now, Nueces River Rat said:

Well.... If it's inevitable,  I just hope we get to play Tech at home and absolutely dog stomp them.    Tech fans have been almost aggy like since they beat us and then topped that off with a win over Ole Miss who they seem to forget lost four of their last five games.  Beating TCU on the way out would be a good thing too.  

In my experience, Tech fans have always been more insufferable. The chip on their shoulder dwarfs anything coming out of College Station.