PAC News

Volbound1700 said:
I also think the values of Cal-Stanford will be slightly higher once they are playing more big name teams. For example, they now have to played Oregon, Washington, USC, and UCLA every year. In most years in the Pac12, they miss a couple of those teams.
Click to expand...
they never missed any of those teams. except maybe 2020.
Cal and stanford were in the north with OR and WA and there was an all 4 california schools play eachother stipulation.
 
ralphiewvu said:
The dude they interviewed (longtime media consultant) alluded to their best linear options being from ION or the CW Network. If they could get a good price I’d think the CW is the play. They have LIV and are in a ton of major media markets.
Click to expand...
There is a lot in that article and none of it was really explained well.

It basically says that the PAC will struggle to get 50% of their games on TV. That is a shocking number to me as Auburn has maybe one game a year that isn't on TV and several that probably shouldn't be so that's 92% of their games and in a bad year say two games were not on that would be 83%. I can't even fathom a world where only 50% of the games are on TV.

I guess this projection is assuming half would be streaming but that wasn't clear. If the PAC is looking to split this deal 50/50 between linear TV and steaming it's going to be a huge argument about who gets to pick what and that will affect the price dramatically. Without USC and UCLA there are probably around 2 games a week in most weeks that people will have an interest in.

That was not a positive article for the PAC at all.
 
Wild Turkey said:
There is a lot in that article and none of it was really explained well.

It basically says that the PAC will struggle to get 50% of their games on TV. That is a shocking number to me as Auburn has maybe one game a year that isn't on TV and several that probably shouldn't be so that's 92% of their games and in a bad year say two games were not on that would be 83%. I can't even fathom a world where only 50% of the games are on TV.

I guess this projection is assuming half would be streaming but that wasn't clear. If the PAC is looking to split this deal 50/50 between linear TV and steaming it's going to be a huge argument about who gets to pick what and that will affect the price dramatically. Without USC and UCLA there are probably around 2 games a week in most weeks that people will have an interest in.

That was not a positive article for the PAC at all.
Click to expand...
Yup, what I want to know is the ballpark these streaming sites are offering? Also if Someone like a CW would be able to pay for a bunch of content?

Not positive at all. But it’s still not over yet and I really have to believe it’s going to take a complete failure in negotiations to get some of these schools to move to the B12. Seems like most (if not all) presidents want That to be last possible option.
 
Wild Turkey said:
Without USC and UCLA there are probably around 2 games a week in most weeks that people will have an interest in.

That was not a positive article for the PAC at all.
Click to expand...
Even with them not every game is must see tv.
ill be honest as it is right now unless at least 1 more team can step up the name and appearance of most matchups arent going to spark the national interest
People wont care for the Oregon State vs Washington game because of the Oregon State name and ignore how they actually did.
 
OlyDuck said:
Even with them not every game is must see tv.
ill be honest as it is right now unless at least 1 more team can step up the name and appearance of most matchups arent going to spark the national interest
People wont care for the Oregon State vs Washington game because of the Oregon State name and ignore how they actually did.
Click to expand...

True but people somewhat care if they are in the top 25, especially top 10.
 
OlyDuck said:
Even with them not every game is must see tv.
ill be honest as it is right now unless at least 1 more team can step up the name and appearance of most matchups arent going to spark the national interest
People wont care for the Oregon State vs Washington game because of the Oregon State name and ignore how they actually did.
Click to expand...
People say that the SEC is a one or two-team league but the truth is that if any of these teams are on and playing someone with a heartbeat (not a Furman or Georgia Southern) then people are going to watch:

Alabama
Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Tennessee
LSU
aTm
add: Oklahoma & Texas

All of the above most likely will have 2mm watching regardless of who they play.

Teams that get great fanbase support so you know there will be around 2mm watching most games:

Ole Miss
Miss State
South Carolina
Arkansas

The only ones that aren't automatic draws but if they are playing other SEC teams will draw anyway are:

Kentucky
Vandy
Mizzou

I watch a ton of SEC football, especially the ones Auburn is going to play for scouting purposes and that is way more standard down here than I think anywhere else. The PAC struggles to get even their Alumni to watch their own games.

It's just a ton of inventory that will be watched.
 
Wild Turkey said:
People say that the SEC is a one or two-team league but the truth is that if any of these teams are on and playing someone with a heartbeat (not a Furman or Georgia Southern) then people are going to watch:

Alabama
Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Tennessee
LSU
aTm
add: Oklahoma & Texas

All of the above most likely will have 2mm watching regardless of who they play.

Teams that get great fanbase support so you know there will be around 2mm watching most games:

Ole Miss
Miss State
South Carolina
Arkansas

The only ones that aren't automatic draws but if they are playing other SEC teams will draw anyway are:

Kentucky
Vandy
Mizzou

I watch a ton of SEC football, especially the ones Auburn is going to play for scouting purposes and that is way more standard down here than I think anywhere else. The PAC struggles to get even their Alumni to watch their own games.

It's just a ton of inventory that will be watched.
Click to expand...

Although they haven't always been as successful on the field, even Arkansas and South Carolina tend to have a large and dedicated fanbases. The Mississippi teams suffer from having two teams in a state that really only has a population for one major team. I would be curious to have seen the SEC had Ole Miss been the only Mississippi team in 1933 as that state produces a lot of in-state talent. I imagine Ole Miss could be in the top category. (Of course Alabama has same problem with both Alabama and Auburn but they both become powers).

Kentucky also has that large/dedicated fanbase for Basketball.

The only team that really doesn't carry much weight from a fanbase perspective is Vanderbilt. Sorry Vandy fans.
 
