The PAC 10 expansion groundswell

[Art Vandelay]

Eddie makes a very good point. The only question I have is: Who would ESPN be bidding against to get the P12? Other potential suitors like Apple or Amazon do not seem 1) very likely or 2) willing to pay more than a lowered ESPN offer

[Moliere]

Maybe this is why the B1G doesn't care about ESPN pulling out....


https://9to5mac.com/2022/08/09/apple...-rights-apple/

But no mention of the PAC 12-2? I thought they were banking on a streaming partner to give them the big money.

Honestly, if any conference has their tier 1 rights on only a streaming platform, they are in trouble. Way too many people are not on those platforms and it’s just easier to turn on the tv and pick the game you want to watch by switching the channel than it is to navigate through streaming apps. For a game I really care about, I’ll go find it but the majority of games I watch on Saturday I’m just flipping through ESPN, cbs, nbc etc to find why I want to watch.

[beefytee]

I know that the content it fragmented, but more people subscribed to streaming services than do to cable tv at this point. And the day that ESPN offers their channels directly without a cable subscription will be the day that cable officially dies.

Honestly I think NBC has approached things correctly with their Peacock offering, they shut down OLN/Versus/NBCSN and have had things like the Olympics available to stream online. They were still available on OTA and cable channels, but also available live and on demand in their streaming service.

[Uncle Ted]

Eddie makes a very good point. The only question I have is: Who would ESPN be bidding against to get the P12? Other potential suitors like Apple or Amazon do not seem 1) very likely or 2) willing to pay more than a lowered ESPN offer

Embedded Tweet

Embedded Tweet

[UtahJazzFan88]

I’d like to see SDSU, & UNLV (could be an underrated team for the league and if they’re bad, then they’re just Tulane) in the PAC-12.

I think the Utes & the PAC will stand pat.

[Uncle Ted]

I’d like to see SDSU, & UNLV (could be an underrated team for the league and if they’re bad, then they’re just Tulane) in the PAC-12.

I think the Utes & the PAC will stand pat.

Do you think SDSU & UNLV would add value to the PAC? I think SDSU could potentially add value. Don't know about UNLV. The PAC is in a tough situation right now because the Big 12 took all the teams worth adding off the table.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Do you think SDSU & UNLV would add value to the PAC? I think SDSU could potentially add value. Don't know about UNLV. The PAC is in a tough situation right now because the Big 12 took all the teams worth adding off the table.

Pshaw. SU assures us that hell will freeze over before those two pathetic loser schools get an invite to the P12.

[myboynoah]

Commissioner K's solution to the no-SoCal school issue is to play some league games in LA.

This is the type of next-level thinking that the PAC needs.

[Uncle Ted]

Pshaw. SU assures us that hell will freeze over before those two pathetic loser schools get an invite to the P12.

Yeah... Didn't he also imply that the PAC would eventually become a football-less conference as well? Maybe they should merge with the WCC.

[Moliere]

Commissioner K's solution to the no-SoCal school issue is to play some league games in LA.

This is the type of next-level thinking that the PAC needs.

Colorado vs Oregon state in LA may actually draw more fans than the typical ucla home game

[Uncle Ted]

Colorado vs Oregon state in LA may actually draw more fans than the typical ucla home game

Speaking of Colorado... They have been scheduling more PAC-12(-2) executive board meetings:

Embedded Tweet

I assume they are just disclosing to the board the PAC contract options: ESPN (@ $24.5mm/school) or just putting all T1 games on the PAC12-2 network. I am sure the Australians and the Canadians will like the later option given the P12 network is available to them. My cable provider pulled the P12 network four years ago.

[Uncle Ted]

Wilner's mailbag:

Larry Scott cost the P12 about a half billion dollars with the P12 network...

By placing 400-something football games on the Pac-12 Networks over 12 years, instead of on ESPN and Fox, the conference has lost more than half a billion dollars over the contract cycle.

https://www.oregonlive.com/collegefo...outputType=amp

On expansion and survival...

