(04-11-2023 10:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 09:16 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 07:25 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

A baseball guy? What a lame hire. Doubt he’s aggressive in expansion.

My initial reaction is that he’s not going to make any major waves.

Counterpoint...

MLB is a national league that understands the value of exposure in multiple regions. Additionally, it's a sport that has faced challenges in adapting to changing markets and demographics. That's something college sports will likely have to face in the next generation and it will be good to have a guy who has spent a lot of time working to grow a product in that sort of environment.

And his experience is heavily in media and a changing media environment. So he doesn't seem like a status quo type hire.

The quote literally says all he is expected to do is keep the status quo

Quote:As one college sports insider describes it, Petitti is a safe and solid hire who needs to only “keep the [Big Ten] train running on time.”

(04-12-2023 01:17 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 02:46 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 02:36 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  It's gonna be me. And my first act will be to invite Notre Dame and Cincinnati to join.

You heard it here first. /s

No way the B1G invites ND, they already have the State of Indiana saturated with Purdue and Indiana.

Just a tidbit, my good buddy: The "/s" in my post means "end sarcasm" which means I was being sarcastic. But I also know to put "/sarcasm" next time so you have no doubt I'm being sarcastic.

(Seriously, I was kidding, man. How could you not see that? lol)

I'm afraid you're the one not picking up the sarcasm here.

Going to be interesting if the New Commish offers any Pac12 teams this summer

(04-11-2023 10:40 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 08:54 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 08:44 PM)goofus Wrote:  As a Midwestern guy who likes football and wanted the Big Ten to add Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas instead of Rutgers and MD, there are 4 things I already don't like about this guy

1. A new Yorker
2. A lawyer
3. A tv guy
4. A baseball guy.

I like him exactly for those reasons, now that you have spelled it out like that.

Headline in next thread: "ND fan inadvertently leaks news of impending move to B1G"

Nah, I am a Yankee lawyer who likes baseball.

ESPN article:

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...mmissioner

(04-11-2023 11:30 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 07:50 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

Quote: As one college sports insider describes it, Petitti is a safe and solid hire who needs to only “keep the [Big Ten] train running on time.”

Subtext… he won’t be aggressive in further expansion

Actually, this is a very solid hire by the B1G. The fact that he is an attorney should concern ACC folks, IMO. And while he does come from baseball, MLB guys know plenty about egos!!! Petitti will know how to make course corrections with the B1G presidents!!
I don't think he will waste much time with ND. He will probably concentrate his efforts on who the B1G wants from the Pac 12, and go from there.

If the B1G wasn't interested in doing anything on the realignment front, they could have gone after the ACC commish, or promoted one of Commissioner Warren's lackeys. The fact that they did neither shows me that they are interested in realignment.

I don't know if the hire means much for realignment one way or the other. That remains to be seen.

However, I do think that the Big Ten picking prioritizing someone with top experience with one of the 4 major pro sports leagues and one of the 4 major TV networks as opposed to a college sports lifer indicates that the conference knows that the future looks a lot more like a pro sports environment regardless of whether there's more expansion.

I don't get the critique from others (not you) that the new commissioner is a "baseball guy" at all. Being the COO of *all* of Major League Baseball has heck of a lot more in common with running a power conference like the Big Ten (AKA a massive valuable sports organization where you have to deal with multiple big ego/money constituents like MLB owners or university presidents) than the experience of Kevin Warren, Brett Yormark or George Kliavkoff when they were hired.

(04-12-2023 11:31 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 11:30 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 07:50 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

Quote: As one college sports insider describes it, Petitti is a safe and solid hire who needs to only “keep the [Big Ten] train running on time.”

Subtext… he won’t be aggressive in further expansion

Actually, this is a very solid hire by the B1G. The fact that he is an attorney should concern ACC folks, IMO. And while he does come from baseball, MLB guys know plenty about egos!!! Petitti will know how to make course corrections with the B1G presidents!!
I don't think he will waste much time with ND. He will probably concentrate his efforts on who the B1G wants from the Pac 12, and go from there.

If the B1G wasn't interested in doing anything on the realignment front, they could have gone after the ACC commish, or promoted one of Commissioner Warren's lackeys. The fact that they did neither shows me that they are interested in realignment.

I don't know if the hire means much for realignment one way or the other. That remains to be seen.

However, I do think that the Big Ten picking prioritizing someone with top experience with one of the 4 major pro sports leagues and one of the 4 major TV networks as opposed to a college sports lifer indicates that the conference knows that the future looks a lot more like a pro sports environment regardless of whether there's more expansion.

