Anything good here?
Anything good here?
With the two California teams in the B1G, I wonder if one of the two will always be away while the other is home and vice versa so that the B1G will always have a late night game for the west coast audience, while giving the other a game in one of the eastern time slots.
I think ESPN is playing both sides against the middle negotiating with both the B12 & PAC at the same time.You’ll forgive me if I have a healthy skepticism about the ESPN’s disinterested generosity. Look for this offer to be low with the idea that the big 12 will give up future speculative value for immediate certainty.
On the other hand, it’s also possible that ESPN has decided to make the big 12 the winner of the game of survivor that’s going on between eight and the Pac 12 much like it did when it chose the ACC over the Big East when those two conferences were looking to position themselves.
Anything good here?
Well- I do think that in the decade to come these media companies will be looking to make these conferences have a footprint that hits all four corners of the map so that they can legitimize paying oodles and avoid having what is deemed a regional product. It’s remote at this moment, but I could see each of the power 2, 3 or 4 conf adopting a G5 to have a combined media deal. A Big brother - little brother media package. More content and more opportunities to help Olympics. I don’t see the power conf just handing money out and opening doors- instead I just see it as combo package to fill in gaps. Right now the BiG could literally toss CUSA or the FunBelt some nickels and say hey- we are putting you on BTN as gap filler and also we’ll do some BB stuff together.Clearly the B1G and Big East are going to merge for Olympic Sports purposes. That would put the B1G far above the SEC. Winning.
Clearly the B1G and Big East are going to merge for Olympic Sports purposes. That would put the B1G far above the SEC. Winning.
I hear what you’re saying and I don’t find it appealing either.36-40 programs will breakaway. 18-20 south (SEC) and 18-20 north (BiG). Professional franchises each within a conference. That will be college football and, eventually college basketball. NFL and NBA light. Holds no appeal to me, but evidently the brain trusts see a way to make a lot more money.
Honestly, I have no direct insight into this, but I have to believe this is where its all going.
College sports are moving to conference networks and streaming. When the cable bundle ends or becomes less relevant in the future, conference networks will be looking for content and brands to attract customers to buy their channel. It would not surprise me if the BTN and SECN look towards other conference for content.Well- I do think that in the decade to come these media companies will be looking to make these conferences have a footprint that hits all four corners of the map so that they can legitimize paying oodles and avoid having what is deemed a regional product. It’s remote at this moment, but I could see each of the power 2, 3 or 4 conf adopting a G5 to have a combined media deal. A Big brother - little brother media package. More content and more opportunities to help Olympics. I don’t see the power conf just handing money out and opening doors- instead I just see it as combo package to fill in gaps. Right now the BiG could literally toss CUSA or the FunBelt some nickels and say hey- we are putting you on BTN as gap filler and also we’ll do some BB stuff together.
What happens to BTN if the FunBelt is added? Seems like BTN adds a lot of southern eye balls.
Xavier isn't getting the ACCN in Ohio. Even Cincinnati couldn't do that. Ohio is all Ohio State. Fans of the other schools all went to school there, and even those fans are often double fans - fans of their home school and fans of Ohio State.In the short term, ironically, it would make the most sense for the ACCN to partner with the Big East for content as it would get the ACCN with home state pricing in Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, DC/Maryland, Philadelphia, Chicago, Ohio, Milwaukee,...
Probably SMU and Memphis as well.Cool, so the entire Mountain West (12) called and Gonzaga too (1) That was easy - "more than a dozen!"
College sports are moving to conference networks and streaming. When the cable bundle ends or becomes less relevant in the future, conference networks will be looking for content and brands to attract customers to buy their channel. It would not surprise me if the BTN and SECN look towards other conference for content.
In the short term, ironically, it would make the most sense for the ACCN to partner with the Big East for content as it would get the ACCN with home state pricing in Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, DC/Maryland, Philadelphia, Chicago, Ohio, Milwaukee,...
I understand what you’re saying, but I think it’s somewhat problematic. I think the goal is to get an optimally sized conference that allows you to fill the time slots in your media deal. If you start bringing in “associate members“ or contracting to fill those time slots with programs outside of your conference there will be dissent due to lost visibility. We are already hearing a little bit of blowback from big 10 members who take the very reasonable position that they don’t want to add anyone who dilutes value. Diluting visibility would be a similar concern.I've been saying this for a while. B1G and SEC are going to get other conferences to align with their media deals so those services have content beyond B1G and SEC. It also allows for easier non-conference scheduling.
Used to be conference prestige was linked to the media who broadcast conference games. So, it was a big deal to say games were on CBS or ESPN.
Now, media outlets want to use conferences to bolster their service. So, FOX can say they are a B1G content provider. ESPN can say they are an SEC content provider.
In terms of brand power the conference is now more prestigious than the media outlets.
I have said many times this grand experiment will fail. Just look at business history. Yes, these schools will make a boatload of money and perhaps that is all that matters. But in the end the best case is a return to smaller regional conferences and worst case the destruction of college Athletics. Good legacy for these folksI understand what you’re saying, but I think it’s somewhat problematic. I think the goal is to get an optimally sized conference that allows you to fill the time slots in your media deal. If you start bringing in “associate members“ or contracting to fill those time slots with programs outside of your conference there will be dissent due to lost visibility. We are already hearing a little bit of blowback from big 10 members who take the very reasonable position that they don’t want to add anyone who dilutes value. Diluting visibility would be a similar concern.
To me, the flaw in the mega-conference theory is that at some point when a conference gets large enough, it stops feeling like a conference. I am reminded of the line from The Incredibles “when everyone is super, no one is.“ At some point when you get large enough, there’s stops being a cachet and stops having a shared sense of purpose.
I’m not so sure it would fail, and if it ultimately does it will be after making people billions of dollars. Is that a failure? I don’t know.I have said many times this grand experiment will fail. Just look at business history. Yes, these schools will make a boatload of money and perhaps that is all that matters. But in the end the best case is a return to smaller regional conferences and worst case the destruction of college Athletics. Good legacy for these folks
I have said many times this grand experiment will fail. Just look at business history. Yes, these schools will make a boatload of money and perhaps that is all that matters. But in the end the best case is a return to smaller regional conferences and worst case the destruction of college Athletics. Good legacy for these folks
The problem is markets and where people turn after they refuse to buy into the streaming services. Big boy fans such as you might pay for Iowa/Rutgers, but many of us will have nothing to do with the cartel and will find other interests in life to spend our time and money on best of luck to your AOL/Time Warner experimentMy personal opinion is it’s about consolidating the major players and making those at the table more visible. We have seen this happen before when the divisions were set up and again when D1 football was split. It’s taking the top brands and their Tagalongs (you know who they are) and elevating them above the rest. Once you get the P2 set, you can break apart the conferences into divisions (like the NFL) and find a way to get a little parity between the big dogs. Will it work? Don’t know, but that’s the way life is nowadays, the powerful doing what they can to protect and expand what they have.
Not all of them will be relegated. The P2 will pick off the most valuable names on that list. If they want to expand it's going to have to be from the Pac12, Big XII, and ACC because it doesn't appear that they're interested in G-5/mid-major schools. There will be schools that get screwed of course, but we know all about that don't we?Clemson, Utah, Baylor, Oregon, Okie State, NC State, Miami (Fla), Pitt, Wake, Cinci, Houston, BYU, Fresno State, UCF, Kansas State, UNC, Boise State, Air Force, App State, SDSU, Utah State
Who are 21 programs who finished ranked or ORV in 2021 which will be relegated per B1G and SEC brass. Ridiculous.