What's new
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!

Pac 12 Losing USC and UCLA - "Everybody talking out of their ass"

LesGrossman

Club Member
Club Member
The C4C had unisex bathrooms upstairs so I always went up there to peel paint after a hefty dining hall adventure. The privacy and HVAC in there (not swamp coolers thank god) was unparalleled. Felt bad for the ladies up there but gotta do what ya gotta do

This thread just goes to show how poor a job CUFB is doing connecting to the fan base lol
 

manhattanbuff

Club Member
Club Member
I remember the day we were excited about joining the Pac, it's been a **** show every since
The Pac-10 was the top conference at that time. Going there made tons of sense. The key hire that unwound all of that momentum was Larry Scott. He was hired for his so-called TV savvy. Instead he fleeced the league for a huge salary and made TV deals that let other conferences dust the P12 revenue-wise.
 

skibum

Did not pee on the Alamo.
Club Member
I remember the day we were excited about joining the Pac, it's been a **** show every since
I mean, to be fair, the years leading up to that were a **** show too. Back then we just thought the **** show was temporary and hadn't yet realized that it was the new normal.
 

tsarbomba

One Damn Dirty Ape
Club Member
I mean, to be fair, the years leading up to that were a **** show too. Back then we just thought the **** show was temporary and hadn't yet realized that it was the new normal.
Wait, I thought that this was a thread about bathrooms.
 

MiamiBuffs

YYZ
Club Member
The Pac-10 was the top conference at that time. Going there made tons of sense. The key hire that unwound all of that momentum was Larry Scott. He was hired for his so-called TV savvy. Instead he fleeced the league for a huge salary and made TV deals that let other conferences dust the P12 revenue-wise.
Fun fact. He was hired before adding the CU and the UU not after. He did good things in his previous job that warranted his hiring. He got ****ed by the politics of UT and OU. He did fleece the members for a big salary and made many errors. But the waters back then were more uncharted then well marked. He was out of his depth vis a vis the politics in college sports. Hind sight is always 2020.
 

manhattanbuff

Club Member
Club Member
Fun fact. He was hired before adding the CU and the UU not after. He did good things in his previous job that warranted his hiring. He got ****ed by the politics of UT and OU. He did fleece the members for a big salary and made many errors. But the waters back then were more uncharted then well marked. He was out of his depth vis a vis the politics in college sports. Hind sight is always 2020.
It was always a mistake to not be on DirecTV. It was always a mistake to be in long term deals without the ability to renegotiate around a sport with rising popularity.
 

DBT

Club Member
Club Member
OK. I'm not a Mod but can I play one for a minute? Let's have a time out on the bathroom stuff. This is the thread in which we chronicle the possible downfall or resurrection of the PAC 10 and CU football's place in the world. Someone can start a bathroom thread in Barzil if he or she wants to. Fair? I pledge to stop. :)
No ****!
 

MiamiBuffs

YYZ
Club Member
It was always a mistake to not be on DirecTV. It was always a mistake to be in long term deals without the ability to renegotiate around a sport with rising popularity.
DirecTV would never come to the table. But Dish Network did and was first. Followed by some cable providers. Even after a deal was already struck with Dish DTV still wouldnt play ball. Rumor had it, back then, that there were unofficial overtures where DTV pushed for the rate Dish negotiated ahead of them to take a huge haircut. That would lead to Dish and cable guys, who followed Dish in making a deal, to demand the same lower rate too.

If Scott had agreed to DTVs demand it would still lead back to the exact same spot of ****ty revenue for all. Everyone goes on and on about DirecTV but they were never serious about carrying P12N. And DirecTV, despite being soo smart, has cratering subscriber numbers and found itself sold to AT&T (suckers).

Setting up the network on his own was Scotts big mistake. Full Stop. But the only other model out there at the time was the B1G network that shared ownership with Fox. Scott thought we would all make more owning 100% and he was simply wrong. He likely ignored advice. He gambled. And lost.

DirecTV was right about one thing: the fact that no one watches these networks. They. Dont. Move. The. Needle. But when theyre bundled the carrier cant do anything about it.
 
Last edited:

manhattanbuff

Club Member
Club Member
DirecTV would never come to the table. But Dish Network did and was first. Followed by some cable providers. Even after a deal was already struck with Dish DTV still wouldnt play ball. Rumor had it, back then, that there were unofficial overtures where DTV pushed for the rate Dish negotiated ahead of them to take a huge haircut. That would lead to Dish and cable guys, who followed Dish in making a deal, to demand the same lower rate too.

If Scott had agreed to DTVs demand it would still lead back to the exact same spot of ****ty revenue for all. Everyone goes on and on about DirecTV but they were never serious about carrying P12N. And DirecTV, despite being soo smart, has cratering subscriber numbers and found itself sold to AT&T (suckers).

Setting up the network on his own was Scotts big mistake. Full Stop. But the only other model out there at the time was the B1G network that shared ownership with Fox. Scott thought we would all make more owning 100% and he was simply wrong. He likely ignored advice. He gambled. And lost.

