|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 19, 2023 19:35:54 GMT -8
I'm not certain, but I think some conferences have outs if multiple teams vacate. So if Apple came to to the table with a business plan with substantially higher payouts, that veey well could happen. The MWC Media contract can be opened up and renegotiated with the addition of teams. Renegotiated doesn't necessarily mean cancelled. Sounds like they'd only be dealing with CBS/FOX in that case? |
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Aug 19, 2023 19:55:33 GMT -8
I'm not certain, but I think some conferences have outs if multiple teams vacate. So if Apple came to to the table with a business plan with substantially higher payouts, that veey well could happen. Apple would probably literally have to approach teams or conferences and try to get them to dissolve conferences. I'm not sure that would fly, probably would lead to tampering lawsuits filed by the companies that already have media deals. I consider the current media companies to have kinda tampered in what is going on, but what they did was negotiate expansion with conferences they already had deals with... it kinda adds a buffer level in tampering accusations. I like the idea of them locking up the G5 conferences, but most if not all, have media deals already. I don't see conferences dissolving in hopes to get Apple deals. I guess they could negotiate with the Pac to rebuild a 16/18 team conference, then once it pans out and everyone is making money, suggest the PAC add say 40-60 teams, form multiple divisions, and agree to offer the PAC enough money to cut expansion teams the same $$ (or whatever terms the PAC wants to give expansion teams)... there would be conferences dissolving to join the Pac directly, but Apple wouldn't be negotiating with individual teams or conferences with existing media deals. Essentially that is what other media companies are doing. The 8 PAC teams that just left were deaing with conferences, not media companies. I think that's exactly what Apple would do. But they may not think the PAC has enough pull now to do that. Then again, if they could prove the concept... |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 19, 2023 20:04:44 GMT -8
Apple would probably literally have to approach teams or conferences and try to get them to dissolve conferences. I'm not sure that would fly, probably would lead to tampering lawsuits filed by the companies that already have media deals. I consider the current media companies to have kinda tampered in what is going on, but what they did was negotiate expansion with conferences they already had deals with... it kinda adds a buffer level in tampering accusations. I like the idea of them locking up the G5 conferences, but most if not all, have media deals already. I don't see conferences dissolving in hopes to get Apple deals. I guess they could negotiate with the Pac to rebuild a 16/18 team conference, then once it pans out and everyone is making money, suggest the PAC add say 40-60 teams, form multiple divisions, and agree to offer the PAC enough money to cut expansion teams the same $$ (or whatever terms the PAC wants to give expansion teams)... there would be conferences dissolving to join the Pac directly, but Apple wouldn't be negotiating with individual teams or conferences with existing media deals. Essentially that is what other media companies are doing. The 8 PAC teams that just left were deaing with conferences, not media companies. I think that's exactly what Apple would do. But they may not think the PAC has enough pull now to do that. Then again, if they could prove the concept... Proof of concept is pretty much the case. If Apple wants to get in now, the PAC is the only conference available, and that's if they could cobble together enough teams. The only other shot is going with independents, but there are cuttently only 4 independent FBS teams. My guess is that's not enough inventory to get off the ground with. |
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Aug 19, 2023 20:13:00 GMT -8
Here's a crazy idea that would be a roll of the dice, but we're at that point anyhow, right?
Instead of Stanford/Cal going to the ACC, bring some of the ACC to us. How, you say? FSU and Clemson want out. Find some suitable partners for them on the East Coast. Find a couple more on the west coast to make a pod for the west. I know - why would FSU ever do this?
Simple. They need $120 million to get out of the ACC. Do the Apple deal but give each school 50% of the 50% cut the PAC gets after the base. Based upon the numbers we heard, 5 million subscriptions would get an extra $30 million per school for the PAC-10. That's $300 million, and FSU could have $150 million per year. OSU might be stuck at $35 million, but we'd be one of the schools in the driver's seat. If FSU and Clemson think they're so popular, 5 million should be easy.
Is my math wrong somewhere?
