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!
Pac-12 expansion is now inevitable
- Thread starter Duff Man
- Start date
Why are we sure that expansion is now inevitable? The BigTen is not expanding. Yet they signed what seems to be the largest deal in NCAA history (each of these P5 deals is larger than the last). Why divvy up that money by two or four more members?
What I think is a bit more interesting, a bit more nuanced, is that it sounds like ESPN allowed Fox to bypass them and greatly increased their rights. In the past ESPN tried to outbid everyone in order to keep rights away from others. But now they're in financial trouble. So they could be circling their wagons around the SEC and letting the other P5s T1 rights slip away when the come up renewal. They also have the College Football Playoffs thru 2025. And ending their run as The Dominant player.
Fox will most likely pump up Big10 sports at the expense of other conferences its paying to broadcast. In the past they seemed to favor spending on the NFL and playing second fiddle to college sports never buying primary rights but mostly secondary rights. Could Fox buy P12 T1 rights next in order to keep these two conferences and their storied histories together? Or will Fox diminish its P12 coverage?
CBS seems happy for now with the NFL, College Hoops, and some SEC games. Losing the primary on the SEC might make it important for them to find a new conference. Would they go after more SEC rights? Or switch to the ACC (No ACC channel yet by the way) where they can set up the ACC channel too? Or would CBS go after the P12?
Then there is the rumor that Notre Dame is headed for the ACC. NBC is supposedly only paying $9m per season (compare that to other schools now getting $20-30m py). NBC doesn't air every ND game either (ND cant like that). And the ratings for ND games they do air are supposedly half of what CBS or ESPN draws. My guess is both organizations will be parting company soon. Could NBC find a new partner with the P12?
Scott could be waiting for this moment to sell the equity stake in the P12N to the highest bidder.
At the end of the day one of the P5 will be left out because there are only 4 major TV networks to the five conferences. Ill bet you can guess which one is screwed. If the ND chip falls to the ACC Id think WVU would the team added to bring the ACC to 16. Or maybe UConn from the AAC. Anyhow, after the dust settles the BigXII's only gems left for the taking are Texas and Oklahoma. Maybe they join the AAC. lol
What I think is a bit more interesting, a bit more nuanced, is that it sounds like ESPN allowed Fox to bypass them and greatly increased their rights. In the past ESPN tried to outbid everyone in order to keep rights away from others. But now they're in financial trouble. So they could be circling their wagons around the SEC and letting the other P5s T1 rights slip away when the come up renewal. They also have the College Football Playoffs thru 2025. And ending their run as The Dominant player.
Fox will most likely pump up Big10 sports at the expense of other conferences its paying to broadcast. In the past they seemed to favor spending on the NFL and playing second fiddle to college sports never buying primary rights but mostly secondary rights. Could Fox buy P12 T1 rights next in order to keep these two conferences and their storied histories together? Or will Fox diminish its P12 coverage?
CBS seems happy for now with the NFL, College Hoops, and some SEC games. Losing the primary on the SEC might make it important for them to find a new conference. Would they go after more SEC rights? Or switch to the ACC (No ACC channel yet by the way) where they can set up the ACC channel too? Or would CBS go after the P12?
Then there is the rumor that Notre Dame is headed for the ACC. NBC is supposedly only paying $9m per season (compare that to other schools now getting $20-30m py). NBC doesn't air every ND game either (ND cant like that). And the ratings for ND games they do air are supposedly half of what CBS or ESPN draws. My guess is both organizations will be parting company soon. Could NBC find a new partner with the P12?
Scott could be waiting for this moment to sell the equity stake in the P12N to the highest bidder.
At the end of the day one of the P5 will be left out because there are only 4 major TV networks to the five conferences. Ill bet you can guess which one is screwed. If the ND chip falls to the ACC Id think WVU would the team added to bring the ACC to 16. Or maybe UConn from the AAC. Anyhow, after the dust settles the BigXII's only gems left for the taking are Texas and Oklahoma. Maybe they join the AAC. lol
The culture of the PAC agrees with this, each member is treated like a full partner even though some are obviously worth more financially than others all work for the common good.
