OT: College Football

[hermes]

Thing I saw on ESPN scrawl at the bottom is that Washington and Oregon would get reduced TV money compared to other Big 10 schools.

So how would they ever be competitive?

Well Oregon is getting all that Nike money and UW is in a big media market probably bigger than Columbus or Ann Arbor? Certainly bigger than Indiana or Wisconsin.

The only offer the Pac 12 had apparently was with Apple and the money would be based on how many subscribers Apple could sign up to pay extra for Pac 12.

Well I'm a Cal alum but I haven't watched their games in years. But I was a pro sports fan long before I went to college and the Bay Area is far more interested in pro sports, though Stanford and Cal have had moments.

i guess they'll get a partial share until the next media deal then they'll get bumped up to a full share (same thing happened with nebraska, rutgers, and maryland - but notably won't happen with usc and ucla who get a full share from the jump)

partial share is probably more than the pac12 but maybe equal to or less than the big12 but you're in one of the two major conferences and on the next media deal the big10 is likely to come out better than the big12

[hermes]

Absolutely pathetic that the Pac-12 is disbanding. I'm officially renouncing my fanship to the University of Arizona. I have no desire to join the Big 12 and that micky mouse conference

My Dawgs are part of the Big10 now. But I'm gonna miss the rivals in the Pac. UW didn't really have a choice. Especially with SC & UCLA leaving for the Big10. The deal with Apple that the conference put together was a joke.

we're in the same conference now

[Cactus Jack]

Thing I saw on ESPN scrawl at the bottom is that Washington and Oregon would get reduced TV money compared to other Big 10 schools.

So how would they ever be competitive?

Well Oregon is getting all that Nike money and UW is in a big media market probably bigger than Columbus or Ann Arbor? Certainly bigger than Indiana or Wisconsin.

The only offer the Pac 12 had apparently was with Apple and the money would be based on how many subscribers Apple could sign up to pay extra for Pac 12.

Well I'm a Cal alum but I haven't watched their games in years. But I was a pro sports fan long before I went to college and the Bay Area is far more interested in pro sports, though Stanford and Cal have had moments.

i guess they'll get a partial share until the next media deal then they'll get bumped up to a full share (same thing happened with nebraska, rutgers, and maryland - but notably won't happen with usc and ucla who get a full share from the jump)

partial share is probably more than the pac12 but maybe equal to or less than the big12 but you're in one of the two major conferences and on the next media deal the big10 is likely to come out better than the big12

It's being reported that Oregon & Washington will each get between $35-40m/yr from the Big10.

Fwiw Colorado is getting $31m with the move to the Big12.

[bluejerseyjinx]

Absolutely pathetic that the Pac-12 is disbanding. I'm officially renouncing my fanship to the University of Arizona. I have no desire to join the Big 12 and that micky mouse conference

Not for me. I just feel sorry for the conferences that have to put up with these teams when they come over.

[Cactus Jack]

Not for me. I just feel sorry for the conferences that have to put up with these teams when they come over.

North Carolina should leave behind the ACC.

[bluejerseyjinx]

They are fine where they are. ACC is king in college basketball.

[hermes]

isn't the big12 a big time basketball conference now?

[Cactus Jack]

isn't the big12 a big time basketball conference now?

Everyone knows that money is driven by Football. That's why the SEC & Big 10 have the highest revenues among the Power 5.

We'll see if the Big12 bypasses the ACC with their recent expansion. However I think it's probably only a matter of time before we eventually end up with just two super conferences.

[wco81]

Thing I saw on ESPN scrawl at the bottom is that Washington and Oregon would get reduced TV money compared to other Big 10 schools.

So how would they ever be competitive?

Well Oregon is getting all that Nike money and UW is in a big media market probably bigger than Columbus or Ann Arbor? Certainly bigger than Indiana or Wisconsin.

The only offer the Pac 12 had apparently was with Apple and the money would be based on how many subscribers Apple could sign up to pay extra for Pac 12.

Well I'm a Cal alum but I haven't watched their games in years. But I was a pro sports fan long before I went to college and the Bay Area is far more interested in pro sports, though Stanford and Cal have had moments.

i guess they'll get a partial share until the next media deal then they'll get bumped up to a full share (same thing happened with nebraska, rutgers, and maryland - but notably won't happen with usc and ucla who get a full share from the jump)

partial share is probably more than the pac12 but maybe equal to or less than the big12 but you're in one of the two major conferences and on the next media deal the big10 is likely to come out better than the big12

It's being reported that Oregon & Washington will each get about $40m/yr from the Big10. The current Pac12 deal was closer to $20m per team.

Fwiw Colorado is getting $31m with the move to the Big12.

Those are crazy differences in sums of money.

And you know a lot of it was ending up with the players.

Or at the very least, teams in the SEC and Big 10 get so much coverage that the best players would go to them since they can monetize their college careers and make some serious money before turning pro.

[Cactus Jack]

i guess they'll get a partial share until the next media deal then they'll get bumped up to a full share (same thing happened with nebraska, rutgers, and maryland - but notably won't happen with usc and ucla who get a full share from the jump)

partial share is probably more than the pac12 but maybe equal to or less than the big12 but you're in one of the two major conferences and on the next media deal the big10 is likely to come out better than the big12

It's being reported that Oregon & Washington will each get about $40m/yr from the Big10. The current Pac12 deal was closer to $20m per team.

Fwiw Colorado is getting $31m with the move to the Big12.

Those are crazy differences in sums of money.

And you know a lot of it was ending up with the players.

Or at the very least, teams in the SEC and Big 10 get so much coverage that the best players would go to them since they can monetize their college careers and make some serious money before turning pro.

So these numbers we're how much each school made on average last year.

Big Ten- $60M
SEC- $50M
Big12- $42-45M
ACC- $38-41M
Pac12- $37M


Apple's deal with the Pac12 is reportedly worth up to a payout of $20M per school. A significant reduction from the previous deal with ESPN & Fox. It made it an easy decision for the school's.

[bwgood77]

I will kind of miss the PAC 12 but I will enjoy the new AZ rivalry with Kansas in basketball. It will also help them in SOS playing better basketball opponents. I will probably see more games since I live in Austin. Watching them play TCU, Baylor and OKLA St in football should be fun. Kansas St maybe...Wildcats vs Wildcats. Would be nice if they still played UCLA non conference, at least in basketball. That's really their only semi rivalry in the PAC 12 other than ASU. Oklahoma and Texas are making a mistake and will get crushed in the SEC.

[bwgood77]

isn't the big12 a big time basketball conference now?

Everyone knows that money is driven by Football. That's why the SEC & Big 10 have the highest revenues among the Power 5.

We'll see if the Big12 bypasses the ACC with their recent expansion. However I think it's probably only a matter of time before we eventually end up with just two super conferences.

Two conferences will be dumb, especially for football. The SEC and Big 10 already can't have all the teams play each other, even before the new teams join. What's the point of a conference if all the teams can't even play each other? In both the SEC and Big 10 all the best teams are in one division too for the most part. There are like 1 or 2 good teams on the other side of each...like Georgia and Wisconsin. I guess the PAC 12 teams could push some of the good teams east...like Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St maybe. And UT, Okla may push a good team or two east in the SEC.

[Cactus Jack]

isn't the big12 a big time basketball conference now?

Everyone knows that money is driven by Football. That's why the SEC & Big 10 have the highest revenues among the Power 5.

We'll see if the Big12 bypasses the ACC with their recent expansion. However I think it's probably only a matter of time before we eventually end up with just two super conferences.

Two conferences will be dumb, especially for football. The SEC and Big 10 already can't have all the teams play each other, even before the new teams join. What's the point of a conference if all the teams can't even play each other? In both the SEC and Big 10 all the best teams are in one division too for the most part. There are like 1 or 2 good teams on the other side of each...like Georgia and Wisconsin. I guess the PAC 12 teams could push some of the good teams east...like Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St maybe. And UT, Okla may push a good team or two east in the SEC.

I completely agree...But you have ACC teams like Florida State that are looking for a way out. Due to a poor media/revenue deal. The exit fee & fines are the only thing preventing some of these teams from leaving the conference.

I think eventually we will have three power conferences with the way things are currently headed.

Is it ultimately good for college Football? No.

[hermes]

isn't the big12 a big time basketball conference now?

Everyone knows that money is driven by Football. That's why the SEC & Big 10 have the highest revenues among the Power 5.

We'll see if the Big12 bypasses the ACC with their recent expansion. However I think it's probably only a matter of time before we eventually end up with just two super conferences.

Two conferences will be dumb, especially for football. The SEC and Big 10 already can't have all the teams play each other, even before the new teams join. What's the point of a conference if all the teams can't even play each other? In both the SEC and Big 10 all the best teams are in one division too for the most part. There are like 1 or 2 good teams on the other side of each...like Georgia and Wisconsin. I guess the PAC 12 teams could push some of the good teams east...like Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St maybe. And UT, Okla may push a good team or two east in the SEC.

like in the nfl?

this is probably going to trend toward two 24 team conferences, split up into four 6-team pods. the pod winners have a mini playoff to determine the conference winner and the two conference winners will play each other for the national title

[wco81]

Everyone knows that money is driven by Football. That's why the SEC & Big 10 have the highest revenues among the Power 5.

We'll see if the Big12 bypasses the ACC with their recent expansion. However I think it's probably only a matter of time before we eventually end up with just two super conferences.

Two conferences will be dumb, especially for football. The SEC and Big 10 already can't have all the teams play each other, even before the new teams join. What's the point of a conference if all the teams can't even play each other? In both the SEC and Big 10 all the best teams are in one division too for the most part. There are like 1 or 2 good teams on the other side of each...like Georgia and Wisconsin. I guess the PAC 12 teams could push some of the good teams east...like Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St maybe. And UT, Okla may push a good team or two east in the SEC.

like in the nfl?

this is probably going to trend toward two 24 team conferences, split up into four 6-team pods. the pod winners have a mini playoff to determine the conference winner and the two conference winners will play each other for the national title

So you're talking 48 teams vs. 32 for the NFL?

How many playoffs teams? Because that would imply maybe 3 or 4 rounds of playoffs. The top teams may get a bye but have to play 3 playoffs games instead of 2 in order to reach the title game.

That would be something if college team had to play more playoffs games than NFL teams.

They may stick with the 4 or 8 teams which are allowed to play for the championship.

Because otherwise, top prospects will decline to play these playoffs and bowl games to protect their NFL draft prospects.

[bwgood77]

Everyone knows that money is driven by Football. That's why the SEC & Big 10 have the highest revenues among the Power 5.

We'll see if the Big12 bypasses the ACC with their recent expansion. However I think it's probably only a matter of time before we eventually end up with just two super conferences.

Two conferences will be dumb, especially for football. The SEC and Big 10 already can't have all the teams play each other, even before the new teams join. What's the point of a conference if all the teams can't even play each other? In both the SEC and Big 10 all the best teams are in one division too for the most part. There are like 1 or 2 good teams on the other side of each...like Georgia and Wisconsin. I guess the PAC 12 teams could push some of the good teams east...like Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St maybe. And UT, Okla may push a good team or two east in the SEC.

like in the nfl?

this is probably going to trend toward two 24 team conferences, split up into four 6-team pods. the pod winners have a mini playoff to determine the conference winner and the two conference winners will play each other for the national title

Yeah, that's how they'd have to do it, but you still likely have some very tough divisions, tougher than the NFL and it might be hard to have a decent playoff in a conference with division winners. But I guess if they only have like 5 division games and a few playoff games to get to a conference championship,they could still be close to 10 games, even if they threw a non division game or two in there.

[hermes]

Two conferences will be dumb, especially for football. The SEC and Big 10 already can't have all the teams play each other, even before the new teams join. What's the point of a conference if all the teams can't even play each other? In both the SEC and Big 10 all the best teams are in one division too for the most part. There are like 1 or 2 good teams on the other side of each...like Georgia and Wisconsin. I guess the PAC 12 teams could push some of the good teams east...like Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St maybe. And UT, Okla may push a good team or two east in the SEC.

like in the nfl?

this is probably going to trend toward two 24 team conferences, split up into four 6-team pods. the pod winners have a mini playoff to determine the conference winner and the two conference winners will play each other for the national title

So you're talking 48 teams vs. 32 for the NFL?

