Realignment speculation

PAC tv deal expires in 2023. BIG tv deal expires a year earlier. That is why the national pundits who follow expansion say something will happen in 2022/2023 regarding expansion. They are not going to expand until their current tv deal is up.

2 Likes

If the PAC TV deal expires in 2023, I’m sure there will be a new deal in place before it expires. I don’t know how long negotiations takes, but it could be agreed on 1 or 2 years before it expires. This means the PAC would have identified the schools they want to add and the TV networks would want to agree to the added schools. The school presidents will also want to know what will the payout be with the added schools. What I’m trying to say is that adding new schools and TV network deal negotiations may take a year or two, which means they may start talks in 2021 on expansion.

1 Like

I agree on the timing, but I think this is the most likely thing to happen:

OU & uta will leave the Little-12 and go elsewhere, and at least 2 other members will do the same. That will kill the Little-12. At that time, I think the AAC has a good chance to replace the Little-12 as one of the P5 conferences, probably with a few changes in membership.

I think if OU and UT leaves the B12 and not go to the PAC, the PAC may invite UH. If UT goes to PAC then they will not want UH. If OU goes somewhere else, that will leave, as you say, the “Little-12”. With that scenario, I think the Big 12 remaining schools and the AAC might merge to a 14 or 16 team conference and try to maimtain P5 status. If that happens, the Big12 and AAC will have to get rid of some schools. In addition, I think they should keep the name AAC. The American is a more fitting name.

I will say that the writing is on the wall for some programs in the Big 12. I stumbled upon this article today. For KU, a bigger hurdle than upgrading facilities will be seperating from KSU.

The possibility of PAC making money in Texas by adding UH is not assured. Even the big 10 had the recent scare of Comcast dropping them even within their footprint. The PAC network more than likely won’t be paid by time warner or Comcast for any subscribers outside of the Houston area and the likelihood of the PAC making $1.30 per subscriber in the Houston area is slim.

So $20 million is a pipe dream and hopefully even $6 million is doable.

Comcast was going to drop the Big 10 in markets outside their footprint. Comcast was never going to drop them inside their footprint.

The in market drop did turn out to be false. The fact that New York isn’t included in the footprint anymore is a blow to their income and the fact that the big 10 is up against this doesn’t bode well for the pac network being able to land a lucrative deal.

That is why the PAC NET and BTN both really need a team in Texas. That would make the whole state in footprint for each. UT to BIG and UH to PAC.

2 Likes

The B1G Network/Comcast situation is an interesting one and bears watching. If Comcast sticks to their guns and doesn’t add them back come football season, we may begin seeing the bubble burst when it comes to TV contracts.

Biggest thing to remember is that only about half of cable subscribers actually watch sports and many are coming to the conclusion that paying large cable bills that contain high cost sports channels are a waste. As more and more cut the cord or look for other options, the cable companies will make cuts. Some are even offering skinny bundles that don’t include sports channels.

The question, as we move to more of a streaming culture, is will the sports channels continue to pay out exorbitant sums of money. ESPN just started ESPN+ and will try to recoup their money that way ($4.99 month), but until they add the main ESPN channels to that package, subscriptions probably won’t be high. Question is, how much will they charge when that happens? $20/month? Will people pay that and will it be enough to cover overhead?

If the bubble does burst, that probably ends realignment as we know it and conferences will probably look at cutting costs. Could mean a change in the way conferences look now and a move back to more regional conferences.

4 Likes

Texas has two different major cable providers so either conference gaining a team in Texas does not mean they will benefit from in state income for all 18 million residents.

Plus, the way Comcast is negotiating, the next round of contracts will carve out the specific areas the teams are in. No more will all of Ohio necessarily be in state for the big ten network, etc.

I just received a message on my TiVo that the big 10 network has been deleted by Comcast.

I’m surprised by this since I simply thought Comcast wasn’t providing it in the sports cable packages of non footprint states, not that the option is being removed entirely.

Even if UT is added to the big 10 broadcast in footprint will likely only be in Austin.

I don’t see the pac network making millions and millions from the state of Texas by adding us. But we are still a good option for them

The BIG seems certain to make a move when their TV deal is close to expiration in 2022/23. I cannot imagine PAC 12 standing still and doing nothing if BIG expands. Those 2 are serious partners anyway
As one goes, the other will follow.

The footprint is the entire state in which the school exist. That is why Comcast will carry Rutgers in all of New Jersey but not carry it at all in New York City.

1 Like

Texas is large enough that we have two different cable companies. Comcast, as far as I can tell from a quick search, is not in Dallas. I may be wrong but I would imagine time warner would rebel about paying in state rates for a team that is in comcast’s Footprint.

UH winning has a mesmerizing effect on people’s considerations. Until we’re back at the top in football I don’t see us generating enough buzz despite any financial projection to the contrary. It seems that UH is under appreciated at the core (seen as a viable year-to-year popular state school) but when we’re winning we seem to capture people’s attention at an incrementally better multiple than other schools. Maybe because we’re seen as an exciting offense. But we do seem to get better PR payoff when we win than other G5 schools. That puts a lot of pressure on our program.

1 Like

I should say we seem to have a bigger drop off of alumni and fan viewers when we’re not winning but our fans seem to come home at a greater multiple than most schools when we’re back in the spotlight. Maybe the sheer number of alums that we have around the country.

Because most UH fans feel entitled to undefeated seasons or close to. We feel UH is too good for the AAC, so when we have a season like 2017, we immediately get turned off.

We all deep down know we are working towards something. We all know UH has to prove itself time and time again.

4 Likes

But the academic prestige that comes with the Big Ten transforms a university. I’ve written before about Nebraska’s increased status, even without AAU membership. OU in the Big Ten would cause wild celebration in the academic centers of campus.

My Big Ten professor says that OU and Nebraska are “virtually identical” academically. I don’t know if that’s true. But the professor said that if Big Ten presidents “view Nebraska, with their level of academics, as someone with whom they wish to associate, I cannot imagine why Oklahoma would not be a school that they would welcome.”