Unfortunately the Pac doesn't have a ton of leverage. There aren't many media networks to work with and we don't even have the time zone monopoly with USC/UCLA leaving.
Would it be smart to work on a shorter term deal, putting ourselves off cycle with other conferences and hoping things feel less dire in, maybe, 5 years? Or just lock into the sure money longer and scrum with all the other conferences? I'd also be extremely weary of any grant of rights agreement similar to the ACC's.
P.S.: 3rd from last paragraph, "poot of the deal" is either a typo or extremely valid descriptor of the proposals.
I'm getting tired of all of this. There are so many other far more pressing things having to do with the Pac-12 conference, Cal's poorly performing AD, the people he hires and fires (or doesn't), poor team performance in revenue sports. I am now questioning the Chancellor's judgement about revenue sports in general at Cal. I didn't think I'd say this, but I am starting to think that either she's out of her depth or she has hung in the towel, maybe without even knowing it. I've said it before and will say it again: it doesn't make sense to a "task force" to decide on "rebranding," at least as the top priority. There seems to be many other things that seem more pressing that she needs to attend to re: current problems with revenue producing athletics at Cal.
Of course, what do I know. Given the context in which she's operating and how many fires there seem to be to put out, I don't quite get her sense of priorities, IF she's serious about doing something about Cal athletics and while also having to deal with the academic side of the university.
The word is that ESPN wants the PAC12 deal badly AFTER they lost the BIG10 to Fox. And they want the west coast night games. ESPN used to own SEC, BIG10 & ACC. By losing BIG10 they just lost a boatload of revenue. I think by the time the deal is done and there are multiple media companies involved, the deal will be better than a lot of naysayers are forecasting. And there are a lot of 'what ifs' in this story that really have no evidence to back up their premise. Let's wait and see what shakes out. Stay tuned.
Hope we can get a deal done on somewhat favorable terms. Streaming is probably 5 years away from true critical mass when it comes to a tepid college football audience, e.g. the former Pac-12 Networks audience, so maybe Amazon isn't willing to pony up hundreds of millions for the rights which would offset an afterthought ESPN deal.
Not major league, not Triple A, maybe Double A, probably Sally League - and......crickets from Clueless Carol and her loyal sidekick Empty Suit Jim --- Jayzus, how pathetic ---
How come BYU is never in the conversation about the Pac-12. It is a natural rival of Utah and has a big following. I understand SDSU, but SMU? And we're supposed to be concerned about travel as well.
So on-brand that a Conference that already struggles immensely with national exposure would then choose to air up to half their games (as reported last week by Dennis Dodd on CBSSports.com) on a streaming platform that over 3/4 of the country probably doesn’t know provides that content.
And how does streaming sports content work for a bar/sports bar setting? Say Cal/ASU is gonna be on Amazon Prime - could fans go to a bar in say LA or NYC and watch it? Anyone know?
Unfortunately the Pac doesn't have a ton of leverage. There aren't many media networks to work with and we don't even have the time zone monopoly with USC/UCLA leaving.
Would it be smart to work on a shorter term deal, putting ourselves off cycle with other conferences and hoping things feel less dire in, maybe, 5 years? Or just lock into the sure money longer and scrum with all the other conferences? I'd also be extremely weary of any grant of rights agreement similar to the ACC's.
P.S.: 3rd from last paragraph, "poot of the deal" is either a typo or extremely valid descriptor of the proposals.
I'm getting tired of all of this. There are so many other far more pressing things having to do with the Pac-12 conference, Cal's poorly performing AD, the people he hires and fires (or doesn't), poor team performance in revenue sports. I am now questioning the Chancellor's judgement about revenue sports in general at Cal. I didn't think I'd say this, but I am starting to think that either she's out of her depth or she has hung in the towel, maybe without even knowing it. I've said it before and will say it again: it doesn't make sense to a "task force" to decide on "rebranding," at least as the top priority. There seems to be many other things that seem more pressing that she needs to attend to re: current problems with revenue producing athletics at Cal.
Of course, what do I know. Given the context in which she's operating and how many fires there seem to be to put out, I don't quite get her sense of priorities, IF she's serious about doing something about Cal athletics and while also having to deal with the academic side of the university.
The word is that ESPN wants the PAC12 deal badly AFTER they lost the BIG10 to Fox. And they want the west coast night games. ESPN used to own SEC, BIG10 & ACC. By losing BIG10 they just lost a boatload of revenue. I think by the time the deal is done and there are multiple media companies involved, the deal will be better than a lot of naysayers are forecasting. And there are a lot of 'what ifs' in this story that really have no evidence to back up their premise. Let's wait and see what shakes out. Stay tuned.
Hope we can get a deal done on somewhat favorable terms. Streaming is probably 5 years away from true critical mass when it comes to a tepid college football audience, e.g. the former Pac-12 Networks audience, so maybe Amazon isn't willing to pony up hundreds of millions for the rights which would offset an afterthought ESPN deal.
Not major league, not Triple A, maybe Double A, probably Sally League - and......crickets from Clueless Carol and her loyal sidekick Empty Suit Jim --- Jayzus, how pathetic ---
How come BYU is never in the conversation about the Pac-12. It is a natural rival of Utah and has a big following. I understand SDSU, but SMU? And we're supposed to be concerned about travel as well.
So on-brand that a Conference that already struggles immensely with national exposure would then choose to air up to half their games (as reported last week by Dennis Dodd on CBSSports.com) on a streaming platform that over 3/4 of the country probably doesn’t know provides that content.
And how does streaming sports content work for a bar/sports bar setting? Say Cal/ASU is gonna be on Amazon Prime - could fans go to a bar in say LA or NYC and watch it? Anyone know?