The question becomes which is more important for you? Playing in traditional rivalries or playing in the future (the new collegiate order). I’m a traditionalist. I like old rivalries. I think they create togetherness and camaraderie. But if you’re left outside looking in it becomes a moot point. Its a tough call. I wouldn’t leave the pac for 2 mil more a year. But I’d be foolish to look at the landscape and not realize that next time around Yormark is gonna have a lot more arrows in his quiver. The disparity between the two will grow from here on out.
Everyone is focusing on this TV deal as the answer to “Will the Pac 12 survive?”.
The answer is Oregon and Washington. The Big 10 isn’t done and they wanted Oregon over UCLA in the first place.
The $ in a TV contract isn’t something a kid cares about. The exposure is what they want, not only for ego purposes but NIL as well.
The Pac is line the SWC at the end. The patient is going to die, you just don’t know when.
They might have preferred Oregon but that doesn’t mean much at this point. OreWah are not sitting safely right now either. If the bottom falls out of the conference the Big doesn’t have any greater need for Oregon now than it did yesterday. OreWash could sit atop an outhouse for eight years waiting on the next realignment.
When the PAC falls apart in the coming weeks Ore/Wash will either end up in the B1G at a partial share, or in the BIG 12.
Also, those that think traditions mean something in the PAC. They aren’t very strong when USC/UCLA already left, Oregon and Washington spent weeks begging the B1G to take them, and no the 4 corners having in depth conversations about what a move to the BIG 12 would look like.
These things happen because those presidents have zero confidence Kliavkoff is going to deliver a media deal that is acceptable.
They are going to publicly show positive support, but like Arizona President said last week very publicly. There are minimum standards the deal has to meet, if it is going to be acceptable. Close in $$$ to the Big 12, and can’t be more than 50% streaming.
Kliavkoff is not going to be able to deliver that because ESPN is in control of the 2nd stipulation, and they don’t want the PAC to stay together.
I wonder if the delay is on purpose.
Either pushed by Wash/Ore as they wait a new Big 10 commissioner.
Or by GK himself hoping to push it back so far that it’s too late for the four corners to join the Big 12 for 2024.
Sounds familiar….
When I sat down to write this article it was to point out how hard it would be to say no to Amazon or Apple because a great deal of research and develop money flows into member schools not to mention the alumni base who work in the tech industry based less than an hour from the Pac-12 offices. But things have changed very quickly to the point where the hard part might be saying yes. Indications point to Apple TV as the front-runner and attempts are being made by Kliavkoff, to carve out a package to include ESPN and Amazon.
(As is the case with all that has gone on with this deal who the front-runner could change.)
A note to the athletic directors who want exposure saying no to Apple and Amazon because of their preference for a liner partner. Perhaps they haven’t been paying attention the only possibility for that to happen is to take a low-ball deal from ESPN that would get a few games on the network but likely a huge package on their streamer ESPN +.
1 Like
I don’t understand why the Pac dealing with Apple would be a win. Pac athletic support is relatively apathetic compared to, well, everywhere else. There’s no way the fanbase is going to subscribe to Apple+ in order to watch Washington State take on Cal. I can’t see how Apple stands to make any money from this deal…and I bet viewership drops.
1 Like
It’s a smarter deal than going with espn. The pac athletic base isn’t strong, but selling them Apple TV and it’s non sports offerings, is a better bet than selling the fan base on a sports only network.
It’s easier to sell the pac fan base a slew of Apple TV movies and tv shows with their team football game attached.
The only was Disney got everyone to also subscribe to espn was forcing it as a bundle with their family entertainment channels.
That model is now over as cable companies have told Disney to pound sand.
Who knows if it’ll work for the pac but the strategy is logical.
1 Like
Not at a $300 million a year price tag it doesn’t.
There’s been many diapers thrown up against the wall.
My latest understanding is that Apple TV offers big 12 money but would be a learning curve for people to learn to watch sports on Apple TV.
ESPN offers significantly less because people already watch it for sports.
Which are you replying to about $300 million?
Either one.
What has been speculated is that the ONLY WAY the PAC could get to near BIG 12 payout is if it was 100% Apple, and they over paid to get it.
ESPN is never going to pay $300 million. Not since the Kliavkoff decided to go to the open market and thumb their nose at ESPN.
Whether or not the Fanbase could navigate watching their games on Apple, was never the issue.
It was the fact that ONLY their fan bases would navigate to watch the games. And, most likely only the fanbases of those that were actually playing in that particular game.
2 Likes
If I’m desperate to watch a football game at 10:00 - 11:00 on a Saturday night, am I going to Apple TV+ or am I going to channel surf on ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, Fox, FS1, or FS2? You can check your cable or DVR menu to see which games are being televised at any given time. For a streaming service, it’s more of an effort.
The question I would ask is how dedicated is your fanbase to go out and possibly subscribe to Apple TV+ or how much of a fanbase are you going to grow by having your games on Apple TV+?
2 Likes
I total could see Apple paying $300m or even $400m like that, they paid $80m for the rights to the movie Greyhound. Amazon paid almost $200m for one movie. Their valuation is based upon subscriber numbers and growth.
For the movies, Apple is willing to eat cash for a very short-term expense. These negotiations will be for a lengthier term…and I’m not sure Apple would be willing to pay more to Pac in order to spend more to produce the material. Apple might be the most money-greedy IT company ever…and I can’t see them willing to flush any amount of cash away without a guarantee that they’d benefit from the “investment”. I’m not sure Pac fans will provide enough interest to make this profitable for Apple.
1 Like
No insider info here and totally in line with what’s out there publicly but one of my best friends works at Disney focused on streaming and previously worked at Apple TV. I asked him (he is completely clueless about sports) and while he hadn’t heard anything specifically he did say that right now both Disney/ESPN, Apple and other streamers are drastically pulling back spending on content and that in general now would be a horrible time to try to do a (good) deal with one of them. He did however mention that Eddie Cue who is responsible for Apple TV is a huge sports fan and was the one pushing Apple’s involvement in sports but that he’s a Duke fan.
2 Likes
Agree
Apple not ready to sink the $ into the huge infra structure of production.
They can throw $ for “turn key” content and its just a sunken cost.
Why not the PAC?
PAC owning its own network seems perfect for this situation. It will effect the real worth of the deal.
Some comments that MLS self production will be $60 million over time.
Apple must see Amazon not self producing Thursday Night NFL & like the idea short term.
The big issue:
An extra $77 a year like MLS if you already have an Apple + account ?
Mostly knocks out the casual watcher when regular cable has so many games.
1 Like
The missing dynamic is that, as a high-value recruit, I don’t care how much the university is making. I’m trying to get the biggest exposure possible for myself.
If I’m deciding between being exclusively on Apple+ versus being on ESPN, that’s an easy decision for me.
If the PAC decides to accept Apple+ dollars, they are doing so at the expense of their recruiting ability and long-term athletic health. But maybe PAC is OK deciding that they’ll take a step back in athletics for the sake of their academic social circle.
2 Likes
If Apple was going to pay that amount, it would have happened already.
Of course, that’s also ignoring the fact that Arizona President Robbins, has said anything more than 50% streaming is a non-starter Any talk of Apple being the Tier 1 rights holder is not going to work.