Jon Wilner reports on the stepping down of PAC Networks President Lydia Murphy-Stephans.

He mentions a few types of potential changes although he mostly disregards the idea that this is a signal that a portion of the PACN will be sold off.

I think it will be telling though what decision is made in hiring the next President and what changes occur in content. In so far as what the future of the PAC will be in realignment...

Had the B1G done their 6 year deal when the decision to retain 100% ownership was reached?
Had the ACCN been announced?
The times are changing at a rapid pace and somebody had better make plans to keep up.

PAC is falling behind financially

People are switching over to streaming options and are still not getting the PAC Network

Cal, iirc, stated they were operating at a deficit

Might be time to partner their network with a fox or espn if they want some kind of distribution and profit

If not, they logically become targets for realignment

Are you listening X? Their demographics mirror yours. But the outcome does not have to be the same. Here are the PAC's mistakes.

1. Governance. College presidents don't know a damned thing about programming and running a network. This is a lesson they should have learned from the the Big 10 and didn't. The SEC did learn and look where we are now. There isn't enough time in a day to be sensitive to the whims of 12 college presidents and how the want their campuses and sports showcased, and still run a network. The arrogant idiots need to sell a share to some network so that professionals and not local hires make those decisions and maybe twice a year have a face to face with the assembled presidents for input, if then.

2. Why should Direct TV add a product that nobody wants to watch? They are business and not a charity for the PAC. If the product has a market and commands the price then fine. If not? Oh well.

3. There are many terrific women out there who can run networks and transact business. Few of them have hyphenated last names. Never hire a man or a woman with a hyphenated last name. It simply shows that they emphasize minutia over the big picture and are too insecure to be successful.


Now that said it could affect realignment, particularly if FOX lands a deal with the PAC. It will create a bidding war for Texas and Oklahoma. Neither Texas nor Oklahoma really wants to be in the B1G. Texas doesn't want to do a fly over to be in the ACC. Both have wanted associations with the PAC. If the money offered by FOX can lure them to the PAC then the following will happen:

1. The next FOX renewal with the Big 10 will not see an increase and may even decline.

2. ESPN will again redouble efforts to make sure that the SEC can cover DFW and land a larger % of Texas even without the Sooners and Horns.

3. ESPN will have more to invest in the ACC and the acquisitions of Connecticut, Cincinnati, and West Virginia will be pushed.

4. The PAC will gain traction and they will improve their standing leaving the ACC a distant 4th.

5. ESPN will eventually push for more of merger between the ACC and SEC in order to increase content match ups in football and basketball. A scheduling arrangement simply will not be sufficient.

Why? Because we will still have the best brands. Refusing to play games against FOX backed brands in the Big 10 and PAC will protect the recruiting grounds in the Southeast and will keep all of our money in house and give them little opportunity for the improvement of their status.

So if the PAC gets serious, and it sound like to me they are about to do so, not just because of poor carriage, but because they realize that in 5 years the only product that can improve their standing will be gone, and because they don't have the war chest to attract the product that would help them without a networks help, and because the only network that would be interested in spending more than schools might be worth to help facilitate their move to the PAC (which would also boost their poorer inventory) would be FOX, expect realignment to happen sooner and expect ESPN and FOX to be at war over product that would boost either the PAC or the ACC, with the SEC & Big 10 being used to facilitate the transition.

It will be fascinating. It also explains why ESPN is suddenly enhancing their pull in Texas. And, I might add it will mean that either FOX or ESPN will divide the whole Big 12 between the two conferences they hold.

FOX (B10N & PACN) versus ESPN (ACCN & SECN). But either way 10 schools will be divided between 2 conferences and one Network will have 36 programs or the other will have 39 through in Cincinnati or UConn to make 40.

(04-24-2017 01:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Are you listening X? Their demographics mirror yours. But the outcome does not have to be the same. Here are the PAC's mistakes.

1. Governance. College presidents don't know a damned thing about programming and running a network. This is a lesson they should have learned from the the Big 10 and didn't. The SEC did learn and look where we are now. There isn't enough time in a day to be sensitive to the whims of 12 college presidents and how the want their campuses and sports showcased, and still run a network. The arrogant idiots need to sell a share to some network so that professionals and not local hires make those decisions and maybe twice a year have a face to face with the assembled presidents for input, if then.

2. Why should Direct TV add a product that nobody wants to watch? They are business and not a charity for the PAC. If the product has a market and commands the price then fine. If not? Oh well.

3. There are many terrific women out there who can run networks and transact business. Few of them have hyphenated last names. Never hire a man or a woman with a hyphenated last name. It simply shows that they emphasize minutia over the big picture and are too insecure to be successful.


Now that said it could affect realignment, particularly if FOX lands a deal with the PAC. It will create a bidding war for Texas and Oklahoma. Neither Texas nor Oklahoma really wants to be in the B1G. Texas doesn't want to do a fly over to be in the ACC. Both have wanted associations with the PAC. If the money offered by FOX can lure them to the PAC then the following will happen:

1. The next FOX renewal with the Big 10 will not see an increase and may even decline.

2. ESPN will again redouble efforts to make sure that the SEC can cover DFW and land a larger % of Texas even without the Sooners and Horns.

3. ESPN will have more to invest in the ACC and the acquisitions of Connecticut, Cincinnati, and West Virginia will be pushed.

4. The PAC will gain traction and they will improve their standing leaving the ACC a distant 4th.

5. ESPN will eventually push for more of merger between the ACC and SEC in order to increase content match ups in football and basketball. A scheduling arrangement simply will not be sufficient.

Why? Because we will still have the best brands. Refusing to play games against FOX backed brands in the Big 10 and PAC will protect the recruiting grounds in the Southeast and will keep all of our money in house and give them little opportunity for the improvement of their status.

So if the PAC gets serious, and it sound like to me they are about to do so, not just because of poor carriage, but because they realize that in 5 years the only product that can improve their standing will be gone, and because they don't have the war chest to attract the product that would help them without a networks help, and because the only network that would be interested in spending more than schools might be worth to help facilitate their move to the PAC (which would also boost their poorer inventory) would be FOX, expect realignment to happen sooner and expect ESPN and FOX to be at war over product that would boost either the PAC or the ACC, with the SEC & Big 10 being used to facilitate the transition.

It will be fascinating. It also explains why ESPN is suddenly enhancing their pull in Texas. And, I might add it will mean that either FOX or ESPN will divide the whole Big 12 between the two conferences they hold.

FOX (B10N & PACN) versus ESPN (ACCN & SECN). But either way 10 schools will be divided between 2 conferences and one Network will have 36 programs or the other will have 39 through in Cincinnati or UConn to make 40.

There's an interesting confluence of ideas here.

Assuming the PAC does sell a portion of its network off to FOX in an attempt to survive then what is ESPN's response? How do they secure the product?

If ESPN wants to move Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC for all the reasons we've been discussing recently and if they also want to secure all 10 schools from the Big 12 into the ESPN family then they would be a bit limited with how they could go about doing that.

What I'm referring to is that most of the Big 12 schools are geographical outliers for the ACC and outside of schools like UT, OU, KU, and maybe WVU then I'm not sure any of them would really profit the ACCN anyway. Of course, put all that in the context of Mike Slive saying the next move would be very, very large conferences as opposed to the increases by 2 or 4 that we usually talk about...

I'm going to go a little crazy here as I am want to do. I do remember this article from Berry Tramel from last Summer... Officials suggest merger

I know it couldn't possibly be the MOST profitable solution for all parties, but I can't help but think it is the MOST profitable for the most parties. SEC/Big 12 merger?

Let's flesh this out in light of new developments...

1. ESPN wants Mexico and the Spanish speaking population of the US, read that as a need to capitalize on TX and the Southwest in general
2. ESPN has green-lighted an ACC Network, doubtful they'll turn back at this stage
3. Big 12 feigned an expansion process in an attempt to cajole something out of the networks

So what is ESPN willing to pay for?

Let's say we did it like this...

West Virginia, Cincinnati, and UConn go to the ACC with Notre Dame going all in...

The remaining 9 Big 12 teams take BYU(let's not forget they are an ESPN property with good revenue and attendance) and merge with the SEC...

The benefit you get is that you can move everyone into regional divisions where you don't have to play schools from the other side of the conference on a regular basis. What would normally be non-conference games are instead conference games played infrequently and everything is under the same roof.

What if ESPN paid for it by robbing FOX of content and essentially shutting the door on Big Ten expansion before it ever has a chance to get started? Convert the LHN into a Spanish language network and carry both the SECN and SEC Deportes nationally. The national part takes on new meaning because multiple regions of the country are covered. The SECN has oodles of content that it could never show so ESPN's other networks don't hurt for ratings.

No more GOR to worry about...no more threats of leaving little brothers behind...

I'm just saying, it would solve a lot of problems for a lot of people.

(04-24-2017 03:22 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(04-24-2017 01:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Are you listening X? Their demographics mirror yours. But the outcome does not have to be the same. Here are the PAC's mistakes.

1. Governance. College presidents don't know a damned thing about programming and running a network. This is a lesson they should have learned from the the Big 10 and didn't. The SEC did learn and look where we are now. There isn't enough time in a day to be sensitive to the whims of 12 college presidents and how the want their campuses and sports showcased, and still run a network. The arrogant idiots need to sell a share to some network so that professionals and not local hires make those decisions and maybe twice a year have a face to face with the assembled presidents for input, if then.

2. Why should Direct TV add a product that nobody wants to watch? They are business and not a charity for the PAC. If the product has a market and commands the price then fine. If not? Oh well.

3. There are many terrific women out there who can run networks and transact business. Few of them have hyphenated last names. Never hire a man or a woman with a hyphenated last name. It simply shows that they emphasize minutia over the big picture and are too insecure to be successful.


Now that said it could affect realignment, particularly if FOX lands a deal with the PAC. It will create a bidding war for Texas and Oklahoma. Neither Texas nor Oklahoma really wants to be in the B1G. Texas doesn't want to do a fly over to be in the ACC. Both have wanted associations with the PAC. If the money offered by FOX can lure them to the PAC then the following will happen:

1. The next FOX renewal with the Big 10 will not see an increase and may even decline.

2. ESPN will again redouble efforts to make sure that the SEC can cover DFW and land a larger % of Texas even without the Sooners and Horns.

3. ESPN will have more to invest in the ACC and the acquisitions of Connecticut, Cincinnati, and West Virginia will be pushed.

4. The PAC will gain traction and they will improve their standing leaving the ACC a distant 4th.

5. ESPN will eventually push for more of merger between the ACC and SEC in order to increase content match ups in football and basketball. A scheduling arrangement simply will not be sufficient.

Why? Because we will still have the best brands. Refusing to play games against FOX backed brands in the Big 10 and PAC will protect the recruiting grounds in the Southeast and will keep all of our money in house and give them little opportunity for the improvement of their status.

So if the PAC gets serious, and it sound like to me they are about to do so, not just because of poor carriage, but because they realize that in 5 years the only product that can improve their standing will be gone, and because they don't have the war chest to attract the product that would help them without a networks help, and because the only network that would be interested in spending more than schools might be worth to help facilitate their move to the PAC (which would also boost their poorer inventory) would be FOX, expect realignment to happen sooner and expect ESPN and FOX to be at war over product that would boost either the PAC or the ACC, with the SEC & Big 10 being used to facilitate the transition.

It will be fascinating. It also explains why ESPN is suddenly enhancing their pull in Texas. And, I might add it will mean that either FOX or ESPN will divide the whole Big 12 between the two conferences they hold.