First, I wouldn’t assume the Pac-12 is going to survive. That’s the most likely short-term outcome, in our opinion, but it’s not a lock.

We view survival as a 4.5-point favorite over extinction. That’s anything but an overwhelming favorite.

If the conference holds together, there’s a reasonable chance it expands to 12 teams. Why? Because of inventory demands.

On basketball...

The Big 12 is a vastly better basketball conference — arguably the best in the land these days with the past two national champions (Baylor and Kansas).

Aside from three phenomenal weeks in March ‘21, the Pac-12 has struggled on the court relative to the other Power Six leagues.

And in two years, it’s losing the one true blue blood.

[Uncle Ted]

Another mailbag... John Canzano:

[...]
Q: No matter what happens for the Oregon Ducks, unequal revenue sharing has to be part of the equation for them going forward right? — @Deafdux

A: I think the Pac-12 is exploring an incentivized payout structure for the programs that qualify the NCAA Tournament and College Football Playoff. Won’t be surprised if the conference stops the practice of splitting those postseason windfalls evenly among members and gives the bulk of the payout to the programs that earn it.
[...]
Q: On your podcast with Jon Wilner, you both said adding SDSU only is an option (11 teams). Why wouldn’t that Pac-12 want to add four-plus teams as major conferences are going to 16? — @lilcmac5

A: Ideally, you’d love to get to 16 teams and include a pile of major television markets. But let’s face it — there aren’t six great options out there right now. I’m having a difficult time finding four. But if I was forced to expand liberally, I’d do it in this order: San Diego State, SMU, UNLV, Fresno State or Boise State (pick one or both). And maybe I’d try to poach Houston from the Big 12 and get to six teams.
[...]
Q: Let’s say San Diego State is added, when would they possibly start playing Pac-12 games? — @kirkkern

A: The conference’s current media deal expires July 1 of 2024. That’s why USC and UCLA have to wait to depart to the Big Ten. San Diego State could join that same summer and play football in the 2024 season as a Pac-12 member.
[...]

https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzan...ith-pac-12-9d2

Yeah, it seems if the Pac 12-2 is going to survive long term they need to expand... but this is not going to happen with any of the teams Canzano mentioned. SU said so.

The Pac 12 trying to poach Houston from the Big 12... that's funny. Why wouldn't they try to poach BYU or TCU or Baylor instead? Oh nevermind... the Pac 12-2 is a heathen conference.

[BigFatMeanie]

I read Wilner's article but I think his conclusions are, umm..., unreliable.

Just a couple of sentences before his statement that the conference has "lost" more than half a billion dollars he states:

Granted, the weekly pick structure allows Fox and ESPN to broadcast the most valuable football games; USC-Notre Dame and Washington-Oregon are never on the Pac-12 Networks. But you can see where we’re headed. By placing 400-something football games on the Pac-12 Networks over 12 years, instead of on ESPN and Fox, the conference has lost more than half a billion dollars over the contract cycle. In other words: As the Pac-12 negotiates its new media contracts, it will include a huge package of undervalued football inventory.

Wilner's faulty assumptions are 1) thinking that ESPN and Fox would have put more inventory on their networks and 2) that the contract would have paid the same for that inventory as for the actual games that ESPN/FOX did select and televise.

For assumption #1 to be valid, both ESPN and Fox would need to air an average of 1.25 additional PAC-12 games apiece each week, for every single week (13 weeks) of the season, for every year of the 12 year contract. Also, you can't "lose" money you never had in the first place. Even if ESPN and Fox wanted/needed that much additional inventory, the assumption that the additional inventory is worth the same as the inventory that ESPN/FOX selected is completely without evidence.

Wilner concludes based on his two faulty assumptions that the PAC-12 has "a huge package of undervalued football inventory". While true that they have a huge package of inventory, the value of that inventory is only determined by what the market was and is willing to pay. One might argue that the PAC-12 has a huge package of correctly-valued football inventory based on what the market was willing to pay.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Wilner is giving this everything he has. Bless his heart.