Take your best shot. I don' think there is anything too outlandish you can guess.

My sense is a big:


stock-photo-canada-goose-egg-23873432.html

Denial, rainbows and sunshine! Everybody pretend like USC and UCLA are members in good standing, say there is a great media deal in the works, the future of the PAC-10 never looked better!

They've been testing out their likely spin with the stuff in Canzano's columns attributed to "a Pac-12 CEO", who I think is the Wazzu president.

"The shift at Disney/ESPN is causing a delay in the Pac-12's world."

"It will be worth the wait."

calumnus said:

---

Denial, rainbows and sunshine! Everybody pretend like USC and UCLA are members in good standing, say there is a great media deal in the works, the future of the PAC-10 never looked better!

---

sorry about the goose egg picture. I can certainly see the Calumnus scenario.

How connected is Brock Huard? Personally, I've never liked the guy but I wonder how connected he is within Pac circles.

In this segment about conference media days, Huard discusses the Marshawn Lynch sideline expletive incident and how strained the relationship between the Pac 12 and potential media partners has become.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5QihZtWU8hYByjpPu8ysRi?si=0r6wqP3eRDuP2qR_6bdS-g&context=spotify%3Ashow%3A1r3dFWldwA8uQTFjuxx8C9&nd=1

Well, goose egg is right:

Pac-12 won’t announce new media deal this week with more bidders engaged: Source

via @TheAthletic https://t.co/vuBHregZtg

— Nicole Auerbach (@NicoleAuerbach) July 18, 2023

Can't say I'm surprised

Wilner's latest has a source who offers the same "it will be worth the wait" spin:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/07/18/pac-12-media-rights-negotiations-no-deal-expected-this-week-as-football-takes-center-stage-in-las-vegas

Quote:

---

Conference executives are "super confident" in the outcome, according to a source. "The patience the presidents have shown is about to pay off. The longer we wait, the more bidders there are and the better the outcome."

---

Quote:

---

The Pac-12 presidents were willing to "wait it out for people to come back to the (negotiating) table," a source said. "They locked arms and fought through the last nine-to-12 months."

---

Here is the @pac12 story with the latest: https://t.co/XX70LH1OFq

— Heather Dinich (@CFBHeather) July 18, 2023

Seems like a coordinated leak to 3 different people ... hoping to preemptively address the media rights questions we all know are coming on Friday. Will it work?

With his Vegas, MGM, and media background and connections, Kliavkoff probably understands the entertainment/media landscape, dynamics and the ins and outs better than most, if not all, conference commissioners. He's been quiet and [exceedingly] patient in his prosecution of securing a new media rights deal. Whereas many thought that the Big 12 securing their media rights deal was a case of the Big 12 beating the P12 to the punch, and not leaving much more than crumbs on the table for the P12, Kliavkoff may have been the only commissioner who saw "time" as his friend. As an advantage. I, quietly, have always believed that Kliavkoff was way keener about this than he was being given credit for. And whatever he has been telling the P12 Presidents about what he is doing, and what's happening behind the scenes, and what the progress and the likely GOR amounts will be, has been positive enough to keep all of the remaining P10 schools unified, and forestall any further attrition beyond USC and fUCLA pending finalization of the deal.

Two Conferences , SEC and BIG. though the North/ South Orientation doesn't make sense- better East/ West. How many divisions? How many teams?

These conferences are essentially the NFL's farm systems- top tier and top pay. Problem Is that leaves a lot of dreck in place. How does Notthwestern or Illinois or Indiana or Kentucky or Vanderbilt or Ole Miss plus others hang around as crash test dummies with no chance of ever winning a championship. The leftovers- East and West- might be able to reform conferences that are competitive and still make money and entertain, kind of like relegated soccer teams

Remember last media day, when George Kliavkoff came out full of bravado, saying of the Big XII "We haven't decided if we're going shopping there yet or not."

Brett Yormark proceeded to eat his lunch.

But has he really, though? He hasn't lost any schools to Yormark. And, honestly, Kliavkoff's patience with the P12's media rights negotiations, and not jumping at the first available semi-competitive deal (as did the Big 12) is poised to pay dividends. personally, I anticipate the final GOR/P12 media rights deal to exceed both the Big 12 and the ACC. And, in that scenario, who will have eaten WHO'S lunch?

Pittstop said:

---

But has he really, though? He hasn't lost any schools to Yormark. And, honestly, Kliavkoff's patience with the P12's media rights negotiations, and not jumping at the first available semi-competitive deal (as did the Big 12) is poised to pay dividends. personally, I anticipate the final GOR/P12 media rights deal to exceed both the Big 12 and the ACC. And, in that scenario, who will have eaten WHO'S lunch?