DirecTV was right about one thing: the fact that no one watches these networks. They. Dont. Move. The. Needle. But when theyre bundled the carrier cant do anything about it.
You drank Larry’s narrative about DirecTV. Strangely enough the $EC and B1G found a way to be on their satellite network and take their money. They found a way to get bundled and Larry could not. I’m not sure what you’re even arguing, considering that he was hired to make the P12 richer via TV. He thought he could do so without input and that’s also why he was a bad hire.
 

Thisuniversityisf’ed!

Well-Known Member
DirecTV would never come to the table. But Dish Network did and was first. Followed by some cable providers. Even after a deal was already struck with Dish DTV still wouldnt play ball. Rumor had it, back then, that there were unofficial overtures where DTV pushed for the rate Dish negotiated ahead of them to take a huge haircut. That would lead to Dish and cable guys, who followed Dish in making a deal, to demand the same lower rate too.

If Scott had agreed to DTVs demand it would still lead back to the exact same spot of ****ty revenue for all. Everyone goes on and on about DirecTV but they were never serious about carrying P12N. And DirecTV, despite being soo smart, has cratering subscriber numbers and found itself sold to AT&T (suckers).

Setting up the network on his own was Scotts big mistake. Full Stop. But the only other model out there at the time was the B1G network that shared ownership with Fox. Scott thought we would all make more owning 100% and he was simply wrong. He likely ignored advice. He gambled. And lost.

DirecTV was right about one thing: the fact that no one watches these networks. They. Dont. Move. The. Needle. But when theyre bundled the carrier cant do anything about it.

lol what? If Larry Scott agreed to direcTVs offer it would lead to the same thing? This is 100% not true as it would have led to more money.
 

Highlander

There can be only one
Club Member
You drank Larry’s narrative about DirecTV. Strangely enough the $EC and B1G found a way to be on their satellite network and take their money. They found a way to get bundled and Larry could not. I’m not sure what you’re even arguing, considering that he was hired to make the P12 richer via TV. He thought he could do so without input and that’s also why he was a bad hire.
IIRC, the hang up for DTV with the P12 Network vs the SEC and B1G was the 7 channels for the P12 Network. That was a tragic error in judgment.
 

hokiehead

Gobbler on the Mountain
Club Member
lol what? If Larry Scott agreed to direcTVs offer it would lead to the same thing? This is 100% not true as it would have led to more money.
Is there reason to believe that DTV was prepared to give enough money to make a meaningful difference? I think Miami is saying his sources say "no".

The other part is increased access to viewers though. Would the additional PAC 12 exposure at 1AM ET in bars and homes that had the service have made a difference? Maybe -- i don't think a case has been made either way.

I think the narrowing the situation to only DTV is a mistake -- the issue is that the combination of major national carriers didn't have the PTN (DTV, Comcast, Carter).
 

MiamiBuffs

YYZ
Club Member
You drank Larry’s narrative about DirecTV. Strangely enough the $EC and B1G found a way to be on their satellite network and take their money. They found a way to get bundled and Larry could not. I’m not sure what you’re even arguing, considering that he was hired to make the P12 richer via TV. He thought he could do so without input and that’s also why he was a bad hire.
He did make them more per season thru TV.

The Pac-10 made less than $60 million in media rights this past season. The contract, which will begin with the 2012-13 season, will be worth more than $225 million per year -- or $2.7 billion over the life of the deal.

The ACC recently signed a deal for $155 million a year, and the Big 12 reached a deal with Fox that made its total annual package worth about $130 million.

The Pac-10, which will be renamed the Pac-12 in July with the additions of Utah and Colorado, topped those deals, as well as the $205 million the SEC gets and the $220 million paid to the Big Ten.


As part of an agreement to give up their historically larger share of television revenues, Southern California and UCLA each was to receive a $2 million premium any year that the media rights did not reach $170 million.



The very thing you are arguing for, money, is the very thing destroying college football right now. Shortly after this deal Money came along and destroyed several traditional rivalries having already begun the process of destroying the bowls. Money prevented us from getting on DirecTV.
 
Last edited:

MiamiBuffs

YYZ
Club Member
lol what? If Larry Scott agreed to direcTVs offer it would lead to the same thing? This is 100% not true as it would have led to more money.

Wilner contributed to this article.

And while Pac-12 got Comcast, Time Warner/Bright House and Cox to pay Pac-12 upfront to help offset launch costs for its channels, it also gave them Most Favored Nation (MFN) status. That meant it guaranteed them the same fees no matter when they signed up with the networks.

The Pac-12 did consider eliminating the out-of-market fee as a way to bring DirecTV on board, but due to the MFN status it would have to do that for all of its pay TV partners, so the conference elected not to do that.

With the major football and basketball games on ESPN and Fox, there’s really no incentive for DirecTV to make a deal.


That fee that was the problem would have amounted to $18 million a year from DirecTV. And they balked at paying it.

Pac-12 structured its pricing into three different tiers, one for a primary national/local feed, one for an outer market feed and a totally out-of-market/out-of-conference footprint feed.

