AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Larry Scott & the Pac-12 need to do something
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
This is an accurate and short enough sound bite that it might start to penetrate the university presidents' (i.e. Larry Scott's bosses) awareness if they hear it a few times.
FWIW, the 1. Bundesliga (top division in German football) is a better on field product than the PAC 12. Strangely enough, the ages of many 1BL players is similar to American college football because German clubs like to bring homegrown talent through to their first teams.
This issue really is about money. Revenues let schools upgrade facilities and hire better coaches. The top of the P12 has some very good coaches. The rest of the pack might not be good enough to be analysts for Alabama.
This issue really is about money. Revenues let schools upgrade facilities and hire better coaches. The top of the P12 has some very good coaches. The rest of the pack might not be good enough to be analysts for Alabama.
It's also not true. I'm not here to defend Larry Scott, something needs to change, but how about we argue with facts. It appears, through googling, as I'm not very familiar with Bundesliga broadcast rights, that they appear on Fox Sports 1. A network Pac-12 football regularly appears on. Pac-12 football also appears on Fox broadcast network, as far as my quick googling said, Bundesliga does not. Pac-12 football also appears on ESPN along with the Pac-12 network. Bundesliga does not appear on ESPN and does not have it's own network.
EDIT: Apparently some bundesliga shows up on network fox. http://worldsoccertalk.com/2017/08/...-tv-schedule-revealed-first-month-new-season/
It was more of a pithy remark, but since I know how to use google.
"The Bundesliga season consists of 306 matches played from August to May. In addition to the 58 games telecast on FOX Sports 1, 60 are earmarked for FOX Sports 2, and the remainder offered via FOX Soccer Plus. On the Spanish-language side, FOX Deportes is set to televise 105 matches. Additionally, every game televised on FOX Sports 1 or FOX Sports 2 is being streamed live on desktop computers via FOXSoccer.com as well as the FOX Sports GO mobile app. All FOX Soccer Plus matches are being streamed on the FOX Soccer 2 GO app."
The point being that from an accessibility standpoint, the Bundesliga is, in fact, more accessible to more Americans.
The ability to watch every Bundesliga game is already included in more Americans cable subscription packages than is the ability to watch every Pac-12 football game.
Sorry @torerobuff the German soccer league does, in fact, have better distribution than Pac-12 football. I'm not happy about that, but it's an accurate statement: more people can watch a random match between Hamburg and Dortmund than can watch CU-WSU.
Nicely put. This is the point that most people fail to recognize when we get on the subject of the Pac-12 Network's failings. Yes, the teams make less money - and that is unacceptable. But it isn't the only issue. It cannot be discounted that teams can't look a recruit's parent in the eye and tell them they can watch all of their son's games if they live east of Denver. How about trying to drum up support and donations from Alumni if they live in the Midwest or out East. Distribution and accessibility matters.
Who hired those ADs? The Pac-12 Presidents/Chancellors? I have to say that they (outside of CU & Utah) are a reason for the product of the Pac-12. It's easy to blame Larry Scott but the desire to have strong football & basketball teams aren't at the level of the Big 12 presidents.
Agree as I mentioned in an earlier post. College football is not a central part of the culture in the PAC12 footprint.
The balance to this though is that the PAC12 states have larger and more affluent populations. Tapping a smaller % of the population should be able to generate comparable revenues.
SEC State populations as of 2017
Alabama 4.9 million
Arkansas 3.0 million
Florida 20.5 million
Georgia 10.5 million
Kentucky 4.4 million
Louisiana 4.5 million
Mississippi 3.1 million
Missouri 6.5 million
South Carolina .8 million
Tennessee 6.9 million
Texas 27.7 million (but mostly a Big XII state)
Most of these states fall near the bottom of the list for income and wealth as well.
PAC 12 States, most of which are in the upper levels in terms of income.
Arizona 7.0 Million
California 39.6 Million
Colorado 5.7 Million
Oregon 4.1 Million
Utah 3.1 Million
Washington 7.2 Million
SEC footprint (not counting Texas which is almost all BigXII is about 58 Million, PAC 12 states about 72 Million not counting adjoining states that do not have P5 level football like Nevada.
The PAC should be able to with better management and marketing generate revenues closer to the SEC (and B1G) than they do even without being as culturally significant.
We have posters on this board who still haven't canceled DirectTV for a provider that has the Pac12 Network.
Edit: And yes, I'm calling you out.
Edit: And yes, I'm calling you out.