---

I think you are right, the remaining PAC-10 is stronger and more valuable than the B12, but in some ways that makes it less stable in the short run.

The PAC-10 media deal will be better than the B12 and ACCs but not close to the SEC and B1G. The SEC and B1G have already taken most of what they might want from the B12, plus their schools are locked for the next cycle already.

The key is going to be the presentation of the PAC-10 media deal to the school presidents. If they sign, Kliavkoff will have beat Yormack (for whatever that is worth). However, if there are more defectors to the B1G and the PAC-10 media deal collapses….

BearSD said:

---

Wilner's latest has a source who offers the same "it will be worth the wait" spin:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/07/18/pac-12-media-rights-negotiations-no-deal-expected-this-week-as-football-takes-center-stage-in-las-vegas

Quote:

---

Conference executives are "super confident" in the outcome, according to a source. "The patience the presidents have shown is about to pay off. The longer we wait, the more bidders there are and the better the outcome."

---

Quote:

---

The Pac-12 presidents were willing to "wait it out for people to come back to the (negotiating) table," a source said. "They locked arms and fought through the last nine-to-12 months."

---

---

I hope this right, because in runs contra the massive cuts media companies are starting. I'm hoping it is ESPN that maybe decided it needs to keep Pac schools away from the B1G and Fox.

Pittstop said:

---

With his Vegas, MGM, and media background and connections, Kliavkoff probably understands the entertainment/media landscape, dynamics and the ins and outs better than most, if not all, conference commissioners. He's been quiet and [exceedingly] patient in his prosecution of securing a new media rights deal. Whereas many thought that the Big 12 securing their media rights deal was a case of the Big 12 beating the P12 to the punch, and not leaving much more than crumbs on the table for the P12, Kliavkoff may have been the only commissioner who saw "time" as his friend. As an advantage. I, quietly, have always believed that Kliavkoff was way keener about this than he was being given credit for. And whatever he has been telling the P12 Presidents about what he is doing, and what's happening behind the scenes, and what the progress and the likely GOR amounts will be, has been positive enough to keep all of the remaining P10 schools unified, and forestall any further attrition beyond USC and fUCLA pending finalization of the deal.

---

While I think a good media deal (approach $40M per team or more) just postpones the inevitable, I hope you are right and hats off to Commissioner K if he can pull this off.

Pittstop said:

---

But has he really, though? He hasn't lost any schools to Yormark. And, honestly, Kliavkoff's patience with the P12's media rights negotiations, and not jumping at the first available semi-competitive deal (as did the Big 12) is poised to pay dividends. personally, I anticipate the final GOR/P12 media rights deal to exceed both the Big 12 and the ACC. And, in that scenario, who will have eaten WHO'S lunch?

---

Yormark beat Klaivkoff to market, which not only set the price but seized valauble real estate on both OTA and cable. The Pac-12 exceeding the Big XII and ACC? I don't see it.

don't know if this was posted anywhere

Colorado chancellor Phil DiStefano told Denver Post, Pac-12’s new media partnerships is expected to be presented to league chancellors & presidents Thursday by commissioner George Kliavkoff.
“I’m eagerly awaiting to hear what the commissioner has to say,” DiStefano told The Post.…

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) July 20, 2023

oscarsBBurger said:

---

don't know if this was posted anywhere

Colorado chancellor Phil DiStefano told Denver Post, Pac-12’s new media partnerships is expected to be presented to league chancellors & presidents Thursday by commissioner George Kliavkoff.
“I’m eagerly awaiting to hear what the commissioner has to say,” DiStefano told The Post.…

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) July 20, 2023

---

Partnerships, plural?

Just hoping this isn't a hodgepodge of streaming vs broadcast with no wat to access all of a fan's desired games without multiple subscriptions and/or air playing a game through various devices.

bearsandgiants said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

don't know if this was posted anywhere

Colorado chancellor Phil DiStefano told Denver Post, Pac-12’s new media partnerships is expected to be presented to league chancellors & presidents Thursday by commissioner George Kliavkoff.
“I’m eagerly awaiting to hear what the commissioner has to say,” DiStefano told The Post.…

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) July 20, 2023

---

Partnerships, plural?

Just hoping this isn't a hodgepodge of streaming vs broadcast with no wat to access all of a fan's desired games without multiple subscriptions and/or air playing a game through various devices.

---

I believe the schools are looking for a larger linear footprint. They know that a streamer may be a primary broadcaster, but need a larger linear presence. The idea that they have no or very low national coverage is not going to be appealling to the presidents IMO.

One of ESPN, Fox or CBS needs to be involved IMO. 2 would be better. CBS and ESPN have open slots for 2024. They would be ideal if they can make the numbers work and whatever streamer they have allows for some decent games to be broadcast.