I don't get the critique from others (not you) that the new commissioner is a "baseball guy" at all. Being the COO of *all* of Major League Baseball has heck of a lot more in common with running a power conference like the Big Ten (AKA a massive valuable sports organization where you have to deal with multiple big ego/money constituents like MLB owners or university presidents) than the experience of Kevin Warren, Brett Yormark or George Kliavkoff when they were hired.

Multiple reports said that the TV networks weren't willing to re-negotiate with the Big Ten for any additions until they hired a new commissioner. Regardless of what Pettiti's views on expansion are, the Big 10 couldn't expand until they got a new commish.

We should have a clearer idea of Big Ten expansion within the next month at the most.

(04-12-2023 11:34 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

This makes me wonder, If he is a network guy and loved by all in the industry, if the B1G were to expand again this summer or next year could ESPN/ABC be a network that comes to the table with an offer for the extra content?

(04-12-2023 11:59 AM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(04-12-2023 11:34 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

This makes me wonder, If he is a network guy and loved by all in the industry, if the B1G were to expand again this summer or next year could ESPN/ABC be a network that comes to the table with an offer for the extra content?

Personal relationships certainly matter and it's better to have them than not have them, but these networks are still about the bottom line. ESPN/ABC is only coming to the table if a deal makes sense financially, particularly in this tough environment where Wall Street is hammering all of the entertainment companies on costs.

George Kliavkoff was a top executive at NBCUniversal and helped create Hulu, yet neither NBC/Comcast nor Disney (majority owner of Hulu) seem to be doing the Pac-12 any favors.

(04-12-2023 11:59 AM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(04-12-2023 11:34 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

This makes me wonder, If he is a network guy and loved by all in the industry, if the B1G were to expand again this summer or next year could ESPN/ABC be a network that comes to the table with an offer for the extra content?

I think expansion and "fourth TV package" go hand in hand, you can't really do one without the other. You need expansion to add inventory that isn't already earmarked, and you need new TV money to pay for additions (and a bump for the existing schools).

What is ESPN looking to pay for the No. 4 Big Ten game each week? "Big Ten After Dark," with three home games each from four Big Ten West Coast teams? I don't think that's what USC joined the Big Ten for.

I suspect Amazon would be paying a good deal more than ESPN, for a Friday night package. That would tie in with their Thursday night NFL game, but are the Big Ten presidents interested in signing up for a Friday Night home game 2 years out of 3 (assuming 18 teams, 12 Friday night games)

I'm kind of a skeptic on Big Ten expansion, because the Big Ten schools are in a position where they don't have to jump through hoops (Friday night games, more West Coast trips, Big Ten After Dark) for another say $5M per school per year.

(04-12-2023 07:35 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 10:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 09:16 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 07:25 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  

A baseball guy? What a lame hire. Doubt he’s aggressive in expansion.

My initial reaction is that he’s not going to make any major waves.

Counterpoint...

MLB is a national league that understands the value of exposure in multiple regions. Additionally, it's a sport that has faced challenges in adapting to changing markets and demographics. That's something college sports will likely have to face in the next generation and it will be good to have a guy who has spent a lot of time working to grow a product in that sort of environment.

And his experience is heavily in media and a changing media environment. So he doesn't seem like a status quo type hire.

The quote literally says all he is expected to do is keep the status quo

Quote:As one college sports insider describes it, Petitti is a safe and solid hire who needs to only “keep the [Big Ten] train running on time.”

For the last dozen years, the status quo has been that the B1G has added 5 teams, one or two at a time. There is no specific indication they will add another PAC school(s) in the next year, however they likely will add more during his tenure assuming it is roughly around 5 yrs or more, two at a time b/c of the peculiarities of an odd numbered league of that size.

The end PAC contract/cohesion/dissolution scenarios may speed up that timeframe, as if UW and one of UO/Stanford are in a tough spot and willing to accept it, they are certainly worth it at half or even 2/3 shares for a contract term.

From Pete Thamel:

Petitti takes over the Big Ten at a time when the league is seeking stability and a consensus builder. Warren's tenure was uneven, as he had difficulty with the set up of college athletics as a clunky and non-linear business where commissioners mostly lack unilateral power of professional commissioners.

But Mandel’s tweet says:

Thamel says:

Quote:Unless of course they're planning to add more schools (cough, cough, Oregon & Washington) and need to package another rights deal sooner.

