Pac 12 Gets Record-Setting TV Deal

If their commish was truthful when he said our Longhorn Network wasn’t a roadblock to us moving out west, we should have gone. That’s a decision I expect to be revisited in a few years.

Sports are DVR proof and college FB is proving to be more and more valuable due to the dedication of its fans. For us, it means more games on TV with real production value hopefully. Huzzah

The Pac 12 certainly represents a great theoretical market. They’re pinning a lot on USC’s resurgence, UCLA recovering, Oregon not getting a near-death penalty.
 
All the more reason I’m irritated we didn’t go there. Combining Texas with California would have garnered huge TV numbers and it would have created a goad for upgrade for a number of Pac 10 programs.
 
Take a look at our 2011 schedule. This conference is an unappealing piece of shit. And we managed to lose our two best road trips in CU and NU.

I’m going to regret not going west for a long time. Pac 16 would have been big money. Aggy reallyfucked up. They left money on the table and handed us the Longhorn Network.

Roadtrips to Ames… sigh.

Seriously. Imagine those numbers with conference network revenue added in. And then think about the numbers if you added the Texas MSAs. Sick.

Fuck the Pac-16. Best move that ever happened not going there. It’s not worth the money. The administrations out there think you are all idiots. Every one of them. Ever met a USC grad? We would have been giving up numbers and getting our chain yanked around on voting issues.

ded,

Yeah I’ve met USC graduates before, they seemed like decent quality individuals. Same with UCLA, Stanford, Oregon, Washington etc.

The only alumni I’d be concerned about are the Cal grads. Those people are nuts.

Even my former UT English professor—a Cal grad—didn’t want his own kids to go there.

We have the money, unfortunately, we are also in a conference that is equivalent to the 90’s SWC in terms of national interest.

unfortunately, we are also in a conference that is equivalent to the 90′s SWC in terms of national interest

This.

There’s always a certain amount of angst whenever you see another conference getting more money, but I doubt DeLoss is losing any sleep over it. As a Virginia Horn, I’d certainly be more stoked to see a Texas-USC or Texas-Oregon game on TV than, say, a Texas-Iowa State or Texas-Baylor game. But geography is what it is.

Just as nobody who works for a living wants to have to commute 2 hours each way to work, Longhorn athletes should not have to fly halfway across the country to Oregon and Washington 5/10/20 times a year and have to miss classes just to earn their scholarships.

I’m not privy to any inside knowledge, but I seriously doubt the issue of UT and some others moving west is dead just yet.

Dodds’ public pronouncements notwithstanding, the Big Less Than Twelve is still a dead man walking, with agricultural, Mizzou, and perhaps KU still looking for a possible way out. The disparity between us, with our ESPN network, and other conference members isn’t going to get smaller, but larger, and every other team in what’s left of the conference knows it.

My guess is four years, five at the most, and the Big 12 Minus 2 folds. Before that happens, UT will start looking around, and my guess is, looking west. The Pac 12 will be interested.

In hindsight, I don’t think Deloss looks so good retaining no equity in the LHN.

Lessee,

Stillwater, Lubbock and Ames OR Los Angeles, Seattle, and Boulder?

$20 mill vs. $12 mill…per annum?

Gee ! I dunno. Whatchyall thimk?

SEC can’t be pleased. Wonder if/how they will react?

ded:

That is a sadly provincialist viewpoint.

However you feel, I know that WSU and Oregon State very much wanted Tech to join, in order to expand their little fraternity of schools in towns that smell of manure.

I just don’t see how schools in the Pac-12 interest are aligned with ours in the long term. It’s much easier for Texas to police A&M, OU, and Tech in their backyard, but you’ll be pretty much defenseless against the shenanigans of USC and Oregon. Plus, there are many more TV sets projected to filter into Texas over the next decade than California, so a union could be diluting the future market value of our contracts. While most on here are basing their stance of a move on the relative scenery in Palo Alto versus Ames, it seems the guys pulling the strings are concerned with political narratives involved that don’t jive. I tend to agree with them.

The WHOLE state of Texas smells of manure!

 It’s just masked in Austin by the stench of sweaty BO, vomit and stale beer!

Enjoy your newly minted old SWC, now upgraded and complete with Dirt Thieves! (annually whipping your Whorn asses!)

Sayonara———- Suckahs!

1. There were pros & cons to leaving for the Pac-Whatever. What’s done is done. Quit whining about the decision to stay in the Big 12-2 like a bunch of bitches.

2. Quit complaining about the destinations of the Big 12-2 vis-a-vis the Pac-12. Locations don’t mean squat if you don’t win. Plus, I’d bet that many of you can’t guarantee that you’d actually travel w/ the team to Seattle, the Bay Area, etc.

What kind of revenue would a conference with the states of Texas and California generate? I think you can add $10 million per school in the now debunked PAC16.

Ubben has a good blog up discussing the deal:

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/28432/did-the-pac-12-upstage-the-big-12s-tv-deal

Live events are the last bastion of the networks — and live sports are at the head of the line — that’s what helping to drive the negotations for all conferences.

Assuming that valuations of TV rights will be the same or higher in four years is the underpinning of Ubben’s analysis. I’m not saying they won’t be. But assumptions like that don’t always work out so well either. See: US Housing market, sub-prime loan portfolios, etc.

Assuming that valuations of TV rights will be the same or higher in four years is the underpinning of Ubben’s analysis. I’m not saying they won’t be. But assumptions like that don’t always work out so well either. See: US Housing market, sub-prime loan portfolios, etc.

While it’s not a sure bet, it is a stronger bet than sub-prime. The networks audiences are older and skew female. IF you can attract the 18-49 demo (and especially the 18-34 group) you can also attract top dollar from advertisers. This younger demo also loves DVR. Right now it is estimated that over 40% of all US households have DVR’s. Live events — especially live sporting events demand live viewing, commercials and all.

College sports have a double appeal for advertisers. They over-index the male 18-49 demo, and they also attract the more affluent baby boomers who are loyal to their university. That’s what the conferences and the networks are betting on.

srr50:

What you are saying makes perfect sense conceptually. Four years is just a long time in a media business that has to continue to grapple with challenges to its relevance from disruptive technologies and distribution channels. Not to mention the fact that all of the bidders are units of publicly traded companies, where the emphasis can shift dramatically due to outside market forces.