I think not only the dollars but tier 1 and tier 2 rights really matter. 4pm and 7:30PM windows in the west could have some national appeal if they can find the right partnerships.

bearsandgiants said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

---

Partnerships, plural?

Just hoping this isn't a hodgepodge of streaming vs broadcast with no wat to access all of a fan's desired games without multiple subscriptions and/or air playing a game through various devices.

---

Any deal that includes some games being streamed will require multiple subscriptions.

The Pac is not alone in that. The bulk of Big 12 games going forward will be on ESPN+, which requires a subscription to ESPN+ or the "Disney bundle" in addition to the "cable" subscription needed to watch the games that are on ESPN and FS1. The Big Ten's new TV deal includes games that are exclusively on NBC's streaming service Peacock, which requires a separate subscription. (One of those games on Peacock is Washington at Michigan State on Sept. 16.)

6956bear said:

---

bearsandgiants said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

don't know if this was posted anywhere

Colorado chancellor Phil DiStefano told Denver Post, Pac-12’s new media partnerships is expected to be presented to league chancellors & presidents Thursday by commissioner George Kliavkoff.
“I’m eagerly awaiting to hear what the commissioner has to say,” DiStefano told The Post.…

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) July 20, 2023

---

Partnerships, plural?

Just hoping this isn't a hodgepodge of streaming vs broadcast with no wat to access all of a fan's desired games without multiple subscriptions and/or air playing a game through various devices.

---

I believe the schools are looking for a larger linear footprint. They know that a streamer may be a primary broadcaster, but need a larger linear presence. The idea that they have no or very low national coverage is not going to be appealling to the presidents IMO.

One of ESPN, Fox or CBS needs to be involved IMO. 2 would be better. CBS and ESPN have open slots for 2024. They would be ideal if they can make the numbers work and whatever streamer they have allows for some decent games to be broadcast.

I think not only the dollars but tier 1 and tier 2 rights really matter. 4pm and 7:30PM windows in the west could have some national appeal if they can find the right partnerships.

---

Those attending games would like a known starting time (which you get with streaming) preferably around 12:30. So with the linear programming you are balancing less live audience vs. more national audience.

Quote:

---

Any deal that includes some games being streamed will require multiple subscriptions.

The Pac is not alone in that. The bulk of Big 12 games going forward will be on ESPN+, which requires a subscription to ESPN+ or the "Disney bundle" in addition to the "cable" subscription needed to watch the games that are on ESPN and FS1. The Big Ten's new TV deal includes games that are exclusively on NBC's streaming service Peacock, which requires a separate subscription. (One of those games on Peacock is Washington at Michigan State on Sept. 16.)

---

Do you think it's possible to move a block of Pac 12 schools over to the Big 12?

They have a standing pro rata provision in their media rights contract to match the payout for P5 additions.

According to this writer, the Big 12 has got quite a bit of linear distribution for their upcoming contract.

If a block of Pac schools move over, it seems like a workable solution to get paid and get linear exposure and keep playing like the usual rotation of schools. Also would be able to capture the 4th slot late night.

Thanks Jim! I have since updated the Big Ten projection to account for Peacock in this written article that follows it.https://t.co/EFnYSQQMIe https://t.co/2nHYy76iiZ

— Sam Bradshaw (@Baylor_S11) July 19, 2023

https://sicem365.com/s/15245/how-much-exposure-can-we-expect-from-conference-tv-deals

wifeisafurd said:

---

6956bear said:

---

bearsandgiants said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

don't know if this was posted anywhere

Colorado chancellor Phil DiStefano told Denver Post, Pac-12’s new media partnerships is expected to be presented to league chancellors & presidents Thursday by commissioner George Kliavkoff.
“I’m eagerly awaiting to hear what the commissioner has to say,” DiStefano told The Post.…

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) July 20, 2023

---

Partnerships, plural?

Just hoping this isn't a hodgepodge of streaming vs broadcast with no wat to access all of a fan's desired games without multiple subscriptions and/or air playing a game through various devices.

---

I believe the schools are looking for a larger linear footprint. They know that a streamer may be a primary broadcaster, but need a larger linear presence. The idea that they have no or very low national coverage is not going to be appealling to the presidents IMO.

One of ESPN, Fox or CBS needs to be involved IMO. 2 would be better. CBS and ESPN have open slots for 2024. They would be ideal if they can make the numbers work and whatever streamer they have allows for some decent games to be broadcast.

I think not only the dollars but tier 1 and tier 2 rights really matter. 4pm and 7:30PM windows in the west could have some national appeal if they can find the right partnerships.

---

Those attending games would like a known starting time (which you get with streaming) preferably around 12:30. So with the linear programming you are balancing less live audience vs. more national audience.

---

No question that is true. As a Cal fan I do not care if the games are 100% streaming. I will watch regardless. And when they play at home I certainly prefer 12:30. Although 3:30 is not bad either (at least for me). But there is opposition to 100% streaming. The Arizona schools for sure and I have heard that UO and UW are not for it either.

So in order to satisfy everyone and get a deal that pays enough that all will sign a GOR for likely calls for some compromise. Which is why you have what we have now.

The 6 and 12 day windows are a problem for fans planning on attending live. As are night games. Especially Friday nights. As well the differing time slots. But again if the presidents need linear broadcasters those things likely will be included. I do not know for sure but if the money is close I bet Cal would be just fine with 100% streaming.

6956bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

---

The 6 and 12 day windows are a problem for fans planning on attending live. As are night games. Especially Friday nights. As well the differing time slots. But again if the presidents need linear broadcasters those things likely will be included. I do not know for sure but if the money is close I bet Cal would be just fine with 100% streaming.

---

6 and 12 day windows are a fair compromise if it's being done solely to move games to a broadcast network or real ESPN. It's a bad compromise if it's being done to put games on the likes of FS1 or ESPNU.

linebiz said:

---

How connected is Brock Huard? Personally, I've never liked the guy but I wonder how connected he is within Pac circles.

In this segment about conference media days, Huard discusses the Marshawn Lynch sideline expletive incident and how strained the relationship between the Pac 12 and potential media partners has become.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5QihZtWU8hYByjpPu8ysRi?si=0r6wqP3eRDuP2qR_6bdS-g&context=spotify%3Ashow%3A1r3dFWldwA8uQTFjuxx8C9&nd=1

---

I think he brought up Marshawn's "These Mother*****s, right here ...." comment mostly to point out the consensus that .... yeah, no one's going to Pac12 games. You know he's wrong to pile it all on Larry Scott and University Presidents though. A huge part of this apathy he's referring to is ESPN themselves scheduling Pac12 after dark games. And of course Larry Scott's complacency about it.

And Harbaugh wasn't motivated by this lack of culture and low fan turnout to make the move to Michigan. He's forgetting that Harbaugh left Stanfurd for the Niner's. Hahahaha. He's just got all of the details wrong.

I don't think it's a game of chicken right now either. Colorado to the Big12 is a lateral move at best and I have a feeling they really don't want to go back there now that the old Big12 North doesn't really exist. It would be cultural suicide for them, a bunch of Texas hicks and this one school up North. I think everyone is giving Klaivkoff some rope to see if he can pull a rabbit out of his hat. If he can salvage a media deal that is similar to the previous one, this would be the best option for everyone. And the current media deal doesn't end until next year.

BancroftSteps said:

---

linebiz said:

---

How connected is Brock Huard? Personally, I've never liked the guy but I wonder how connected he is within Pac circles.

In this segment about conference media days, Huard discusses the Marshawn Lynch sideline expletive incident and how strained the relationship between the Pac 12 and potential media partners has become.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5QihZtWU8hYByjpPu8ysRi?si=0r6wqP3eRDuP2qR_6bdS-g&context=spotify%3Ashow%3A1r3dFWldwA8uQTFjuxx8C9&nd=1

---

I think he brought up Marshawn's "These Mother*****s, right here ...." comment mostly to point out the consensus that .... yeah, no one's going to Pac12 games. You know he's wrong to pile it all on Larry Scott and University Presidents though. A huge part of this apathy he's referring to is ESPN themselves scheduling Pac12 after dark games. And of course Larry Scott's complacency about it.

And Harbaugh wasn't motivated by this lack of culture and low fan turnout to make the move to Michigan. He's forgetting that Harbaugh left Stanfurd for the Niner's. Hahahaha. He's just got all of the details wrong.

I don't think it's a game of chicken right now either. Colorado to the Big12 is a lateral move at best and I have a feeling they really don't want to go back there now that the old Big12 North doesn't really exist. It would be cultural suicide for them, a bunch of Texas hicks and this one school up North. I think everyone is giving Klaivkoff some rope to see if he can pull a rabbit out of his hat. If he can salvage a media deal that is similar to the previous one, this would be the best option for everyone. And the current media deal doesn't end until next year.

---

Hi BancroftSteps, thanks for the response.

I agree with you that there are many responsible for the fall of the conference. Makes me sad as this is the conference I grew up watching and, as a huge sports fan, have loved my whole life.

I wish we could go back to the original Pac 10. Before adding Utah and Colorado, the Pac 10 was one of the premier conferences and signed the largest media deal in history.

Utah and Colorado were dilutive to the league but it was masked by the new conference championship game revenue. Of course, it's not Utah and Colorado's fault they were invited. They simply took advantage of the opportunity, though I'm sure Colorado wishes they could go back in time and accept the Big Ten offer they had instead of the Pac offer. Colorado has even lost $67 Million since joining the Pac in 2011, relative to what they would have earned by staying in the Big 12

Ultimately, the league lost their two premier brands (USC & UCLA) because they added Utah and Colorado. Not a great trade, to say the least.

I really hope Kliavkoff really is able to pull a rabbit out of his hat but I've been very disappointed in his performance since he became commissioner. So much fumbling like him taunting the Big 12 about not sure if going shopping for their members yet or saying that UCLA would ultimately earn less by going to the Big 10.

I also agree with you that going to the Big 12 would be a lateral move at best. Well, that's as long Kliavkoff gets a good deal, otherwise the move would represent security and stable income that is desperately needed.

One thing I'll note however is that despite seriously lacking brand names with cachet, the Big 12 is surprisingly strong when it comes to performance on the field/court.

Massey Ratings;

2022

SEC 32.65
B12 39.09
B10 47.67
PAC 49.85
ACC 53.94

SEC+OU/UT 32.33
B12-OU/UT 41.36
B8+4 NEW 44.04
B10+SC/LA 44.20
PAC-SC/LA 55.84
P10+SD/SMU 58.47

3 YR AVG

SEC 39.26
B12 41.51
B10 43.21
ACC 57.23
PAC 58.41

SEC+OU/UT 37.24
B12-OU/UT 48.04
B8+4 NEW 46.12
B10+SC/LA 47.12
PAC-SC/LA 61.96
P10+SD/SMU 60.93

5 YR AVG

SEC 38.71
B12 43.07
B10 48.33
PAC 55.95
ACC 56.82

SEC+OU/UT 36.29
B12-OU/UT 48.99
B8+4 NEW 46.23
B10+SC/LA 48.54
PAC-SC/LA 57.14
P10+SD/SMU 57.39

Head to Head;

B8vsP10

3 YR 5 0
5 YR 7 2
10 YR 14 5

B8+4vsP10

3 YR 10 1
5 YR 15 9
10 YR 25 18

B8+4vsP10+2

3 YR 17 3
5 YR 24 14
10 YR 43 27

B8vs non-conP5

3 YR 16 12
5 YR 27 24
10 YR 52 52

P1Ovs non-conP5

3 YR 8 20
5 YR 22 30
10 YR 57 59

B8+4vs non-conP5

3 YR 32 26
5 YR 55 49
10 YR 102 109

P1O+2vs non-conP5

3 YR 11 25
5 YR 28 38
10 YR 66 85

B8 6 of 8 teams in bowls, 41.96 million viewers w/o natty (59.18 with); P10 5 of 10 teams in bowls 23.79 million viewers

All 4 new B12 teams in bowls with 8.57 million viewers; both potential P12 new teams in bowls with 3.16 million total viewers

B12 Championship game (no ou/ut) 9.41 million, P12 Championship (w/USC) 5.97 million

Why would Colorado wait longer for the Pac 12 to present a deal? They lost nearly 70M vs what Big 12 schools made since leaving in 2010. They left less than a week before FOX & ESPN presented a good deal to the Big 12. pic.twitter.com/cCDpMDVAMO

— Sam Bradshaw (@Baylor_S11) July 20, 2023

linebiz said:

---

BancroftSteps said:

---

linebiz said:

---

How connected is Brock Huard? Personally, I've never liked the guy but I wonder how connected he is within Pac circles.

In this segment about conference media days, Huard discusses the Marshawn Lynch sideline expletive incident and how strained the relationship between the Pac 12 and potential media partners has become.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5QihZtWU8hYByjpPu8ysRi?si=0r6wqP3eRDuP2qR_6bdS-g&context=spotify%3Ashow%3A1r3dFWldwA8uQTFjuxx8C9&nd=1

---

I think he brought up Marshawn's "These Mother*****s, right here ...." comment mostly to point out the consensus that .... yeah, no one's going to Pac12 games. You know he's wrong to pile it all on Larry Scott and University Presidents though. A huge part of this apathy he's referring to is ESPN themselves scheduling Pac12 after dark games. And of course Larry Scott's complacency about it.

And Harbaugh wasn't motivated by this lack of culture and low fan turnout to make the move to Michigan. He's forgetting that Harbaugh left Stanfurd for the Niner's. Hahahaha. He's just got all of the details wrong.

I don't think it's a game of chicken right now either. Colorado to the Big12 is a lateral move at best and I have a feeling they really don't want to go back there now that the old Big12 North doesn't really exist. It would be cultural suicide for them, a bunch of Texas hicks and this one school up North. I think everyone is giving Klaivkoff some rope to see if he can pull a rabbit out of his hat. If he can salvage a media deal that is similar to the previous one, this would be the best option for everyone. And the current media deal doesn't end until next year.

---

Hi BancroftSteps, thanks for the response.

I agree with you that there are many responsible for the fall of the conference. Makes me sad as this is the conference I grew up watching and, as a huge sports fan, have loved my whole life.

I wish we could go back to the original Pac 10. Before adding Utah and Colorado, the Pac 10 was one of the premier conferences and signed the largest media deal in history.

Utah and Colorado were dilutive to the league but it was masked by the new conference championship game revenue. Of course, it's not Utah and Colorado's fault they were invited. They simply took advantage of the opportunity, though I'm sure Colorado wishes they could go back in time and accept the Big Ten offer they had instead of the Pac offer. Colorado has even lost $67 Million since joining the Pac in 2011, relative to what they would have earned by staying in the Big 12

Ultimately, the league lost their two premier brands (USC & UCLA) because they added Utah and Colorado. Not a great trade, to say the least.

I really hope Kliavkoff really is able to pull a rabbit out of his hat but I've been very disappointed in his performance since he became commissioner. So much fumbling like him taunting the Big 12 about not sure if going shopping for their members yet or saying that UCLA would ultimately earn less by going to the Big 10.

I also agree with you that going to the Big 12 would be a lateral move at best. Well, that's as long Kliavkoff gets a good deal, otherwise the move would represent security and stable income that is desperately needed.

One thing I'll note however is that despite seriously lacking brand names with cachet, the Big 12 is surprisingly strong when it comes to performance on the field/court.

Massey Ratings;

2022

SEC 32.65
B12 39.09
B10 47.67
PAC 49.85
ACC 53.94

SEC+OU/UT 32.33
B12-OU/UT 41.36
B8+4 NEW 44.04
B10+SC/LA 44.20
PAC-SC/LA 55.84
P10+SD/SMU 58.47

3 YR AVG

SEC 39.26
B12 41.51
B10 43.21
ACC 57.23
PAC 58.41

SEC+OU/UT 37.24
B12-OU/UT 48.04
B8+4 NEW 46.12
B10+SC/LA 47.12
PAC-SC/LA 61.96
P10+SD/SMU 60.93

5 YR AVG

SEC 38.71
B12 43.07
B10 48.33
PAC 55.95
ACC 56.82

SEC+OU/UT 36.29
B12-OU/UT 48.99
B8+4 NEW 46.23
B10+SC/LA 48.54
PAC-SC/LA 57.14
P10+SD/SMU 57.39

Head to Head;

B8vsP10

3 YR 5 0
5 YR 7 2
10 YR 14 5

B8+4vsP10

3 YR 10 1
5 YR 15 9
10 YR 25 18

B8+4vsP10+2

3 YR 17 3
5 YR 24 14
10 YR 43 27

B8vs non-conP5

3 YR 16 12
5 YR 27 24
10 YR 52 52

P1Ovs non-conP5

3 YR 8 20
5 YR 22 30
10 YR 57 59

B8+4vs non-conP5

3 YR 32 26
5 YR 55 49
10 YR 102 109

P1O+2vs non-conP5

3 YR 11 25
5 YR 28 38
10 YR 66 85

B8 6 of 8 teams in bowls, 41.96 million viewers w/o natty (59.18 with); P10 5 of 10 teams in bowls 23.79 million viewers

All 4 new B12 teams in bowls with 8.57 million viewers; both potential P12 new teams in bowls with 3.16 million total viewers

B12 Championship game (no ou/ut) 9.41 million, P12 Championship (w/USC) 5.97 million

Why would Colorado wait longer for the Pac 12 to present a deal? They lost nearly 70M vs what Big 12 schools made since leaving in 2010. They left less than a week before FOX & ESPN presented a good deal to the Big 12. pic.twitter.com/cCDpMDVAMO

— Sam Bradshaw (@Baylor_S11) July 20, 2023

---

It would be great if you simply didn't make stuff up. Claiming UCLA and USC left because the Pac-10 added Colorado and Utah is completely wrong.

golden sloth said:

---

It would be great if you simply didn't make stuff up. Claiming UCLA and USC left because the Pac-10 added Colorado and Utah is completely wrong.

---

Hi Golden Sloth, thanks for your reply.

The conference pay structure did change (unfavorably towards USC & UCLA after a vote of 10-2 against USC/UCLA) starting in 2011 with the addition of Utah and Colorado. I could expand on my statement for more support but I don't really feel like typing out something long to address that small point.

To be clear, I never claimed "UCLA and USC left because the Pac-10 added Colorado and Utah."