I'd like to point out that, besides the Big Ten's own TV contracts, there is a huge television contract being negotiated in the next two years with an enormous impact on the Big Ten -- the new College Football Playoff contract (including, or not, the Rose Bowl)

Even if they (the Big Ten presidents) don't have an appetite for 18 or 20 teams, there's still a lot of value to having a television guy in house.

(04-12-2023 02:01 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Thamel says:

Quote:Unless of course they're planning to add more schools (cough, cough, Oregon & Washington) and need to package another rights deal sooner.

I'd like to point out that, besides the Big Ten's own TV contracts, there is a huge television contract being negotiated in the next two years with an enormous impact on the Big Ten -- the new College Football Playoff contract (including, or not, the Rose Bowl)

Even if they (the Big Ten presidents) don't have an appetite for 18 or 20 teams, there's still a lot of value to having a television guy in house.

What would the playoff TV contract have to do with the Big Ten commissioner? That would be a deal the NCAA commissioner would sign, not the Big Ten commissioner.

The only thing the Big Ten commissioner could really do is lobby the NCAA on how the playoff money should be distributed between conferences. But the Big Ten commissioner would still not be working directly with the TV networks there.

(04-12-2023 02:01 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Thamel says:

Quote:Unless of course they're planning to add more schools (cough, cough, Oregon & Washington) and need to package another rights deal sooner.

I'd like to point out that, besides the Big Ten's own TV contracts, there is a huge television contract being negotiated in the next two years with an enormous impact on the Big Ten -- the new College Football Playoff contract (including, or not, the Rose Bowl)

Even if they (the Big Ten presidents) don't have an appetite for 18 or 20 teams, there's still a lot of value to having a television guy in house.

Excellent point.

I also saw somewhere (can’t find it now) that Petitti worked on the creation of the BCS system, so that’s another point in his favor in terms of having dealt with college athletics.

(04-12-2023 07:35 AM)bk1714 Wrote:  

(04-12-2023 01:17 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 02:46 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(04-11-2023 02:36 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  It's gonna be me. And my first act will be to invite Notre Dame and Cincinnati to join.

You heard it here first. /s

No way the B1G invites ND, they already have the State of Indiana saturated with Purdue and Indiana.

Just a tidbit, my good buddy: The "/s" in my post means "end sarcasm" which means I was being sarcastic. But I also know to put "/sarcasm" next time so you have no doubt I'm being sarcastic.

(Seriously, I was kidding, man. How could you not see that? lol)

I'm afraid you're the one not picking up the sarcasm here.

In my defense, I've been sick with the flu.

(04-12-2023 02:01 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Thamel says:

Quote:Unless of course they're planning to add more schools (cough, cough, Oregon & Washington) and need to package another rights deal sooner.

I'd like to point out that, besides the Big Ten's own TV contracts, there is a huge television contract being negotiated in the next two years with an enormous impact on the Big Ten -- the new College Football Playoff contract (including, or not, the Rose Bowl)

Even if they (the Big Ten presidents) don't have an appetite for 18 or 20 teams, there's still a lot of value to having a television guy in house.

Good point.

(04-12-2023 02:03 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(04-12-2023 02:01 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Thamel says:

Quote:Unless of course they're planning to add more schools (cough, cough, Oregon & Washington) and need to package another rights deal sooner.

I'd like to point out that, besides the Big Ten's own TV contracts, there is a huge television contract being negotiated in the next two years with an enormous impact on the Big Ten -- the new College Football Playoff contract (including, or not, the Rose Bowl)

Even if they (the Big Ten presidents) don't have an appetite for 18 or 20 teams, there's still a lot of value to having a television guy in house.

What would the playoff TV contract have to do with the Big Ten commissioner? That would be a deal the NCAA commissioner would sign, not the Big Ten commissioner.

The only thing the Big Ten commissioner could really do is lobby the NCAA on how the playoff money should be distributed between conferences. But the Big Ten commissioner would still not be working directly with the TV networks there.

Has nothing to do with the NCAA. Its the CFP group run by the commissioners that deals with the TV contract. Maybe Hancock does the actual negotiations, but the commissioners hire the leader and will have input.

Another point: being COO of MLB means that Petitti had to deal frequently with the MLBPA, which is the most contentious and powerful pro athlete union out there.

If/when pay for play and/or unionized workforces come to college sports, that’s another item where I think his experience is quite relevant for what college sports *will* be in the future (as opposed to what it was in the past).