Texas doesn't look at it the same, never have. That is why Arkansas left the SWC before it collapsed and was a big factor in that collapse. It was also a factor in Nebraska and Mizzou welcoming the chance to leave the B12 along with CU and aTm. aTm was a huge indicator because their fans had/have a passionate rivalry with UT and breaking that connection was not done lightly.
If being with Texas is so great why does everyone with a good option try to leave?
Very interesting angle. NBC tried to extract itself from paying large rights for sports and it cost them. Now they are trying to get back into it but there isn't a lot available for them.
The PAC would fill a big hole in their line-up. NBC has also been trying to get involved in a stronger presence in cable sports.
Could NBC become the primary broadcast network partner and also be a partner with the PAC12 network.
UNLV adds nothing but a neutral championship site. They are not in the top 10. I don't have a clue how to justify them as a consideration.
Why Boise? They have a small and rabid fan base. They also appear to be slipping as a MWC power and I would be take the odds that they slip further in the post-Chris Petersen era (takes about 3-4 years). I feel the slip started already though. Without them being really competitive, they bring nothing. zippo.
Why Boise? They have a small and rabid fan base. They also appear to be slipping as a MWC power and I would be take the odds that they slip further in the post-Chris Petersen era (takes about 3-4 years). I feel the slip started already though. Without them being really competitive, they bring nothing. zippo.
I agree with your assessment on Boise. My question is do you think Las Vegas becomes more desirable as a sports town, in general, if they get an NHL and NFL franchise? I really don't know. I realize just because a city ahs a strong presence in one sport doesn't necessarily mean it will translate to another. Just food for thought.
My thought is the Pac will always be behind SEC and Big 10 when it comes to media revenues. Those two conference have entrenched fan bases that are as loyal as they come. If that is the case, I would rather travel to San Diego and Las Vegas than Lubbock, Norman, Lawrence, Manhattan, Stillwater, Dallas, etc. I know it all comes down to media markets and building a bundled platform to televise, but I enjoy the Pac-12 footprint more than the Big XII armpit.
No. Las Vegas is a town of nomads and blue-hairs, who have no connection to UNLV. There is no following for the UNLV teams.
Pro teams will be just a further distraction to anyone latching onto the local college team. They will NEVER draw like Boise and their TV audience will do pretty much anything BUT watch UNLV on tv.
Miami brings up some good points, but the scarcity game can play out a lot of different ways.
When he said there are 5 conferences and 4 networks, I immediately thought "Miami can't count," as I always think of there being 5 networks bidding for sports coverage. But ABC/ESPN are both under Disney now, so maybe I need to update my thinking.
I think Fox senses that ESPN is stumbling a bit, and so they're probably going to push them when they can. If there's actually blood in the water, CBS & NBC will jump in hard too. One also shouldn't forget that the Turner channels also carry sports content - so far it's mainly NBA and MLB, but that can always change.
There's a lot of broadcast time for the networks to fill even before you get to the "second tier" networks (ESPNU, RSNs, etc), and a few of those "second tier" networks want to climb into the first tier. ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, Fox, FS1, NBC, CBS are all what I would label as tier 1 (and FS1 literally just got there); NBCSN is probably on the cusp of being able to be included in that first tier, and FS2 is just behind them.
On a random Friday night/Saturday in October, how many college football games do you think those 7 networks want to carry (or 9 networks if you want to include NBCSN and FS2)?
Here's the big thing when you start thinking about it in terms of numbers of networks and numbers of games: under the current structure, the P5 doesn't produce enough quality games to fulfill the broadcast demand for quality games. Right now, somebody is pissed off when they have to broadcast Alabama vs McNeese State.
That's what is going to drive conference realignment in the future: building a structure so that the "big boys" can produce enough quality games that, like the no fun league, no network will want to be left out.
