Looks like I am right again
Comments
-
Viewership = $$$ and recruiting. Second being almost as important as the first and obviously drives the first as well.AtomicDawg said:
It’s almost like viewership correlates with future tv deals and money that pours into the university.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
I thought UW should LEAVE because they weren't going to get money.RaceBannon said:
This is fucking retarded and why the Pac sucksPostGameOrangeSlices said:
They already laugh at the Pac-12, who gives a shit?TheHB said:PAC-12 on Amazon.
And the nation laughs.
If we think the rest of the country is clueless about college football out west now, just wait until this happens. Fans in the west won’t even give a shit.
Besides the new order being an easier path to the new playoff system, I’m not seeing why UW shouldn’t do everything it can to go B1G.
Take the Amazon money AND fucking win a big game for once. None of us should give a shit about viewership....Fox thinks truck racing is more important
all the bigtime games will still be on fox or abc anyways
bunch of midwest loser dick suckers should root for fucking Minnesota
Stay here with your coogs and beavs
UW should go with the real football
Now, UW could get the money, but the viewership might dip for Colorado at Oregon State...
Looks like the goalposts are moving for the Midwest dick suckers.
Take the money, win the games, and win a fucking big bowl game for the first time in 20 years or DIAFF
Take the Amazon money now, watch the ratings plummet, profit.
What could possibly go wrong? -
I'm not sure the Pac is really serious about Amazon beyond leverage or something against ESPN.
Exposure is big for the schools themselves. Every game you see both team's general university commercial blasted several times. -
I just feel like money has diminished return. The most successful teams aren't necessarily the richest. Don't get me wrong you need a certain level but once you have that then putting yourself at a competitive disadvantage for more money seems dumb.
As far as where the rights go I just want whatever makes it easiest to access north of the border. I hope Kliavkoff keeps me in mind -
Canadawg said:
I just feel like money has diminished return. The most successful teams aren't necessarily the richest. Don't get me wrong you need a certain level but once you have that then putting yourself at a competitive disadvantage for more money seems dumb.
As far as where the rights go I just want whatever makes it easiest to access north of the border. I hope Kliavkoff keeps me in mind
-
T
It's not just the immediate $ payoff that matters. All of the blue bloods are consolidating into two super conferences. If UW wants to be one, they have to join. The west is already bleeding talent and relevance eastward. Imagine how bad that's going to be when the two relevant LA schools leave the west as well?Canadawg said:I just feel like money has diminished return. The most successful teams aren't necessarily the richest. Don't get me wrong you need a certain level but once you have that then putting yourself at a competitive disadvantage for more money seems dumb.
As far as where the rights go I just want whatever makes it easiest to access north of the border. I hope Kliavkoff keeps me in mind
I don't want to fight for tallest midget status with an outside shot at upsetting someone in the playoffs with our scrappy band of 3* recruits and portal castoffs from the super leagues. That sounds pretty lame. -
Remaining P10 isn't operating with any material leveragehaie said:I'm not sure the Pac is really serious about Amazon beyond leverage or something against ESPN.
Exposure is big for the schools themselves. Every game you see both team's general university commercial blasted several times.
There is little much watch potential remaining
Networks aren't paying a premium for the P10 product ... the "windows" that everybody thinks needs to be filled with P10 product can easily be replaced with alternative product or with rights that they already own -
When the PAC was down across the board, USC and UCLA were trump cards you could play to keep you nationally relevant: UCLA and John Wooden, OJ and his ford bronco.
Without them it's over.
The Big 12 just experienced the same with OU/UT.
Even if you cobbled together some sort of B12 alliance, there's no way the smug West Coast would ever integrate w/ Baylor & BYU (side note, they should start a rivalry called the The Holy War). Cinnci making the playoffs and TCU playing for it all helps, but there isn't a national name in the lot.
If we accept D1 football is it's own separate entity that is officially capable of subsidizing a coast-to-coast conference (B10s territory is absurd), The ACC all-stars makes the most sense. It's the only way I see The PAC survive in any format. You add big, relevant, names and national intrigue.
It will never happen, but I like what it could look like.
PAC
UW/Oregon
Cal/Stanford
ASU/Zona
BUFF/UTE
ACC
UNC/Duke
Miami/ FSU
Virginia/Virginia Tech
Syracuse/Pitt
Have a 9th spot filled on each side with one other school for an 18 team league that is pretty damn good in football and untouchable in basketball. -
I get the Big Ten is the no brainer survival move, but something about it rubs me the wrong way.
What's the end game for D1 football?
I'm guessing, it breaks away from the NCAA and perhaps has some sort of relegation with lower schools occurs? It's broken but there's too much money to have it go away. -
All of it rubs me the wrong way. I think it's the no brainier, survival move though. It seems like some other poster named doogles said the same. That guy gets it.Doogles said:I get the Big Ten is the no brainer survival move, but something about it rubs me the wrong way.
