The Pac-12 participation thread.

[Coach McGuirk]

We're not horrified.

I wouldn't think you should be, from ute stars original post he made it sound like the 4 cable companies took ownership, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

[Coach McGuirk]

I don't think many Cougar fans will admit this, but I am so effing jealous that you guys are in the PAC-12 it makes me sick.

On the other hand....we get 2-for-1s with Notre Dame, BITCHES!!

haha.

Don't flatter yourself, it's been admitted on the board since day one.

[kccougar]

Estimates are that the network(s) will bring in an additional 7 million per year per school?

Do you have a link (asked in a non-smack talk way). I had heard that individual teams would not be receiving additional revenue.

[Babs]

Do you have a link (asked in a non-smack talk way). I had heard that individual teams would not be receiving additional revenue.

I have no idea, but a glance through google news suggests that the terms have not been finalized.

[Portland Ute]

Do you have a link (asked in a non-smack talk way). I had heard that individual teams would not be receiving additional revenue.

I apologize for taking my news from the SL Tribune. They reported the 7 million/year/school.

That was based on comments from about a month ago that Scott believed that the PAC12 Network would be worth an additional 1 billion (IIRC, he said he thought the term would be 7-10 years).

As I've read further this evening, I don't think it is clear yet how much the immediate worth will be.

Perhaps I jumped the gun, but it was based on a SL Trib article. (I know...never trust SL media.)

As I've perused Twitter and the news this evening, it appears that nobody really knows the details yet. Some are saying that there won't be an immediate payoff but the big benefits will roll in long term and/or via the advertising monies collected from the networks. Wilner (I believe) said that they might have given up some revenue from outlets in order to keep control of the content, distribution, etc and also to gain greater distribution.

From what I have gathered this evening, we probably won't know for a while. Nothing has been finalized or announced regarding negotiations with satellite providers or internet sources. I suppose we'll hear something from DTV, Dish, AppleTV, etc down the line.

I was encouraged as I read in several places that the Networks will be available on electronic devices as long as (in Scott's words) the user is authenticated.

For some reason I believe Scott when he says that. Dave Checketts didn't have me convinced.

Interestingly, it seems that Checketts had a pretty good idea of what the future was going to be when he started CSTV back before the mtn.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

I have no idea, but a glance through google news suggests that the terms have not been finalized.

Your Sooners could have been a part of that deal. Instead you decided to swear your undying allegiance to your master Texas. They are splitting up the money from their thing pretty well though right?

[Babs]

Your Sooners could have been a part of that deal. Instead you decided to swear your undying allegiance to your master Texas. They are splitting up the money from their thing pretty well though right?

lol. To call your trolling attempts lame would be an affront to the crippled.

[LA Ute]

I apologize for taking my news from the SL Tribune. They reported the 7 million/year/school.

That was based on comments from about a month ago that Scott believed that the PAC12 Network would be worth an additional 1 billion (IIRC, he said he thought the term would be 7-10 years).

As I've read further this evening, I don't think it is clear yet how much the immediate worth will be.

Perhaps I jumped the gun, but it was based on a SL Trib article. (I know...never trust SL media.)

As I've perused Twitter and the news this evening, it appears that nobody really knows the details yet. Some are saying that there won't be an immediate payoff but the big benefits will roll in long term and/or via the advertising monies collected from the networks. Wilner (I believe) said that they might have given up some revenue from outlets in order to keep control of the content, distribution, etc and also to gain greater distribution.

From what I have gathered this evening, we probably won't know for a while. Nothing has been finalized or announced regarding negotiations with satellite providers or internet sources. I suppose we'll hear something from DTV, Dish, AppleTV, etc down the line.

I was encouraged as I read in several places that the Networks will be available on electronic devices as long as (in Scott's words) the user is authenticated.

For some reason I believe Scott when he says that. Dave Checketts didn't have me convinced.

Interestingly, it seems that Checketts had a pretty good idea of what the future was going to be when he started CSTV back before the mtn.