DirecTV would have been on the hook for $0.10 per subscriber per month for all 15 million (approx) of its customers outside the Pac-12 footprint — that’s $18,000,000 per year

Cutting that fee, as DTV demanded means P12 only get carriage for subscribers in the P12 footprint. No money from east coast subscribers.

If the P12 agreed Id imagine it would have meant cutting close to that amount combined from Dish, Comcast, Time Warner, Cox and Bright House in the existing agreements.

By this point (2017) AT&T owns DTV and AT&T is the most leveraged public corporation in the US following a string of acquisitions. They were trying to hold the line. I dropped DTV around this time frame, switched to Slingtv along with many others and cord cutting was happening in earnest around this time too.
 
Last edited:

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member
Wilner contributed to this article.

And while Pac-12 got Comcast, Time Warner/Bright House and Cox to pay Pac-12 upfront to help offset launch costs for its channels, it also gave them Most Favored Nation (MFN) status. That meant it guaranteed them the same fees no matter when they signed up with the networks.

The Pac-12 did consider eliminating the out-of-market fee as a way to bring DirecTV on board, but due to the MFN status it would have to do that for all of its pay TV partners, so the conference elected not to do that.

With the major football and basketball games on ESPN and Fox, there’s really no incentive for DirecTV to make a deal.


By this point AT&T owns DTV and AT&T is the most leveraged public corporation in the US following a string of acquisitions. They were trying to hold the line. I dropped DTV around this time frame, switched to Slingtv, and cord cutting was happening in earnest around this time too.

That fee that was the problem would have amounted to $18 million a month from DirecTV. And they balked at paying it.

Cutting that fee, as DTV demanded means we only get carriage for subscribers in the P12 footprint.

If the P12 agreed Id imagine it would have meant cutting close to that amount combined from Dish, Comcast, Time Warner, Cox and Bright House in the existing agreements.
If it was revenue neutral but would have put PACN in every sports bar in the country, it was stupid not to do it.
 

MiamiBuffs

YYZ
Club Member
If it was revenue neutral but would have put PACN in every sports bar in the country, it was stupid not to do it.
Our best events were already on Fox or ESPN via DirectTV in sports bars around the country. Are you suggesting Womens Volleyball, Soccer, or Tarck would be on over Basketball or Baseball?
 

MiamiBuffs

YYZ
Club Member
I'm saying the football and basketball games that were only on PACN would have been on screens across the country.
Those tier 3 football games probably wouldnt compete with better content already on. Maybe some of the basketball would have been on.

I fully agree that Larry (with the Presidents help) made plenty of mistakes setting this thing up.

Ultimately this is now only about money. It was money that got us and Utah into the Pac12 way back when while Texas was being greedy. It was about money in the old Pac10 that got USC and UCLA a larger share just like it was money that enticed them to leave. Money again for B1G and SEC granting additional rights right after our deal. The TV Empire knows to rule the galaxy they need marquee matchups between prime properties with 4 million viewers a pop to justify what theyre paying. So theyre using money to pull conferences apart and create a rigged playoff in the name of viewership.

Blame Larry Scott all you want. If we all stopped watching and dropped ESPN and FOX this thing would slow down. But we cant live without sports even if its rigged.
 

manhattanbuff

Club Member
Club Member
He did make them more per season thru TV.

The Pac-10 made less than $60 million in media rights this past season. The contract, which will begin with the 2012-13 season, will be worth more than $225 million per year -- or $2.7 billion over the life of the deal.

The ACC recently signed a deal for $155 million a year, and the Big 12 reached a deal with Fox that made its total annual package worth about $130 million.

The Pac-10, which will be renamed the Pac-12 in July with the additions of Utah and Colorado, topped those deals, as well as the $205 million the SEC gets and the $220 million paid to the Big Ten.


As part of an agreement to give up their historically larger share of television revenues, Southern California and UCLA each was to receive a $2 million premium any year that the media rights did not reach $170 million.



The very thing you are arguing for, money, is the very thing destroying college football right now. Shortly after this deal Money came along and destroyed several traditional rivalries having already begun the process of destroying the bowls. Money prevented us from getting on DirecTV.
He got more money for the P12 than they got before. He didn’t get more money than the B1G and $EC.

As far as money ruining college football, GMAFB.
 

leftybuff

Unreconstructed Luddite
Club Member
It was a long time ago, but I recounted a convo I had with a DirecTV muckity muck at a social gathering when all of this was in play.

In a nutshell, DirecTV had no in interest in the P12 network at all. They viewed it as a regional product, at best, and were seeking to not only have national products to offer, but really wanted to tap the SA and Asia markets. Thus, the P12Network simply wasn't on their shopping list, and any overtures from the P12 were met with a "if you will sell it at a huge discount, fine" response.

Larry the cable guy simply overestimated the appeal. He should have partnered with a network. He had the Hobson's choice of blowing up other deals to get in with DirecTV or keeping the $ already negotiated. The biggest problem was the product.
 
Top