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 19, 2023 20:42:59 GMT -8
Here's a crazy idea that would be a roll of the dice, but we're at that point anyhow, right? Instead of Stanford/Cal going to the ACC, bring some of the ACC to us. How, you say? FSU and Clemson want out. Find some suitable partners for them on the East Coast. Find a couple more on the west coast to make a pod for the west. I know - why would FSU ever do this? Simple. They need $120 million to get out of the ACC. Do the Apple deal but give each school 50% of the 50% cut the PAC gets after the base. Based upon the numbers we heard, 5 million subscriptions would get an extra $30 million per school for the PAC-10. That's $300 million, and FSU could have $150 million per year. OSU might be stuck at $35 million, but we'd be one of the schools in the driver's seat. If FSU and Clemson think they're so popular, 5 million should be easy. Is my math wrong somewhere? I'm trying to figure out your math, but the concept of giving 1 team 150 million a year when the next highest estimated college TV payout is 80-100 million a year to the Big10 teams. The other concept I have a tough time handling is FSU only beat Florida by 7 the game before we beat Florida by 27. Granted, Florida was weakened by the time we played them, but is FSU football really worth 4-5X OSU...maybe if you're talking brand, but as far as results go if someone gets that much higher pay than anyone else they should outperform them on the field significantly. I'd be cool with a portion of the overall media contract money each year be proportioned out as bonuses based on actual on-field performance in conference play. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Aug 19, 2023 21:07:22 GMT -8
Here's a crazy idea that would be a roll of the dice, but we're at that point anyhow, right? Instead of Stanford/Cal going to the ACC, bring some of the ACC to us. How, you say? FSU and Clemson want out. Find some suitable partners for them on the East Coast. Find a couple more on the west coast to make a pod for the west. I know - why would FSU ever do this? Simple. They need $120 million to get out of the ACC. Do the Apple deal but give each school 50% of the 50% cut the PAC gets after the base. Based upon the numbers we heard, 5 million subscriptions would get an extra $30 million per school for the PAC-10. That's $300 million, and FSU could have $150 million per year. OSU might be stuck at $35 million, but we'd be one of the schools in the driver's seat. If FSU and Clemson think they're so popular, 5 million should be easy. Is my math wrong somewhere? I'm trying to figure out your math, but the concept of giving 1 team 150 million a year when the next highest estimated college TV payout is 80-100 million a year to the Big10 teams. The other concept I have a tough time handling is FSU only beat Florida by 7 the game before we beat Florida by 27. Granted, Florida was weakened by the time we played them, but is FSU football really worth 4-5X OSU...maybe if you're talking brand, but as far as results go if someone gets that much higher pay than anyone else they should outperform them on the field significantly. I'd be cool with a portion of the overall media contract money each year be proportioned out as bonuses based on actual on-field performance in conference play. Who cares about the math. Who wants to be in a league with FSU &/or Clemson and the East coast travel, pods or not. The answer, whether OSU fan likes it or not, is build with G5. You hope Apple is still highly interested and you build and become unique. OSU becomes innovative, a ground floor "investor" in the future. You then become the league and media market that draws the other "have nots". Let the super rich, elite, NIL swollen universities go their way. And in 3-5 years of growth push for a new division, a separate playoff system and revamped bowl structure for those tired of being screwed by the networks. Dream big... don't become just a 2nd tier arse wipe at the mercy of those "elite" teams. |
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Aug 19, 2023 21:38:56 GMT -8
I'm trying to figure out your math, but the concept of giving 1 team 150 million a year when the next highest estimated college TV payout is 80-100 million a year to the Big10 teams. The other concept I have a tough time handling is FSU only beat Florida by 7 the game before we beat Florida by 27. Granted, Florida was weakened by the time we played them, but is FSU football really worth 4-5X OSU...maybe if you're talking brand, but as far as results go if someone gets that much higher pay than anyone else they should outperform them on the field significantly. I'd be cool with a portion of the overall media contract money each year be proportioned out as bonuses based on actual on-field performance in conference play. Who cares about the math. Who wants to be in a league with FSU &/or Clemson and the East coast travel, pods or not. The answer, whether OSU fan likes it or not, is build with G5. You hope Apple is still highly interested and you build and become unique. OSU becomes innovative, a ground floor "investor" in the future. You then become the league and media market that draws the other "have nots". Let the super rich, elite, NIL swollen universities go their way. And in 3-5 years of growth push for a new division, a separate playoff system and revamped bowl structure for those tired of being screwed by the networks. Dream big... don't become just a 2nd tier arse wipe at the mercy of those "elite" teams. Not opposed to the idea, but you have a long way to go before you could disconnect G5 from CFB, even a little, and I'm not sure OSU is the prime engine to do it. I still hold out hope that there will be a best of AAC, best of MW, PAC 4 conference, but if that doesn't happen, we need to think outside the box. |
|
|
|
Post by easyheat on Aug 20, 2023 0:30:48 GMT -8
I think the reports on Stanford's interest and activity has removed the illusion of any PAC-whatever rebuild
They were essential to any initiatives in reforming the PAC. Had UO and UW stuck around, there would have been a six team nucleus that could have attracted several new teams and a decent media package.