Volbound1700 said:
Although they haven't always been as successful on the field, even Arkansas and South Carolina tend to have a large and dedicated fanbases. The Mississippi teams suffer from having two teams in a state that really only has a population for one major team. I would be curious to have seen the SEC had Ole Miss been the only Mississippi team in 1933 as that state produces a lot of in-state talent. I imagine Ole Miss could be in the top category. (Of course Alabama has same problem with both Alabama and Auburn but they both become powers).

Kentucky also has that large/dedicated fanbase for Basketball.

The only team that really doesn't carry much weight from a fanbase perspective is Vanderbilt. Sorry Vandy fans.
Click to expand...
Isn’t Vandy a smaller private school? With very few exceptions, smaller private schools have less alumni. So even if their loyal fan base is the same percentage as large state universities, it ain’t nearly as big in raw numbers…even if they are winning.
 
Deep Creek said:
Isn’t Vandy a smaller private school? With very few exceptions, smaller private schools have less alumni. So even if their loyal fan base is the same percentage as large state universities, it ain’t nearly as big in raw numbers…even if they are winning.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it definitely has legit excuses for its troubles. It is a beautiful campus, though, and probably should have more of a fanbase and be stronger at sports. The school, for the most part, goes out of the way to neglect sports. People talk about academics but I quickly point out that Northwestern and Stanford are ranked a head of Vandy in most categories but have had far better sports programs.
 
Volbound1700 said:
Yeah, it definitely has legit excuses for its troubles. It is a beautiful campus, though, and probably should have more of a fanbase and be stronger at sports. The school, for the most part, goes out of the way to neglect sports. People talk about academics but I quickly point out that Northwestern and Stanford are ranked a head of Vandy in most categories but have had far better sports programs.
Click to expand...
No doubt they could be better than what they’ve been. But even if they did have leadership that gave athletics more of a priority, they still wouldn’t have the alumni following of a school with annual enrollments of 45,000.

From what i understand, down the road UCF is going to have very large alumni numbers because their enrollment had boomed.
 
Deep Creek said:
No doubt they could be better than what they’ve been. But even if they did have leadership that gave athletics more of a priority, they still wouldn’t have the alumni following of a school with annual enrollments of 45,000.

From what i understand, down the road UCF is going to have very large alumni numbers because their enrollment had boomed.
Click to expand...

UCF, for years, has been one of the larger public school in the nations. It is 3x the size of Alabama and almost 2x the size of UT Knoxville for example. I had an alumni in grad school from UCF and he would tell me a lot about the school. Dante Culpepper was one of their NFL claims to fame back in the day.
 
Volbound1700 said:
UCF, for years, has been one of the larger public school in the nations. It is 3x the size of Alabama and almost 2x the size of UT Knoxville for example. I had an alumni in grad school from UCF and he would tell me a lot about the school. Dante Culpepper was one of their NFL claims to fame back in the day.
Click to expand...
I just looked up a couple. ( I ain’t very technomological). UCF’s entollment is 70,000. Arizona State showed up with 75,000.
 
Wild Turkey said:
Dude, you've already killed two leagues and this is exactly how it starts. Now we need you to go back to the corner and sit the fuck down.

When we are ready for you to have an opinion we will give it to you.
Click to expand...
E67fDHaXoAIiU0v.jpg
 
Wild Turkey said:
I watch a ton of SEC football, especially the ones Auburn is going to play for scouting purposes and that is way more standard down here than I think anywhere else. The PAC struggles to get even their Alumni to watch their own games.

It's just a ton of inventory that will be watched.
Click to expand...
Scouting? so you work for the team?
 
Wild Turkey said:
People say that the SEC is a one or two-team league but the truth is that if any of these teams are on and playing someone with a heartbeat (not a Furman or Georgia Southern) then people are going to watch:

Alabama
Auburn
Georgia
Florida
Tennessee
LSU
aTm
add: Oklahoma & Texas

All of the above most likely will have 2mm watching regardless of who they play.

Teams that get great fanbase support so you know there will be around 2mm watching most games:

Ole Miss
Miss State
South Carolina
Arkansas

The only ones that aren't automatic draws but if they are playing other SEC teams will draw anyway are:

Kentucky
Vandy
Mizzou

I watch a ton of SEC football, especially the ones Auburn is going to play for scouting purposes and that is way more standard down here than I think anywhere else. The PAC struggles to get even their Alumni to watch their own games.

It's just a ton of inventory that will be watched.
Click to expand...
I think this is a little over estimated id say you are probably pretty well on but no its not everygame and not even just a team with a pulse. also contingent on how teams are doing.
you have Auburn in top tier and Miss state at 2mm but their game last year drew 512k
Florida Missouri was only 488k
oklahoma vs iowa state 711k
 
OlyDuck said:
Even with them not every game is must see tv.
ill be honest as it is right now unless at least 1 more team can step up the name and appearance of most matchups arent going to spark the national interest
People wont care for the Oregon State vs Washington game because of the Oregon State name and ignore how they actually did.
Click to expand...
To be honest, the Washinton name doesn't do anything for me and I'm a big CFB fan, obviously. Oregon and USC are the two that people would watch, UCLA a distant 3rd. No one else really does much to people on the east coast.
 
OlyDuck said:
I think this is a little over estimated id say you are probably pretty well on but no its not everygame and not even just a team with a pulse. also contingent on how teams are doing.
you have Auburn in top tier and Miss state at 2mm but their game last year drew 512k
Florida Missouri was only 488k
oklahoma vs iowa state 711k
Click to expand...
Auburn was up against Alabama vs LSU and Clemson vs Notre Dame on that week.

That game has pulled 6mm viewers in the past: CFB Week 7 TV Ratings: Auburn/Mississippi St. Up on CBS, Tops Week

That's the top-rated one granted but Auburn vs Miss State pulled a 3.8 and that's a little more than Oregon and Washington did this year and both were highly ranked.

Just saying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top