Pac-12 Leaders Receive Details of Media Deal

Donate To GopherHole

nitramnaed said:
Will we know the fate of the Pac-12 soon?

tucson.com

Pac-12 leaders receive details of media deal, but no vote to accept terms as future remains murky

Pac-12 leaders were presented details of a long-awaited media rights deal Tuesday by Commissioner George Kliavkoff. A person familiar with the situation told The Associated Press that the meeting concluded
tucson.com tucson.com
Click to expand...
Sounds like the AZ teams are ready to move on. If the numbers are not as good or better than Big 12 deal, I don't see how the Pac12 stays intact. Love watching the late Saturday games after a day at the stadium...if four of those teams are in the B1G in the near future, I'll love watching those games even more.
 

Unnamed sources, most likely from those schools most likely to be left out of desirable landing spots (Cal, WSU, OSU) and the guy with the job nobody wants:

After the meeting Tuesday morning, there remained ambiguity about the potential value of the Pac-12 deal because of the unknown variance of subscriptions. Sources familiar with the negotiations told ESPN the Pac-12 is in a better position now than it was a month and a half ago to sell digital subscriptions thanks to changes in the media landscape.

Kliavkoff said recently at Pac-12 media days in Las Vegas that the longer the league waited, the better the options became.

"There's an underlying shift in the media market that's happening and we're long term taking advantage of that," he said July 21.

Sure.

How do those with options stick this out? More people will see MWC games than Pac 12 games. Minimal visibility and uncertain financial reward. I'm all for tradition but this is a business and if I'm in the four corners, I'm taking the Big 12 offering while it's on the table and if I'm Oregon and Washington, I'm offering myself to the Big 10 at a half share.
 

USC UCLA and Colorado gone.. Oregon and Washington will be gone very soon... The pac is DEAD
 

I think it’s unofficial Oregon and Washington coming to B1G just a matter of time
 


GopherFanatic19 said:
I think it’s unofficial Oregon and Washington coming to B1G just a matter of time
Click to expand...
Not full share. No way. They need to take a hair cut until the next deal is negotiated.

The schools that the Big Ten should only offer a full share immediately are FSU, Clemson, UNC, Virginia, Notre Dame, and Stanford.
 

They got coal for Christmas. Were the PAC 12 Commissioners sleep at the wheel the last few years?
 

PAC has had no leadership for ... decades now?

I get USC and UCLA moving. I'm sure they'd rather stay but when you're in a conference where nobody is at the wheel while the ship sinks ... what choice do you have?
 

TruthSeeker said:
Not full share. No way. They need to take a hair cut until the next deal is negotiated.

The schools that the Big Ten should only offer a full share immediately are FSU, Clemson, UNC, Virginia, Notre Dame, and Stanford.
Click to expand...
Again, the contract has an escalator tied to expansion.
 



Decent new deal for PAC-12, but look! No wonder schools want to come to B1G!

 


It will be interesting to see how big tech media like Apple TV will mesh with big time college athletics.
 

Yah-E said:
Decent new deal for PAC-12, but look! No wonder schools want to come to B1G!

Click to expand...
Is it decent? Feels almost like time to shut down the Athletic Dept if that's all you can do.
 



matt said:
I can’t help but laugh every time I see the ACC deal. In what world did they think that was a good idea?
Click to expand...
Hell, by the time that deal runs out the B1G could be making 5 times as much.
 

TruthSeeker said:
Not full share. No way. They need to take a hair cut until the next deal is negotiated.

The schools that the Big Ten should only offer a full share immediately are FSU, Clemson, UNC, Virginia, Notre Dame, and Stanford.
Click to expand...
Notre Dame being Notre Dame, and based on Big 10 prior interest in UNC and Virginia and the population/market/television sets involved, I assume these three would be full share Big 10 members. I don't think FSU and Clemson deliver big media markets. Are they national brands that would warrant a full share? I don't know. They've certainly been successful on the field but so has Oregon.