We have posters on this board who won't go see the Buffs 30 minutes away in Denver. We have posters on this board who complain about games being too cold despite living in Colorado. We have posters on this board who won't seek out a bar that has the Pac-12 network when there are plenty of them in Colorado. The list goes on.
Yep. And these are the hardest core fans. DirecTV was smart.
I don't know if you are trying to deflect from your weak arguments, or if you are being obtuse. This isn't about fans in Denver (or in the "footprint"), if you are a CU fan and you haven't made the switch in your home, that's on you. But are you also blaming sports bars that live and die with the NFL for not switching?
This has nothing to do with availability in Colorado. Do you really think we can move the needle if all 17 of us die hard Buff fans make the switch? This isn't a failure of the fans, it is a failure of the conference's leadership. If you think otherwise, you just can't be helped.
They were pointing out that even many "die hard" CU fans don't care enough about CU football/basketball to do what's necessary to subscribe to the P12 Network or support the program financially, so you can bet the casual fan isn't doing anything either. Nobody is saying Colorado fans are moving the needle one way or the other; this applies to all Pac states. As nik said, DirecTV knew they had all the leverage because they knew the people in the western region don't care enough about college football (or sports in general) to switch.
The casual fans in the SEC/ACC/BIG/Big 12 make the die hards in the Pac look apathetic to the sport.
Do you understand how stupid this sounds?
There is a proclivity of some on this site to simply dismiss any claim that the Pac-12 is poorly run or that its network has failed with: “How dare you complain? If you were a true fan like me, you would switch to (name your tv provider).” This argument has nothing to do with die hard CU fans. I have had access to the network since day one. I guess that should preclude me from complaining about how terrible the conference is run.
Oh FFS, nobody is talking about CU fans only. Please learn to think critically about the context of what is being said and how it applies to the bigger picture. Or, just re read my previous reply to you, as I've already done all of that for you.
BlackNGold
Club Member
Now we are into who is a better fan. I am sure that fixes things. I do not have Pac 12 network and I don't care. I do have the SEC network, The big 10 network, the Longhorn Network, CBS Sports, Fox Sports, the NFL Network, The NBA network, MLB network, NBC Sports network and the Olympic channel. I did not ask for any of those they are just there. Seems like most sports networks know how to get a distribution deal set up to access their fans. It is backward thinking that fans have cater to PAC 12 network - the PAC 12 network needs to cater to the fans otherwise they will go the way of MySpace. PAC12 Network is not easy to access for many fans so who do you think is going to lose out.
And yes I do not like going to a night game in mid november when it is cold and windy. And I must not of been alone in that feeling since there were less than 15K fans in the stands after halftime. So I am sure that is the fans fault. Paying big bucks for a miserable experience is a sure way to fan loyalty.
And yes I do not like going to a night game in mid november when it is cold and windy. And I must not of been alone in that feeling since there were less than 15K fans in the stands after halftime. So I am sure that is the fans fault. Paying big bucks for a miserable experience is a sure way to fan loyalty.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
This thread has gotten out of control. Getting back to the centerpiece of this discussion........Let's get several things clear-Larry Scott is the one who thinks 7pm or later local time football kicks are a great idea. Larry Scott thinks its a better idea to own 100% of his conference's TV network. Larry Scott is the one who told Tad "Hey, knock it off" when Tad had the gall to speak out about the fact that 25% of the programs in this conference are involved to varying extents in the FBI investigation in college basketball (including the two teams who played in the tournament championship). Larry Scott is the person who thinks Friday night college football games are a great idea (We're the P5 league who plays our CCG on Friday!). See the correlation here? Larry has to go. His ideas are not working and he won't admit he's screwed the pooch. This guy is the worst active commissioner in college sports, and he's down there with Dan Beebe historically. This conference needs to buy him out and get somebody who understands how to negotiate TV deals and fix what's wrong with the basketball in this league. I'd rather be in the Big 12 than this league right now.
It is a failure of PAC12 fans.
Why do we have Nebraska bars in Colorado, in California, etc.? Because their fans voted with their dollars. Get a neighborhood bar that is a little slow on a Saturday afternoon and show them that hanging up a school flag and putting the TV channel on that schools games with the expectation that they would have 20+ fans there drinking and eating for 3 hours. It isn't a stretch that the bar would pay to get that channel.
Not Sure
Sets low bar, barely exceeds it.
If I was Larry Scott, I’d try to re-brand the P12 network as a college sports network and sign deals with the ACC and the Big 12 to cover their tier 2 games. Not tier 3, tier 2. I’d offer it as a partnership with those schools. Basically, instead of partnering with the ESPNs of the world, I’d partner with other conferences and sell shares to the member schools accordingly.