A shipwreck with 4 teams left searching for life boats.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 20, 2023 7:15:40 GMT -8
I think the reports on Stanford's interest and activity has removed the illusion of any PAC-whatever rebuild They were essential to any initiatives in reforming the PAC. Had UO and UW stuck around, there would have been a six team nucleus that could have attracted several new teams and a decent media package. A shipwreck with 4 teams left searching for life boats. I gotta question how essential the 2 California schools are to a rebuild since Luck has said OSU and WSU are his clients. It’d be a heck of a lot easier with the two California schools on board. I expect they’re invited, but it seems they’ve been looking elsewhere the entire time and I’d think the 2 northern schools would have to be taking that into account. Had UW & uo stuck around there would have been a 9 team nucleus WITH a media deal, they were the only ones of the 9 that skipped the Grant of Rights meeting that set off the collapse. |
|
|
|
Post by p8nted on Aug 20, 2023 7:36:54 GMT -8
The MWC Media contract can be opened up and renegotiated with the addition of teams. Renegotiated doesn't necessarily mean cancelled. Sounds like they'd only be dealing with CBS/FOX in that case? That is my understanding, although ESPN has some rights to Boise St games so who knows. There is extra inventory for Streaming, but like the early days of the PAC network, it is not with the games the media is most interested in. |
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Aug 20, 2023 10:49:17 GMT -8
I think the reports on Stanford's interest and activity has removed the illusion of any PAC-whatever rebuild They were essential to any initiatives in reforming the PAC. Had UO and UW stuck around, there would have been a six team nucleus that could have attracted several new teams and a decent media package. A shipwreck with 4 teams left searching for life boats. I gotta question how essential the 2 California schools are to a rebuild since Luck has said OSU and WSU are his clients. It’d be a heck of a lot easier with the two California schools on board. I expect they’re invited, but it seems they’ve been looking elsewhere the entire time and I’d think the 2 northern schools would have to be taking that into account. Had UW & uo stuck around there would have been a 9 team nucleus WITH a media deal, they were the only ones of the 9 that skipped the Grant of Rights meeting that set off the collapse. I think without Furd..... us, Wazzu, and Cal would essentially be absorbed into the MW. Furd is unique because of their academic requirements....being private...lots of money ....and their excellent Olympic sports......they are trying to expand their recruiting footprint to remain relevant......if they play over in the ACC maybe they can recruit more out there, where theres a much higher density of talent. |
|
ftd
Junior
"I think real leaders show up when times are hard." Trent Bray 11/29/2023
Posts: 2,517
|
Post by ftd on Aug 20, 2023 11:34:51 GMT -8
I gotta question how essential the 2 California schools are to a rebuild since Luck has said OSU and WSU are his clients. It’d be a heck of a lot easier with the two California schools on board. I expect they’re invited, but it seems they’ve been looking elsewhere the entire time and I’d think the 2 northern schools would have to be taking that into account. Had UW & uo stuck around there would have been a 9 team nucleus WITH a media deal, they were the only ones of the 9 that skipped the Grant of Rights meeting that set off the collapse. I think without Furd..... us, Wazzu, and Cal would essentially be absorbed into the MW. Furd is unique because of their academic requirements....being private...lots of money ....and their excellent Olympic sports......they are trying to expand their recruiting footprint to remain relevant......if they play over in the ACC maybe they can recruit more out there, where theres a much higher density of talent. Furd seems to be between a rock and a hard place. In today's world of the transfer portal they have a big disadvantage. Their academic standards are quite high, and there aren't a lot of athletes that would be in the portal and meet the academic standards...Is this now showing in Football results the last couple of years?  On the other hand The are a prestigious university and it may be 'beneath them' to play teams currently being associated with a new conference...So they don't want to dilute their prestige... |
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Aug 20, 2023 11:45:21 GMT -8
I think without Furd..... us, Wazzu, and Cal would essentially be absorbed into the MW. Furd is unique because of their academic requirements....being private...lots of money ....and their excellent Olympic sports......they are trying to expand their recruiting footprint to remain relevant......if they play over in the ACC maybe they can recruit more out there, where theres a much higher density of talent. Furd seems to be between a rock and a hard place. In today's world of the transfer portal they have a big disadvantage. Their academic standards are quite high, and there aren't a lot of athletes that would be in the portal and meet the academic standards...Is this now showing in Football results the last couple of years? On the other hand The are a prestigious university and it may be 'beneath them' to play teams currently being associated with a new conference...So they don't want to dilute their prestige... I believe I heard their coach say that like 1% of kids in the portal are kids Furd would even consider to admit. |
|
|
|
Post by speakthetruth on Aug 20, 2023 12:11:26 GMT -8
I think Stanford is playing the waiting game. To be the last pac team standing.
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Aug 20, 2023 13:23:00 GMT -8
I think Stanford is playing the waiting game. To be the last pac team standing. I don't think that is Stanford's goal at all. And from what I've read, Stanford has been actively seeking out a landing spot. |
|