Stanford does not warrant a full share if it warrants an invite at all. San Francisco and the Bay Area are a huge market, but nobody seems to care about Stanford and it isn't a national brand. I think the only way Stanford is in the Big 10 is if Notre Dame says we want Stanford. Otherwise, I think Stanford would have been part of the USC acquisition. Reports are that it was USC alone that approached the Big 10, not USCLA. While there's a strategic case for grabbing UCLA as well, to push the Pac 12 out of the LA market, it would have made some sense at the same time to grab the huge SF/Bay area market along with USC, assuming there is actual value in college FB and to a lesser extent college athletics in that market. My assumption is that the SF/Bay area is not a great college sports market and Stanford/Cal are appraised as underperforming sports properties.
 

mngolf said:
Is it decent? Feels almost like time to shut down the Athletic Dept if that's all you can do.
Click to expand...
About the only thing that makes it decent is that it's better than the AA and MWC contract.

If Apple's proposal is similar to its MLS and other sports properties, then Pac-Whateversleft has the cost and logistics of production, too, lessening the value. Apple doesn't currently produce any of its sports broadcasts.
 

swede2 said:
About the only thing that makes it decent is that it's better than the AA and MWC contract.

If Apple's proposal is similar to its MLS and other sports properties, then Pac-Whateversleft has the cost and logistics of production, too, lessening the value. Apple doesn't currently produce any of its sports broadcasts.
Click to expand...
That makes it decent for the schools that have no other options. OSU and WSU.
 

at this point, there is a proposal on the table - or, depending on which 'source' you believe, there are two or three proposals on the table.

there is no "deal" until the remaining Pac-12 schools vote to approve a media deal - AND approve a Grant of Rights.

so, as of right now, there are two dominoes waiting to be tipped over:
- domino #1 - the Pac-12. is a deal approved? do any more schools leave? do any new schools agree to join the conference?
- domino #2 - the ACC. will one or more schools challenge the GOR in court - or agree to pay a significant buyout to leave the conference?

so far, nothing but silence from the Arizona Board of Regents. This could be a game of chicken to see who blinks first between the Pac-12 and the remaining 'corner' schools - Zona, Zona State and the Utes.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
at this point, there is a proposal on the table - or, depending on which 'source' you believe, there are two or three proposals on the table.

there is no "deal" until the remaining Pac-12 schools vote to approve a media deal - AND approve a Grant of Rights.

so, as of right now, there are two dominoes waiting to be tipped over:
- domino #1 - the Pac-12. is a deal approved? do any more schools leave? do any new schools agree to join the conference?
- domino #2 - the ACC. will one or more schools challenge the GOR in court - or agree to pay a significant buyout to leave the conference?

so far, nothing but silence from the Arizona Board of Regents. This could be a game of chicken to see who blinks first between the Pac-12 and the remaining 'corner' schools - Zona, Zona State and the Utes.
Click to expand...
The Arizona Board had a scheduled meeting. Just happened to be the day after the PAC-12 media deal was presented to the member schools. I don't think there's any there there.
 


Bit we were told by a twice banned user reports of a mediocre Pac 12 deal was all clickbait and things were fine! Are we to believe he was wrong???? :oops::p:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 

swede2 said:
Notre Dame being Notre Dame, and based on Big 10 prior interest in UNC and Virginia and the population/market/television sets involved, I assume these three would be full share Big 10 members. I don't think FSU and Clemson deliver big media markets. Are they national brands that would warrant a full share? I don't know. They've certainly been successful on the field but so has Oregon.

Stanford does not warrant a full share if it warrants an invite at all. San Francisco and the Bay Area are a huge market, but nobody seems to care about Stanford and it isn't a national brand. I think the only way Stanford is in the Big 10 is if Notre Dame says we want Stanford. Otherwise, I think Stanford would have been part of the USC acquisition. Reports are that it was USC alone that approached the Big 10, not USCLA. While there's a strategic case for grabbing UCLA as well, to push the Pac 12 out of the LA market, it would have made some sense at the same time to grab the huge SF/Bay area market along with USC, assuming there is actual value in college FB and to a lesser extent college athletics in that market. My assumption is that the SF/Bay area is not a great college sports market and Stanford/Cal are appraised as underperforming sports properties.
Click to expand...
This post is a bit, right?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom