If Prime succeeds at Colorado he’ll take a better job before Colorado plays its first Big 12 game, and if he is losing the shine will be off of Time and nobody will care anymore.
2 Likes
Here is a post from another board. Shocking
Championship Game Viewership Numbers
This is a contributing factor as to why the networks have basically bailed on the PAC
A Top 10 matchup between Arizona & UCLA got beat by the MWC.
And it only gets worse as a without LA and the top brands.
B10 - 2.81m
ACC - 2.70m
B12 - 2.49m
SEC - 1.95m
AAC - 1.70m
MWC - 1.66m
P12 - 1.57m
A10 - 1.39m
BEast - 0.98m
3 Likes
The same things said about the PAC are the same things that prevent schools in the NE from becoming perennial football powers. Getting people to pay attention to college sports in either place is difficult. Even the ACC is dragged down by BC, Cuse, and a bunch of schools whose fans don’t care about football, which is the money machine for TV contracts.
The NE has gazillions of sports fans, but they are pro fans. Same in the West. Good TV numbers for the PAC will depend a lot on drawing fans from outside their footprint (South and Midwest), and with USC and UCLA going away, good luck with that.
1 Like
Tangential to the main discussion, but I find it interesting that the Big East gets 75% of the TV money the AAC does despite being a basketball conference whose tournament fails to draw the same numbers as the AAC (despite being on Fox while the AAC is on cable). It’s not that the AAC has a #1 team. This has been the case for every season I’ve seen.
Back to the subject at hand, as far as I’ve seen these numbers are pretty typical for the Pac-12. Their basketball viewership is borderline mid-major level. Fox dropping them and picking up Big 12 basketball is a pretty significant win.
5 Likes
Don’t kid yourself. The media outlets know these numbers better than the PAC12 Commissioner and Presidents.
This is in line with my guess for the PAC media deal. Could be a couple million higher on the top end. However, SMU could pay their way into the conference and subsidize some of those costs.
“We’re close to knowing where we’re going to be, and I think we’re close to a deal,” Crow said. “I think that the Pac-12 media rights became more complicated with the departure of USC and UCLA. The media rights became more complicated also, as things always do because markets go like this. They’re up and down, up and down. But, we have fabulous sports teams and the remaining teams, we’re going to get a good offer. We’re in the final stages of that process.”
“There have been no discussions with the Big 12 conference on moving,” Crow said. “I mean, there’s been discussions between everyone everywhere on all things related to where our conference is going and where stuff’s going to end up and what’s happening. We are committed to the Pac-12.”
Reminds me of a couple things Max Olsen said in the above podcast:
- The Big 12 folks don’t actually know much about the Pac-12 deal and where it will land.
- They’re interested in schools that will “buy in”… this was said with a tone to suggest that if Arizona State and Utah are luke-warm or “Oh fine I guess” the conference could shrug them off. (There might have been an “except Washington and Oregon” in here.) Also made is sound like the conference is fine at 12. They want to go higher but there is no sense of urgency.
There wont be any pods with 14 teams…There will be two 7 team divisions…Our division?
Houston, Baylor, TCU, Tech, Okie State for sure, likely along with UCF, West Virginia. It could remain at 12, but it sure sounds like ARIZ and Colorado want out of PAC 12…
I don’t think the Big 12 is poaching any Pac-12 Schools. They’ll get an offer around 28-30 million a year and stay in the Pac-12.
I think it’s obvious BY has been playing the media with leaking info to The Athletic & CBS (Dennis Dodd)
Hope I’m wrong, but this is what it looks like.
Too bad those PAC10 schools are making athletic decisions based on research dollars which will be their eventual downfall.
28-30 mil could be enough to keep them, but an offer from who? They need some TV outlet and i dont see them getting one…28 mil from Amazon or Hulu isnt going to make all the members happy.
1 Like
I think Apple is only possibility of making up the money gap. Amazon isn’t taking a ton of inventory and ESPN wants it cheap.
1 Like
Yeah. I just don’t see how they will get 28-30M net. If they did, they would have signed the contract already. Plus no numbers floating around so that’s not good for Pac12.
2 Likes
I can confirm this observationally. Live in southern vermont, high tourist area — 95% of ‘team’ shirts i see are pro teams. Growing up in east texas i swear everybody had at least one t-shirt of either UH/baylor/texas/a&m/tech.
NE has diehards and that’s about it. The big east and ACC are trending down.
I watched the PAC-12 Championship game, it started late AF. OFC nobody beyond the MTZ is gonna watch
I have heard of apple TV plus…Is that something you buy with a subscription so you can watch it on TV?
So all PAC fans from Rockies to west coast will have to buy a subscription to see PAC 12 games? WOW.
I guess ESPNs offer of 24.6 mil from a few months back was taken off the table after PAC said no…
1 Like
Fine with me. Divisions have been around for a long time as an accepted option, though not perfect. Little is though.
I don’t want pods, don’t like pods, and do not see a pod as having any benefit over permanent rivals (my preferred option).
Apple TV+ is a streaming service like HBO or any other subscription based programing. They have original content then offer some additional movies or series. They also offer pay for view like Amazon Prime. Their uniqueness is you can watch something on Paramount+ or another streaming service and it will appear on your Apple TV+ site making it a one stop shop for finding your preferred programming.
It could be the time delay is the Commish is getting push back to adding SDSU and SMU. I do not see
how it benefits SMU to play Oregon St. and Washington St., different breed up there.
I don’t see how you get to two clean divisions of 7 with 14 teams without splitting up one of the following obvious groupings:
West: Colorado, BYU, Arizona
Southwest: Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Houston
Plains: Kansas, K-State, Iowa State
Eastern: Cincinnati, WVU, and UCF.
You might be tempted to say “Oklahoma State to the Plains” but they’d object and they pull rank. Same with trying to put Texas Tech with the west.
You could move Colorado to the plains then Eastern+Plains in one division and West+Southwest the other, but that would throw them with the eastern schools which is a problem.
With the same divisions (Eastern+Plains/West+Southwest) you could put us in the east, but we definitely don’t want that.
Anything that puts East with West would put teams Arizona (in the Pacific timezone for part of the season) with teams in the eastern time zone, and that’s a non-starter.
For 14 and 16, I don’t see divisions as being workable. There are two potential division configurations for 12, but I think they’ve already said they don’t plan to do it. Permanent rivals seems almost a certainly for 12, 14, or 16.