I will however amend my statement to say the following, since I'm too lazy to support it more:

"Ultimately, the league lost their two premier brands (USC & UCLA) after they added Utah and Colorado. Not a great trade, to say the least."

Adding Utah and Colorado was a total loser but if Larry Scott could've pulled off the first 16 team superconference like he hoped, that would've changed the course of history for our beloved Pac. It's a shame that ESPN bribed UT with the Longhorn Network.

I still hope Kliavkoff can cobble something together that can keep the league together. It will be really sad to see some of these really long running series end. We're talking like almost a hundred years in some cases. What a travesty.

BearSD said:

---

6956bear said:

---

The 6 and 12 day windows are a problem for fans planning on attending live. As are night games. Especially Friday nights. As well the differing time slots. But again if the presidents need linear broadcasters those things likely will be included. I do not know for sure but if the money is close I bet Cal would be just fine with 100% streaming.

---

6 and 12 day windows are a fair compromise if it's being done solely to move games to a broadcast network or real ESPN. It's a bad compromise if it's being done to put games on the likes of FS1 or ESPNU.

---

Sure. For now ESPN and CBS have open windows that could very easily broadcast those games in the late window. CBS could do a late afternoon matchup. The problem as I see it is that a streamer does not want to sacrifice the better games to a broadcast partner if they are to be the primary distributor.

And the broadcast networks want some assurance they get good games. Which is why I believe we keep hearing about a regional braodcaster like the CW that may be ok with broadcasting Cal vs ASU or UA vs Stanford. No way ESPN wants to pay top dollar for those type matchups.

And schools are also tired of Saturday night kickoffs. Friday night games. But may have to agree to them to get TV to pay what they need. TV wants eyeballs. The P12 has not provided anywhere near enough to justify playing games in the earlier windows when the SEC and B1G and even the Big 12 will provide more eyeballs. And that was largely true when USC and UCLA were still members.

What fans want and what schools need are not the same. Schools want and need the TV money. Fans like me just want a place to watch their team play. But paying a subscription to watch the P12 on a streaming platform will limit the exposure. For now anyway.

Fox and NBC could also provide coverage in the late window. Both have open slots. But NBC already has Notre Dame home games and Fox is said to be dead set against the P12 as a whole. Especially if they believe they can get UO and UW to join USC and UCLA for a discount. Fox was the primary force behind the LA schools joining the B1G. The P12 no longer has the power to dictate. Especially in the ever changing market that exists now.

A majority streaming deal seems to be the best bet to provide the revenues required. But will that revenue be enough to keep everybody in if there is no national broadcast partner?

6956bear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

6956bear said:

---

The 6 and 12 day windows are a problem for fans planning on attending live. As are night games. Especially Friday nights. As well the differing time slots. But again if the presidents need linear broadcasters those things likely will be included. I do not know for sure but if the money is close I bet Cal would be just fine with 100% streaming.

---

6 and 12 day windows are a fair compromise if it's being done solely to move games to a broadcast network or real ESPN. It's a bad compromise if it's being done to put games on the likes of FS1 or ESPNU.

---

Sure. For now ESPN and CBS have open windows that could very easily broadcast those games in the late window. CBS could do a late afternoon matchup. The problem as I see it is that a streamer does not want to sacrifice the better games to a broadcast partner if they are to be the primary distributor.

And the broadcast networks want some assurance they get good games. Which is why I believe we keep hearing about a regional braodcaster like the CW that may be ok with broadcasting Cal vs ASU or UA vs Stanford. No way ESPN wants to pay top dollar for those type matchups.

And schools are also tired of Saturday night kickoffs. Friday night games. But may have to agree to them to get TV to pay what they need. TV wants eyeballs. The P12 has not provided anywhere near enough to justify playing games in the earlier windows when the SEC and B1G and even the Big 12 will provide more eyeballs. And that was largely true when USC and UCLA were still members.

What fans want and what schools need are not the same. Schools want and need the TV money. Fans like me just want a place to watch their team play. But paying a subscription to watch the P12 on a streaming platform will limit the exposure. For now anyway.

Fox and NBC could also provide coverage in the late window. Both have open slots. But NBC already has Notre Dame home games and Fox is said to be dead set against the P12 as a whole. Especially if they believe they can get UO and UW to join USC and UCLA for a discount. Fox was the primary force behind the LA schools joining the B1G. The P12 no longer has the power to dictate. Especially in the ever changing market that exists now.

A majority streaming deal seems to be the best bet to provide the revenues required. But will that revenue be enough to keep everybody in if there is no national broadcast partner?

---

The CW isn't a regional broadcaster. I believe they have national OTA coverage.