Every Saturday would start with a “Gameday”type studio show, followed by the early ACC game, the mid day B 12 game, and the afternoon P12 game, with the recap afterwards. The partnership would extend to other sport broadcasting as well for winter and spring sports. Let DTV avoid carrying that network. We wouodn5 own as much of it as we do, but we would still have a significan5 ownership interest and our partners would be other schools, not media companies. This would provide scheduling certainty and national exposure to every member school.
Every Saturday would start with a “Gameday”type studio show, followed by the early ACC game, the mid day B 12 game, and the afternoon P12 game, with the recap afterwards. The partnership would extend to other sport broadcasting as well for winter and spring sports. Let DTV avoid carrying that network. We wouodn5 own as much of it as we do, but we would still have a significan5 ownership interest and our partners would be other schools, not media companies. This would provide scheduling certainty and national exposure to every member school.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
I think this is as much a football problem as anything-we don't seem to have trouble getting our basketball games on ESPN or FOX-Of our 30 regular season basketball games, we played on networks that were owned by FOX or ESPN 9 times. Arizona played on ESPN/FOX owned networks 13 times, and CBS once. There are several things we can do ourselves here-
1. Sell a stake of P12N to a partner. The Big 10 got preferential treatment from FOX because of the investment they have in the BTN. Get a Turner or CBS involved.
2. Everybody has to play at least one power 5 opponent in the OOC every year. Oregon and Washington State do not this season. Make exceptions to that rule, as well. For the sake of this post, BYU is considered a Power 5 opponent. For that matter, I'd offer them an arrangement along the lines of what Notre Dame has with the ACC. We hook them up with 4-5 P12 opponents a year and they are considered a Pac 12 team in the bowl selection process outside of the CFP. They usually play 2-4 games a year against our league as it is, and wind up complementing that with games against G5 leagues and FBS independents not named Notre Dame. Thus, we're probably asking 1-2 teams a year to replace an existing OOC game for a game with BYU, which isn't that much. We're getting additional access to ESPN and better bowl tie ins (they travel really well) by doing this, and this type of thing would allow them to basically remain independent in football while keeping everything else in the WCC, which doesn't make them as vulnerable if Gonzaga does leave that league.
3. Streaming-Use the NFL's deals with Yahoo or whoever they've used to stream one of their London games a year recently as a model. Give google, facebook, or whoever a game a week-That game must kick at 1:30 PM local time, and the Pac 12 networks will produce it, supply a TV crew, and simulcast it on the relevant regional networks.
Last edited:
I've been to Colorado bars in Boston and New York City. I've only ever driven through Nebraska at 100mph (and that's too slow if you ask me), so I don't know or care if there are Colorado bars there.
But there ARE Colorado bars around the US. It's not just the Nebraska fans that get around. And frankly it's easier to have one Nebraska bar in a city. When there are 500 bars in Boulder, it would be pretty odd to have all of them as CU gameday bars.
Last edited:
jkppkjjkp
Well-Known Member
I have worked at bars in a moderate to large east coast city, almost every single bar carries DirecTV, primarily because of NFL Sunday Ticket.
Offering to show up with 20 CU fans would not make it worth it for any of the bar owners to switch cable providers and abandon having access to every NFL fanbase.
If the owner only needed to pay an additional subscription fee for a given channel, then we'd have the option to have Pac12 bars.
There is a bar that I go to regularly that hosts Australian Rules Football events, because you can pay for a streaming service and get the games. Short of switching away from DirecTV I don't know how these bars can cater to Pac 12 fans.
And one thing the Pac-12 is very well positioned for is the eastern sports bars. Pac-12 After Dark gives them live football & MBB content until closing time on Friday and Saturday nights.
Those 8pm PT kickoffs actually fit a market need and could be a thing a sports bar can promote if the Pac-12 does them as "EVENTS".
This isn't a hard fix. Allow that Pac-12 Network to be an over the top subscription. Ya I know it will involve some renegotiating of the current TV deals, but the ability to be seen coast to coast would more than make up for it.
This couldn't be more accurate. The Pac12 has an apathetic fanbase and everyone knows that (except apparently Larry Scott...), therefore you need to bring the network to the fans in any and all manners. Big 10 and SEC fanbases will go out of their way to get their respective networks. But an apathetic fanbase, not so much. This is common sense.
More importantly, since they have now explicitly stated that revenue is not their primary objective and they are intentionally compromising it for gender equity... it makes even less since to not compromise revenue a bit to have maximum distribution and exposure.
