(03-23-2023 03:53 AM)AztecNation Wrote:  For the people saying ESPN is intentionally stalling things to get PAC schools in the B12 at a discount. Can someone explain how it's a discount when ESPN would be acquiring 3 of the least watched FB schools in the conference? Only thing they really would gain is Utah and the Holy War, but Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado do nothing to bolster the B12 if I'm ESPN. Definitely not worth paying 21M to get them.

The top matchups in the Pac right now are Oregon-Washington, Stanford-Cal, Washington-Wash St., Oregon-Oregon St. Then you add Utah games with Washington and Oregon.

That doesn't really seem like a discount, seems like fair value at best, overpaying at worse.

I dont think ESPN really cares. That 4-corners content would largely become ESPN+ games (unless they are having a good year) or late night Saturday window games where there wont be any other linear P5 college games to really compete with. Would ESPN rather have Oregon and Washington? Sure. But if they can get western P5 school content for a cut rate price---that will still functionally fulfill their need.

(03-24-2023 01:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-23-2023 03:53 AM)AztecNation Wrote:  For the people saying ESPN is intentionally stalling things to get PAC schools in the B12 at a discount. Can someone explain how it's a discount when ESPN would be acquiring 3 of the least watched FB schools in the conference? Only thing they really would gain is Utah and the Holy War, but Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado do nothing to bolster the B12 if I'm ESPN. Definitely not worth paying 21M to get them.

The top matchups in the Pac right now are Oregon-Washington, Stanford-Cal, Washington-Wash St., Oregon-Oregon St. Then you add Utah games with Washington and Oregon.

That doesn't really seem like a discount, seems like fair value at best, overpaying at worse.

I dont think ESPN really cares. That 4-corners content would largely become ESPN+ games (unless they are having a good year) or late night Saturday window games where there wont be any other linear P5 college games to really compete with. Would ESPN rather have Oregon and Washington? Sure. But if they can get western P5 school content for a cut rate price---that will still functionally fulfill their need.

There is also no guarantee that all 4 corner schools get a Big 12 invite if the PAC falls apart. FOX will primarily dictate who gets added since they do not already have a P5 pro rata expansion clause. There is a world where Utah and one of the Arizona schools get left out because of market overlap.

There is also no guarantee that all 4 corner schools get a Big 12 invite if the PAC falls apart. FOX will primarily dictate who gets added since they do not already have a P5 pro rata expansion clause. There is a world where Utah and one of the Arizona schools get left out because of market overlap.
[/quote]

This is true but I think the smarter move is to get all 4 of them for the rivalries and eyeballs. At some point tv markets aren't going to be enough, it's going to be about who gets people to watch the games. A Big 12 with a ton of rivalries can bring those eyeballs. The eastern teams have history with each other, Colorado has history with a lot of teams, and the western teams have history with each other.

(03-23-2023 03:53 AM)AztecNation Wrote:  For the people saying ESPN is intentionally stalling things to get PAC schools in the B12 at a discount. Can someone explain how it's a discount when ESPN would be acquiring 3 of the least watched FB schools in the conference? Only thing they really would gain is Utah and the Holy War, but Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado do nothing to bolster the B12 if I'm ESPN. Definitely not worth paying 21M to get them.

The top matchups in the Pac right now are Oregon-Washington, Stanford-Cal, Washington-Wash St., Oregon-Oregon St. Then you add Utah games with Washington and Oregon.

That doesn't really seem like a discount, seems like fair value at best, overpaying at worse.

ESPN appears to disagree with you so strongly that they're willing to pay that much for ANY current P5 addition to the big 12. Which probably means that most of them are worth significantly more to ESPN. Perhaps not in a vacuum, but regarding ESPN's current discussions, bringing in a few Pac schools (but not too many!) would probably be ideal for ESPN. Pay $21m each for, say, 2-4 Pac schools, that's only $42-84m and they now have lots of Late Night content (and no single school gets stuck on it all that often). That could explain the $90m figure from ESPN we're hearing for a smattering of Pac content...they just neither need nor want all that much of it.

As far as discounting the value of the 4c, that's not a great look for a fan of a school that's trying to join their conference. I still don't trash Texas Tech, Rice, or Baylor, and my school hasn't been in a conference with any of them in a very long time.

What are the dominoes that are falling?

(03-24-2023 05:49 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(03-23-2023 03:53 AM)AztecNation Wrote:  For the people saying ESPN is intentionally stalling things to get PAC schools in the B12 at a discount. Can someone explain how it's a discount when ESPN would be acquiring 3 of the least watched FB schools in the conference? Only thing they really would gain is Utah and the Holy War, but Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado do nothing to bolster the B12 if I'm ESPN. Definitely not worth paying 21M to get them.

The top matchups in the Pac right now are Oregon-Washington, Stanford-Cal, Washington-Wash St., Oregon-Oregon St. Then you add Utah games with Washington and Oregon.

That doesn't really seem like a discount, seems like fair value at best, overpaying at worse.

ESPN appears to disagree with you so strongly that they're willing to pay that much for ANY current P5 addition to the big 12. Which probably means that most of them are worth significantly more to ESPN. Perhaps not in a vacuum, but regarding ESPN's current discussions, bringing in a few Pac schools (but not too many!) would probably be ideal for ESPN. Pay $21m each for, say, 2-4 Pac schools, that's only $42-84m and they now have lots of Late Night content (and no single school gets stuck on it all that often). That could explain the $90m figure from ESPN we're hearing for a smattering of Pac content...they just neither need nor want all that much of it.