According to Wilner, Scott said financial gain wasn't a driving factor in the deal; exposure and "superserving fans" were:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/07/27/pac-12-tv-network-details-from-the-scotttime-warner-teleconference/#more-20568

[OrangeUte]

According to Wilner, Scott said financial gain wasn't a driving factor in the deal; exposure and "superserving fans" were:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/college...ce/#more-20568

So interesting! Larry Scott seems to "get" college sports and I like how he is able to make it about the money while still paying attention to the student-athlete part of the equation. He is creating a balance - or maybe just giving it the appearance of balance between the lucrative side of college athletics and the inspiring/pageantry side. Nice job mr. commissioner!

[LA Ute]

This is an interesting take from a WSU-oriented writer:

Finally, Paul Wulff can walk into a recruit's home anywhere in the nation and tell them every single game they play will be televised (maybe not on basic cable, but somewhere in the premium sports package). This is huge for recruiting, and huge for differentiating ourselves from smaller conference schools like Boise State.

I hadn't thought about the recruiting angle. BYU will benefit in the same way from its ESPN deal.

And these interesting thoughts:

There's a lot of air time to be filled by a 24 hour network, and college football only fills 3-4 hours on 12 weeks of the year. The Pac-12 can go a number of different ways with the downtime. We talked about Olympic sports, but beyond that there is the possibility of even more. The NCAA is mulling the possibility of allowing prep games featuring the region's top recruits on the conference airwaves. While I think (and hope) they will stop a school-specific entity like the Longhorn Network from broadcasting their own recruits, I don't believe the NCAA should get in the way of a network owned and operated by an entire conference. If Bellevue-Skyline gets broadcast on Pac-12 Washington, does UW benefit from the recruiting bump any more than WSU? Doubtful.

There is also the possibility of (gasp) academics being broadcast on the Pac-12 Network. Yes, colleges teach things in addition to having men put on pads and hit each other. The Pac-12 can flaunt its academic superiority, which is good for both potential recruits as well as the viewer who is actually interested in the academics. WSU can give love to its finest programs and faculty, and snatch a lot more viewers than KWSU currently reaches.

Other ideas stretch as far as the imagination. Reality is big right now, and don't tell me you wouldn't watch a Hard Knocks-style documentary of WSU football training camp. Fringe sports. Heck, even club sports could be fair game (rugby, anyone?). Classic games. Interviews. 30 minutes of nothing but a loop of this clip over and over again? I'd watch it. The possibilites are endless, and the Pac-12 can always change its mind if they find something doesn't draw viewers. No matter what, it's going to be positive for WSU. With the regional network structure, WSU only has to share airtime with Washington, and I'd have to believe the Pac-12 office will at least try to avoid playing favorites within each pair of rivals.

[WashingtonCoug]

[URL="http://www.cougcenter.com/2011/7/27/2299628/pac-12-network-what-it-means-for-wsu"]While I think (and hope) they will stop a school-specific entity like the Longhorn Network from broadcasting their own recruits, I don't believe the NCAA should get in the way of a network owned and operated by an entire conference. If Bellevue-Skyline gets broadcast on Pac-12 Washington, does UW benefit from the recruiting bump any more than WSU? Doubtful.

Ha! So while it's wrong for only one team to have an advantage over everyone else, it would be ok if two teams have an advantage over everyone else. That's sound logic.

[Babs]

Ha! So while it's wrong for only one team to have an advantage over everyone else, it would be ok if two teams have an advantage over everyone else. That's sound logic.

Perhaps he's implying that no one outside of the Evergreen State is interested in local recruits.

[Surfah]

This is an interesting take from a WSU-oriented writer:



I hadn't thought about the recruiting angle. BYU will benefit in the same way from its ESPN deal.

And these interesting thoughts:

His ideas that stretch the imagination really don't. You still need people to watch. And most people aren't going to be interested in academics or these peripheral fringe sports. There's a reason that the Big 10 Network primarily loops old games almost 24/7.

[LA Ute]

His ideas that stretch the imagination really don't. You still need people to watch. And most people aren't going to be interested in academics or these peripheral fringe sports. There's a reason that the Big 10 Network primarily loops old games almost 24/7.

He's a WSU fan and that shows. I just think his ideas are interesting. Personally, I'm hoping for "Law and Order" re-runs.

[WashingtonCoug]

Perhaps he's implying that no one outside of the Evergreen State is interested in local recruits.

That's a good point. I've never seen a decent recruit out of Washington... especially quarterbacks.