It's going to require some expansion, some consolidation, some bruised egos, and some obnoxious power plays, but the end game will be a system where the 15th least interesting P5 game of the weekend is more interesting than the best G5 game - because that is what will maximize revenue for schools (at least the schools that end up in the club).
When he said there are 5 conferences and 4 networks, I immediately thought "Miami can't count," as I always think of there being 5 networks bidding for sports coverage. But ABC/ESPN are both under Disney now, so maybe I need to update my thinking.
I think Fox senses that ESPN is stumbling a bit, and so they're probably going to push them when they can. If there's actually blood in the water, CBS & NBC will jump in hard too. One also shouldn't forget that the Turner channels also carry sports content - so far it's mainly NBA and MLB, but that can always change.
There's a lot of broadcast time for the networks to fill even before you get to the "second tier" networks (ESPNU, RSNs, etc), and a few of those "second tier" networks want to climb into the first tier. ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, Fox, FS1, NBC, CBS are all what I would label as tier 1 (and FS1 literally just got there); NBCSN is probably on the cusp of being able to be included in that first tier, and FS2 is just behind them.
On a random Friday night/Saturday in October, how many college football games do you think those 7 networks want to carry (or 9 networks if you want to include NBCSN and FS2)?
Here's the big thing when you start thinking about it in terms of numbers of networks and numbers of games: under the current structure, the P5 doesn't produce enough quality games to fulfill the broadcast demand for quality games. Right now, somebody is pissed off when they have to broadcast Alabama vs McNeese State.
That's what is going to drive conference realignment in the future: building a structure so that the "big boys" can produce enough quality games that, like the no fun league, no network will want to be left out.
It's going to require some expansion, some consolidation, some bruised egos, and some obnoxious power plays, but the end game will be a system where the 15th least interesting P5 game of the weekend is more interesting than the best G5 game - because that is what will maximize revenue for schools (at least the schools that end up in the club).
I think miami was referring to Pac12 Net, B10 Net, ACC Net, SEC Net. The Big XII does not have a network because UTerus refuses to give up there TV station.
I was looking at this quote:
And that doesn't equal what you're sayingMiamiBuffs said:
. He did mention the Big 12 being without a network elsewhere though...
Gotcha. Got his statements mixed up myself then.I was looking at this quote:
And that doesn't equal what you're saying
Tl:dr version: PAC 12 expansion is far from inevitable and the actions of the Big 10 do not dictate the actions of the PAC 12.
SuperiorBuff
Well-Known Member
They have destroyed two conferences 3, if you include the big 8. Wanting anything to do with them in your conference is absolutely stupid.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
Fans like us agree with this, Mike Bohn probably agrees, and many other ADs from the old Big12 agree as well, but there are some big egos running Pac 12 institutions. Combine that with the huge dollar signs in their eyes and I'm sure they will convince themselves that the Pac is strong enough not to be ruined by Texas and that it's worth it to add them.
it depends on what folks want the conference to be. some are happy with it the way it is (or the way they romanticize it to be).
ultimately, however, i agree with you and i think competitive balance is going to force some big moves. if each of our schools is pulling down a quarter of the tv money of other power5 conferences, we will soon be unable to compete at the elite level. look at what michigan is doing with regional camps and such. look at the recently passed rule allowing conference to pay for more of the true cost of attendance, as dictated by the conference. the p12 will expand. they will grab 4 more teams. whether it is the 4 at the top of the wish list is anyone's guess, and you can bet texas and ou are the top 2 targets.
i hope the conference doesn't have to go get some also-rans conference teams, but they will if they strike out on the p5 targets.
another wild ride ahead of us.
I'm not worried about what Michigan has to compete, they will always be ahead of us. The owner of the Dolphins just donated around $100 million a couple years ago for the hell of it to use when they needed even though their facilities weren't being upgraded or anything like that. Where we have to be worried is when programs like Purdue, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota have way more resources. That is scary to think about.
Really not hard to understand if you can read the last two posts in the thread.
I acknowledge the widening gap. I'm not following your reasoning to "therefore expansion is inevitable" or "therefore expansion is imminent".