As far as discounting the value of the 4c, that's not a great look for a fan of a school that's trying to join their conference. I still don't trash Texas Tech, Rice, or Baylor, and my school hasn't been in a conference with any of them in a very long time.

Like Bryan said, the overall value makes sense, not the per team value: Paying for four teams to add a new, less competitive window where the 4C host better watched B12 teams is the value, especially if you are paying four teams for the similar content and not ten.

The only dominoes falling are Wilner's Pac 12 survival line pointspread.

He dropped survival from -5.5 to a 5 point favorite on March 1, and said it would decline by half a point every week that went by without a TV deal.

-4.5 on March 8
-4 on March 15
-3.5 on March 22 . . .

On deck, -3 on March 29.

*** Survival odds

For several months, we viewed Pac-12 survival as a 5.5-point favorite over Pac-12 extinction, which equated to a probability of about 67 percent. The conference had a two-in-three chance to successfully navigate this existential crisis.

But as the Hotline detailed a few weeks ago, time and risk move in lockstep in the realignment game.

Risk that unknown or hibernating factors can rise up to derail expectations.

Risk that institutional priorities could change or economic pressures could appear.

Risk that anxiety could lead to panic.

Risk that forces of instability could prevail.

Commissioner George Kliavkoff’s decision to take the negotiations across the holidays and into a second calendar year — “No need for a rush,” he said in December — has created an additional level of uncertainty.

As a result, our Pac-12 survival odds have changed for the first time in months, ticking down to five points.

And they will continue to decrease by a half-point every week that comes and goes without a deal.

If the end of March arrives and the same state of uncertainty still exists, then survival will be favored over extinction by merely a field goal.

(03-24-2023 06:36 PM)JSUCleburneslim Wrote:  What are the dominoes that are falling?

Pac having news about a tv deal and expansion

(03-24-2023 09:53 PM)TeamRamRod1 Wrote:  

(03-24-2023 06:36 PM)JSUCleburneslim Wrote:  What are the dominoes that are falling?

Pac having news about a tv deal and expansion

If dominoes fall in a forest and no one is around to see them fall, did they really fall?

(03-18-2023 03:26 AM)Alanda Wrote:  https://www.750thegame.com/canzano-pac-1...n-tuesday/

Quote:If you’re a fan of a Pac-12 school, circle next Tuesday, March 21st, on your calendar.

That is when the Pac-12 CEO group meets next. They will not meet again until April 10th.

Media rights remains at the top of the agenda, and John Canzano says the finish line is in sight.
[...]

The full audio clip is at the bottom of the article.

So I've lost track of which Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday was supposed to be "the" day.

But I "think" it was supposed to be this week?

And now that the Big10 apparently have a new commissioner to announce, I wonder what those other meetings (the "next" PAC meeting, the Colorado board meeting, and so on) will look like.

I'd make a wish to be a "fly on the wall", but I'm adverse to incendiary explosions : )

(03-24-2023 07:07 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  The only dominoes falling are Wilner's Pac 12 survival line pointspread.

He dropped survival from -5.5 to a 5 point favorite on March 1, and said it would decline by half a point every week that went by without a TV deal.

-4.5 on March 8
-4 on March 15
-3.5 on March 22 . . .

On deck, -3 on March 29.

*** Survival odds

For several months, we viewed Pac-12 survival as a 5.5-point favorite over Pac-12 extinction, which equated to a probability of about 67 percent. The conference had a two-in-three chance to successfully navigate this existential crisis.

But as the Hotline detailed a few weeks ago, time and risk move in lockstep in the realignment game.

Risk that unknown or hibernating factors can rise up to derail expectations.

Risk that institutional priorities could change or economic pressures could appear.

Risk that anxiety could lead to panic.

Risk that forces of instability could prevail.

Commissioner George Kliavkoff’s decision to take the negotiations across the holidays and into a second calendar year — “No need for a rush,” he said in December — has created an additional level of uncertainty.

As a result, our Pac-12 survival odds have changed for the first time in months, ticking down to five points.

And they will continue to decrease by a half-point every week that comes and goes without a deal.

If the end of March arrives and the same state of uncertainty still exists, then survival will be favored over extinction by merely a field goal.

Odds go to -2 tomorrow. Another 4 weeks and they'll be even. And that's coming from one of the biggest Pac Homer's around. I wrote about a week ago that I'm now bearish on the Pac keeping all 10 teams, and the longer this drags on, the more likely we are to see some teams packing their bags.

If the Pac does lose schools will George Kliavkoff keep his job as Commish?

Kliavkoff really screwed the pooch! :lmfao

The SMU "incognito" appearance was the straw the broke the camel's back.

(04-11-2023 10:46 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  ...the longer this drags on, the more likely we are to see some teams packing their bags.

Agreed - for the simple reason that it tells us the schools can't reach an agreement. You know they have to be looking at proposals, but the more they shoot down, the more it seems like they'll never reach an agreement.

(04-11-2023 10:46 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  Odds go to -2 tomorrow. Another 4 weeks and they'll be even. And that's coming from one of the biggest Pac Homer's around. I wrote about a week ago that I'm now bearish on the Pac keeping all 10 teams, and the longer this drags on, the more likely we are to see some teams packing their bags.

I asked Wilner about that. Just like Canzano has abandoned position after position ("Circle March 21 on your calendars and watch the dominos fall!"), Wilner has abandoned the "half point a week approach" and set Pac 12 survival at a 3.5 point favorite (about 62%) until further notice.