6956bear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

6956bear said:

---

The 6 and 12 day windows are a problem for fans planning on attending live. As are night games. Especially Friday nights. As well the differing time slots. But again if the presidents need linear broadcasters those things likely will be included. I do not know for sure but if the money is close I bet Cal would be just fine with 100% streaming.

---

6 and 12 day windows are a fair compromise if it's being done solely to move games to a broadcast network or real ESPN. It's a bad compromise if it's being done to put games on the likes of FS1 or ESPNU.

---

Sure. For now ESPN and CBS have open windows that could very easily broadcast those games in the late window. CBS could do a late afternoon matchup. The problem as I see it is that a streamer does not want to sacrifice the better games to a broadcast partner if they are to be the primary distributor.

And the broadcast networks want some assurance they get good games. Which is why I believe we keep hearing about a regional braodcaster like the CW that may be ok with broadcasting Cal vs ASU or UA vs Stanford. No way ESPN wants to pay top dollar for those type matchups.

And schools are also tired of Saturday night kickoffs. Friday night games. But may have to agree to them to get TV to pay what they need. TV wants eyeballs. The P12 has not provided anywhere near enough to justify playing games in the earlier windows when the SEC and B1G and even the Big 12 will provide more eyeballs. And that was largely true when USC and UCLA were still members.

What fans want and what schools need are not the same. Schools want and need the TV money. Fans like me just want a place to watch their team play. But paying a subscription to watch the P12 on a streaming platform will limit the exposure. For now anyway.

Fox and NBC could also provide coverage in the late window. Both have open slots. But NBC already has Notre Dame home games and Fox is said to be dead set against the P12 as a whole. Especially if they believe they can get UO and UW to join USC and UCLA for a discount. Fox was the primary force behind the LA schools joining the B1G. The P12 no longer has the power to dictate. Especially in the ever changing market that exists now.

A majority streaming deal seems to be the best bet to provide the revenues required. But will that revenue be enough to keep everybody in if there is no national broadcast partner?

---

With Fox and ESPN refusing to deal I don't think Kliavkoff can come up with a package that keeps Oregon and UW from wanting to jump to the B1G. I think they will push for admission at less than full share as soon as Kliavkoff presents his media deal.
Waiting until closer to the end of the current contract could be strategic.

People like Huard know Cal and Stanford are inherently more desirable to the Big 10 presidents, but our weakness is our/our administration's commitment to big time 21st century football and basketball. Now Stanford is getting a new president and Christ is a lame duck.

BearSD said:

---

6956bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

---

The 6 and 12 day windows are a problem for fans planning on attending live. As are night games. Especially Friday nights. As well the differing time slots. But again if the presidents need linear broadcasters those things likely will be included. I do not know for sure but if the money is close I bet Cal would be just fine with 100% streaming.

---

6 and 12 day windows are a fair compromise if it's being done solely to move games to a broadcast network or real ESPN. It's a bad compromise if it's being done to put games on the likes of FS1 or ESPNU.

---

I've been saying for years that the NFL does flex scheduling right... and they don't use 6 or 12 day windows. Almost all game times known before the start of the season. One game a week flexed 8n the second half of the season.

CFB is different due to the size of the conferences, but I'd think having Sept/Oct kickoff times set in stone and then allow good November matchups to be changed to a better time for TV. But have a nominal start time set for November games and don't change the games of lesser national interest. Just play em as scheduled and let the fans keep their plans.

Would help tickets sales and attendance immensely.

The flexed games would be of high interest so those who can't make it can get their tickets to someone who can via whatever method they want (ie resell, give away, donate, etc).

That said, apparently the NFL will now flex Thursday games - that terrible for everyone. I liked what CFB/P12 did with their Thursday games - both teams had no game the weekend before. I think the NFL Thursday game quality would go up if they did it that way. They might not care of they make $$$ though.

Oregon AD is quoted in this article about the media deal.

https://theathletic.com/4710889/2023/07/21/pac-12-media-day-george-kliavkoff?source=user-shared-article

philbert said:

---

Oregon AD is quoted in this article about the media deal.

https://theathletic.com/4710889/2023/07/21/pac-12-media-day-george-kliavkoff?source=user-shared-article

---

The Oregon AD's quote is the same line that's been attributed to anonymous sources for the last 10 days or so, essentially, Looking good, lots of progress, new interested bidders, not worried about anyone jumping ship.

The interesting item in that article is that, contrary to what the media types have been speculating, expansion is not likely.

Quote:

---

One reason SDSU has no clarity: Two league sources told The Athletic on Friday there's not unanimity among the presidents to expand at all. It would take an 8-2 vote, and at least two schools - one of them assumed to be Oregon - don't currently support it. The rationale being, they'd rather compete with fewer schools for the Pac-12's berth in the expanded College Football Playoff, not to mention sharing CFP revenue with fewer mouths.

---