I know you tend toward brevity in your posts, but I'm simply not connecting the dots based on what's posted ITT so far.
How does the Pac-12 increase its revenue and visibility without expansion? Not talking "playing the long game" type scenarios, but rather what happens when Big Ten schools are dwarfing Pac-12 schools in revenue two years from now. I would love to hear some concrete ideas.
- Improving the quality of the schools' teams already in the league is the first idea that comes to mind. this is the needle mover in my mind -- improved content with the schools already in the league
- improved strategic marketing
- Improving the partnerships with bowls, tournaments and other conferences
- Improving donations and endowments through research, academics and alumni outreach.
- longer term, target the students currently enrolled in the schools so that when they graduate, they become rapid-fan type alumni.
good thread, I'm just not following your conclusions.
Your solutions mostly imply there are not fundamental problems for the Pac-12 at the moment.
Pac-12 expansion certainly did not occur in a vacuum, but it seems like some of you guys think very little that happens across the college football landscape directly affects the Pac-12. I guess I am scratching my head here. Marketing is a viable solution? The other conferences are suddenly going to stop marketing?
Pac-12 expansion certainly did not occur in a vacuum, but it seems like some of you guys think very little that happens across the college football landscape directly affects the Pac-12. I guess I am scratching my head here. Marketing is a viable solution? The other conferences are suddenly going to stop marketing?
Marketing has to be part of the solution in today's economy. What makes the SEC and B1G so lucrative is quality football content and fans rabid about their teams. Both of those can be accomplished without expansion, that's my only point. If expansion improves content quality, it helps, but only if it improves content quality, and those options are very limited. Expanding to more schools with don't-GAF-about-sports-alumni or schools who aren't fielding big-draw football teams won't increase revenue or visiblity, IMO. I don't believe it's about new TV markets anymore, it's about quality content and fan loyalty. The only options left seem to be Texas and Okie, and honestly, you guys have me at least partially convinced that move would turn off more fans than they would bring.
But hell, I'm just a fan who spends too much time reading college sports message boards and I could very well be mistaken.
The only way to catch up at the current moment without expanding is to engage the fanbases/pac 12 cities. They are the least engaged in college football so even though the other conferences keep up with what they are doing there is a ton more room for improvement in this conference. The pac 12 has the markets, they have the schools they just don't have the same following. If we figured out a way to change this I'm sure you could find a job with the conference. It also really sucks when the most consistent team over the last 10 years is the one with the worst fanbase.
Unfortunately I don't see the pac being able to convince Texas and OU to join unless these things are figured out, exposure is enhanced and the network starts making money. If they do fix these issues then look out.
Unfortunately I don't see the pac being able to convince Texas and OU to join unless these things are figured out, exposure is enhanced and the network starts making money. If they do fix these issues then look out.
There are two "name brand" teams that might, under certain circumstances, be available to the PAC 12. Those schools are Texas and Oklahoma. Texas is a non starter for all the reasons we've hashed out over the years. From their proclivity to kill conferences to their insistence on holding on to the LHN. It would take a minor miracle for UT to come to the PAC. Their admin doesn't want it. Their players don't want it, their alumni doesn't want it, and their fans don't want it. And, oh by the way, the PAC 12 isn't all that enamored by the idea, either. That leaves Oklahoma. Horrible cultural fit, would likely have to bring along little brother and would not be excited about abandoning its history with UT. There aren't any other schools worth taking. The two schools that are worth taking are extreme long shots and have a ton of baggage that is unattractive to the PAC 12. None of this has anything to do with what the Big 10 is doing. The Big 10 can do whatever it wants and it won't change the reality that I just laid out. The PAC 12, therefore, needs to find other, more creative ways to market its brand and generate revenue for its member institutions.
If you are Texas why would you give up the longhorn network at this time? There are no viable candidates to expand the big 12 so they are just giving up money for the hell of it. It runs out in 2024 like the grant of rights does for the big 12 so there is no reason to rush things, especially when ESPN is not going to keep the network past then anyways.