All of the traditional sports networks could still be the producers of live sports that get bought by schools/conference networks/streaming services. Someone will still have to do production, and the existing sports networks have sunk billions into building out all of the infrastructure necessary to broadcast hundreds of live sporting events a year. The schools and conferences are somewhat reluctant to pick up the full tab for production which is why even the conference networks ultimately are produced by one of the big boy networks that have the muscle to do it at high quality and volume. It would be no different than Apple paying a bunch of money to some production company to produce the Morning Show or The Problem with John Stewart and then selling subs to get access to the content they bought.
And a lot of the under 40 crowd do not follow sports as much as the older crowd. They have far too many entertainment options and way too short attention spans. Streaming may be the future, but I am not convinced the numbers are there for sports only subscriptions.
I think Congress has bigger fish to fry right now. College sports should be like #1287 on the list of priorities.More and more information are coming out regarding the PAC-12 media rights negotiations.
Due to all kinds of potential conflicts of interest throughout the entire process with FOX etc, there needs some kind of congressional investigation.
Report: Pac-12 received last-minute TV rights bids from ESPN, CBS and FOX last week
As the Pac-12 fell victim to conference realignment this past week, new details have emerged on its failed efforts to secure a TV deal.www.on3.com
Yeah, like UFOs.
Clearly it's not enough for Congress to get involved.
True, but congress has no desire to let some of said fish get anywhere near a frying pan.
So, is it anti-competitive to improve a conference that can better compete with the SEC? It will be curious to see what comes out if there is a lawsuit. If Fox and ESPN colluded, then that's a problem. If Fox just took the 4 best programs to shore up their league, that's perfectly ok unless they have monopoly Market Power, and they don't. ESPN has SEC, ACC and 2/3 of the Big XII even if you use the narrowest definition of Market.
www.seattletimes.com
Basically. PAC presidents were a bunch of greedy guys who over estimated their conference. They thought B1G got $65M, the PAC-12 deserved $50M. They had an offer of $30M, and they turned it down. I am not sure if George pushed back on the presidents, but they rejected the offer and got screwed in the end.
Multiple Pac-12 presidents declined deal from ESPN last year to pursue ‘unrealistic’ offer
The failure to accept market reality led the Pac-12 presidents last fall to reject an offer of $30 million per year (per school) from ESPN.
I think Nike should build a facility outside of Chicago so the Oregon football team can house there during fall semseter and only come back to Eugene for "home games". Will be much easier on the "student" athletes.
Oregon could work out a deal with the Packers and even play a few "home" games at Lambeau
Wanna bet?
These two comments, close together, are contradictory. The ESPN deal was much better than the Apple deal. When you factor in travel, which the Washington AD said was about an extra $10m a year, that was their best offer. PAC has been arrogant for decades, even turning down Oklahoma packaged with Texas. They brought this on themselves.