How many playoffs teams? Because that would imply maybe 3 or 4 rounds of playoffs. The top teams may get a bye but have to play 3 playoffs games instead of 2 in order to reach the title game.

That would be something if college team had to play more playoffs games than NFL teams.

They may stick with the 4 or 8 teams which are allowed to play for the championship.

Because otherwise, top prospects will decline to play these playoffs and bowl games to protect their NFL draft prospects.

eight total playoff teams, four each conference (they would be the division winners). you can seed them 1-4 in each conference and play a semifinal then a conference championship - then the conference winners play each other

the two teams in the national championship will play 15 games which is what they play now
fewer teams than the new 12 team playoff they are switching to

[hermes]

Two conferences will be dumb, especially for football. The SEC and Big 10 already can't have all the teams play each other, even before the new teams join. What's the point of a conference if all the teams can't even play each other? In both the SEC and Big 10 all the best teams are in one division too for the most part. There are like 1 or 2 good teams on the other side of each...like Georgia and Wisconsin. I guess the PAC 12 teams could push some of the good teams east...like Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St maybe. And UT, Okla may push a good team or two east in the SEC.

like in the nfl?

this is probably going to trend toward two 24 team conferences, split up into four 6-team pods. the pod winners have a mini playoff to determine the conference winner and the two conference winners will play each other for the national title

Yeah, that's how they'd have to do it, but you still likely have some very tough divisions, tougher than the NFL and it might be hard to have a decent playoff in a conference with division winners. But I guess if they only have like 5 division games and a few playoff games to get to a conference championship,they could still be close to 10 games, even if they threw a non division game or two in there.

i wonder at some point if they don't drop nonconference games once they reach two super conferences then play 12 conference games

[wco81]

Mismanaged media deals by Pac-12 commissioners over the last decade.

Though Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff has made his share of costly blunders since taking over three years ago, his predecessor, Larry Scott, deserves much of the blame for the league’s predicament. Before he signed a historic 12-year, $3 billion TV deal with Fox and ESPN in spring 2011, he failed to add an escape clause.

That locked the Pac-12 in until 2024, which left it vulnerable to poaching from Power 5 conferences with bigger subsequent annual media-rights payouts. By inking a TV deal in spring 2016 that lasted just six years, the Big Ten positioned itself to beat the Pac-12 back to negotiations and, ultimately, convince UCLA and USC to come aboard. Those two defections last summer set the Pac-12 on its current trajectory.

Scott’s biggest misstep was the Pac-12 Networks, which didn’t come close to realizing their billing as a cutting-edge enterprise that would serve as an industry standard-bearer. Instead of partnering with a proven media company like ESPN, Scott launched a network fully owned by the schools in summer 2012, complete with an odd seven-channel model that confused consumers.

The Pac-12 Networks struggled to find distribution. Having never even approached the revenue Scott had projected, it is now considered an albatross that weighs down the remaining league members’ bottom lines.

Read in San Francisco Chronicle: https://apple.news/A6VvO0WKeSaSldw4c1db_nw


So USC and UCLA's defections triggered the decline. Thing is, if they stayed, Pac 12 might have gotten a much better media deal and they'd probably be best-positioned, at least USC would be, to dominate the conference in football.

Instead, they have to deal with OSU, UM, MSU, Wisconsin and now Washington and Oregon, two of their biggest competitors in the Pac 12, are joining them in the Big 10 anyways.

Not blaming the schools which left but USC and UCLA especially, it will be interesting to see how they fare in the first decade in the new conference.

They may not get too many post-season chances. Well UCLA probably will make the tournament in hoops.

But apparently the money which the Big 10 offers them is way more than any postseason games in the Pac 12 would have brought them.

[hermes]

pac12 only has 2 playoff appearances, oregon in 2014-15 and washington in 2016-17