One thing we seem to be overlooking are 'replays'. As streaming content, I'd expect out of time zone viewers to be strategizing watching replays more frequently. I know I've gotten used to it because of convenience.
Report: OU & Texas reach out to join SEC
- Thread starter BigJCy
- Start date
Lets say the B1G takes ISU and KU to get to 16. Good geography, AAU, solid universities. Makes scheduling much easier for the B1G with the pod system, potential for two more B1G branded semi final games, etc etc. And then WVU gets into the ACC.
In that scenario, you have five Big 12 leftovers. Then, assuming the PAC wants to match all the other conferences and get to 16, who do they take? To me, TTU and OSU seem like natural fits in the PAC. That leaves BU, TCU, and KSU. Which two of those three does the PAC take? Or are there G5's with better academics or larger enrollments?
In that scenario, you have five Big 12 leftovers. Then, assuming the PAC wants to match all the other conferences and get to 16, who do they take? To me, TTU and OSU seem like natural fits in the PAC. That leaves BU, TCU, and KSU. Which two of those three does the PAC take? Or are there G5's with better academics or larger enrollments?
The Oklahoman had a solid summary of the OU/UT leaving timeline an conundrum. Most of the details are known and discussed in this thread.
I factor that I hadn't considered is FOX owning of the PAC 12 and 1/2 of the Big 12's media rights influence on when UT/OU could leave. Fox would lose a lot of viewers when the SEC takes the Sooners and Longhorns from the Big 12 partnership and only have the 8 schools in their contract. Fox would want try to force TX/OU to stay in 2025 to fulfill the current Big 12 contract and may not want to incentivize the PAC12 or BiG to take schools.
That is unless Fox gains the irate 8 fanbases under with PAC12 or Big 10 membership to increase those viewer ships and it makes sense financially to do it earlier.
I could also see the case where FOX could force "their" conferences to move on expansion early if TX/OU get the buyout. Especially if the ACC or AAC ESPN properties get traction on adding a Big 12 teams and increasing their CFB foot print. I don't see that as an attractive option for ISU but if I were JP I would at least threaten that it is a possibility to get a seat at the desired FOX conference table.
Tramel's ScissorTales: Don't expect quick resolution on OU & OSU conference realignment
It's in Fox’s best interests to keep OU and Texas in the Big 12 as long as possible; Fox would be a major player in any potential Pac-12 expansion.www.oklahoman.com
Yeah, it seems to me that FOX would probably prefer to stabilize the PAC 12 and/or perhaps add some to the Big Ten rather than try to save a sinking ship in the Big 12.
I think Baylor has the worst chances in that scenario.
1. OSU
2. TT
3. TCU
4. KSU
5 Baylor
This is already starting. When Fox was sold to Disney, the regional networks were part of the deal, but Disney couldn't keep them due to owning ESPN. They were sold to Sinclair Broadcasting, rebranded as Bally Sports Networks", who owns a ton of local stations across the US.
Sinclair recently has been losing negotiations with providers, most recently Dish, who refuses to pay for regional sports networks and is willing to lose their local channels in the process. On an earnings call with investors, Dish Chairman Charlie Ergan said the following:
"Asked if there is any link between a potential deal with Sinclair for the broadcast stations and one for the RSNs, Ergen did not sound any hopeful notes. “We don’t have any customers calling us on RSNs today,” he shrugged. “If the local channels were to go down, we would have more than one customer calling us the next day saying, ‘Where’s my local channel?’”
As far as potential scenarios for sports, “We’re happy to talk about anything that’s creative and doesn’t harm our customers,” Ergen said. “But we’re not interested in taxing our customers when they don’t watch the channels. That doesn’t make any sense.”
But we do not have time on our side. This will hurt recruiting. One big 12 coach said just this week that realignment is killing their recruiting. It has to be hurting ours too. Our coaches can't tell incoming players if we are even going to be P5/4 or not.
The difference between a sinking ship and stabilizing are two flagship Universities. Given that the Pac12 contract expires sooner and their finances are a lot worse, they'd have to do some serious shoring up to keep their flagships from bailing. At that point the newer faster sinking ship transfers their flag to the slower sinker.
You take TCU and KSU. TCU is the less religious of the schools without a scandal hanging around their neck, plus it also gets you into the Metroplex of Dallas/Fort Worth, for recruiting.
Taking KSU gets you into another state for TV and streaming purposes.
Is there any scenario where Baylor has a fighting chance to land aware decent?
We were going to be hurt recruiting wise no matter what, the moment the OUT made the announcement recruiting for the other 8 schools became harder. Its what it is, the staff has to be selling the idea that if you come to ISU, you do not have to worry because we are either going to end up in the Big 10 or the Pac 12.
We also have no say in the timeline, this is only going to move as fast as Fox, and the Big 10 and Pac 12 want it too.
Since the ACC has Norte Dame both BU and TCU could ostensibly end up there.
Probably either if the PAC 12 just decides to take the Big 12 remnants as a package deal, or if the PAC 12 explodes completely and the remnants of both conferences join. Otherwise, I think they're especially screwed (he types while giggling)
The problem is between Oregon and USC only one game was "after dark" on the east coast. Every other game was in one of the other three slots. And between the two teams they had one game on FS1, one game on ESPN2, and all the rest were ABC, Fox or ESPN.
It really was not a factor for Oregon and USC last year. That game (USC vs. Utah) drew 1.3 million. Games in good time slots vs. Arizona and ASU drew 2.3 and 2.2 million, so I think it's safe to say that the boost from a better time slot wasn't going to change the overall average viewership for USC all that much. Oregon had no after dark games.
Time zone keeps getting thrown out there as an excuse for USC and Oregon, but the reality is they don't get stuck with those games. They get prime time slots on prime networks.
To me, that strongly suggests more passion for watching football in Big 12 country, which could really assist the TV numbers for the existing PAC 12 teams as well as we start following the rest of them much more closely.
I'm not gonna go back through all of this thread and see if this has been shared but very interesting about the theory of somebody pressing the replay button. Another possibility where Texas gets what they want in the big 12. **** Texas and still **** Nebby https://omaha.com/sports/huskers/fo...cle_8d28564e-fb94-11eb-87a1-2754af2643e7.html
“I heard — whether it’s true or not, I don’t know — that it wasn’t the replay official who hit the (replay) button to review it,” Pelini said. “There was nothing to review. It was over.”
So who hit the replay button?
According to Pelini: “I heard a Big 12 official reached over and hit the button. That’s what I was told a couple months after. And I was like, ‘Well, what are you going to do?’”
“I heard — whether it’s true or not, I don’t know — that it wasn’t the replay official who hit the (replay) button to review it,” Pelini said. “There was nothing to review. It was over.”
So who hit the replay button?
According to Pelini: “I heard a Big 12 official reached over and hit the button. That’s what I was told a couple months after. And I was like, ‘Well, what are you going to do?’”
Yes, there are just way too many people that don't what they are talking about saying a bunch of contradictory things, including blaming the timezone and lack of college football enthusiasm on the west coast for unimpressive ratings for blueblood USC and major national brand, yet saying that expanding into an area of high college football interest like Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Iowa don't bring any value.
Saying viewership matters while claiming ISU wouldn't bring any value to the PAC, when it would likely be the 3rd or 4th most watched team in the league out of the gate.
Saying footprint and the old model still matter, but saying expanding the PAC into Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas doesn't make any sense.
Arguing against the PAC adding anybody, when it is clear they are in dire need to do something, and probably something drastic just to survive.
A lot of the people saying those things have an agenda they are pushing and want nothing more to see than the Big 12 move down to G5 level or worse.
That is why you keep hearing them say "ISU brings nothing to any league looking to expand."