FOX (B10N & PACN) versus ESPN (ACCN & SECN). But either way 10 schools will be divided between 2 conferences and one Network will have 36 programs or the other will have 39 through in Cincinnati or UConn to make 40.

There's an interesting confluence of ideas here.

Assuming the PAC does sell a portion of its network off to FOX in an attempt to survive then what is ESPN's response? How do they secure the product?

If ESPN wants to move Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC for all the reasons we've been discussing recently and if they also want to secure all 10 schools from the Big 12 into the ESPN family then they would be a bit limited with how they could go about doing that.

What I'm referring to is that most of the Big 12 schools are geographical outliers for the ACC and outside of schools like UT, OU, KU, and maybe WVU then I'm not sure any of them would really profit the ACCN anyway. Of course, put all that in the context of Mike Slive saying the next move would be very, very large conferences as opposed to the increases by 2 or 4 that we usually talk about...

I'm going to go a little crazy here as I am want to do. I do remember this article from Berry Tramel from last Summer... Officials suggest merger

I know it couldn't possibly be the MOST profitable solution for all parties, but I can't help but think it is the MOST profitable for the most parties. SEC/Big 12 merger?

Let's flesh this out in light of new developments...

1. ESPN wants Mexico and the Spanish speaking population of the US, read that as a need to capitalize on TX and the Southwest in general
2. ESPN has green-lighted an ACC Network, doubtful they'll turn back at this stage
3. Big 12 feigned an expansion process in an attempt to cajole something out of the networks

So what is ESPN willing to pay for?

Let's say we did it like this...

West Virginia, Cincinnati, and UConn go to the ACC with Notre Dame going all in...

The remaining 9 Big 12 teams take BYU(let's not forget they are an ESPN property with good revenue and attendance) and merge with the SEC...

The benefit you get is that you can move everyone into regional divisions where you don't have to play schools from the other side of the conference on a regular basis. What would normally be non-conference games are instead conference games played infrequently and everything is under the same roof.

What if ESPN paid for it by robbing FOX of content and essentially shutting the door on Big Ten expansion before it ever has a chance to get started? Convert the LHN into a Spanish language network and carry both the SECN and SEC Deportes nationally. The national part takes on new meaning because multiple regions of the country are covered. The SECN has oodles of content that it could never show so ESPN's other networks don't hurt for ratings.

No more GOR to worry about...no more threats of leaving little brothers behind...

I'm just saying, it would solve a lot of problems for a lot of people.

There are currently 26 schools between the PAC and Big 10. There are 28 and a partial between the ACC and SEC. If the Big 12 is moved in total to either it will create an imbalance in numbers, but not necessarily one in total value. It's an interesting idea. Does FOX want those 36 schools? I have to think yes in a big way. Does ESPN want 39 if N.D. goes all in? Probably Who's #40? Cincinnati. Why? It puts ESPN into Ohio. Then they gain access to the underbelly of the Big 10. Kansas, Missouri, Iowa, Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania, and New York become mixed markets. So if ESPN and FOX don't cooperate, and I don't see a reason that they would since the product they both would be pursuing has only two prizes and they both want them both, I'd say it's going to require some accommodations to make it work on either side of the divide.

If FOX claimed them then is the PAC going to be forced to accommodate the non AAU schools because that won't make the California schools happy. Will the Big 10 have to take some sub par academic schools because that won't make them happy. Or does FOX simply keep the Big 12 intact as a third conference? If so does that mean they demand more playoff spots for having 3 of the P5? If so the SEC will never go along with any of it.

If they come to ESPN will the SEC have to take them all? Will that hurt our payouts? I would think not and that we would be compensated but? Do we leave them as an entity?

Are networks pooled as one through the combined markets or do they remain as they are?

I do think ESPN tipped its hand that they will be going after them.

Well that will give us something to talk about this year!

Something else in the piece that was linked is telling. The PAC wants to emphasize money sports over Olympic sports on their channel. This indicates to me that Network intervention is implied. FOX has a studio in Hollywood.

And in other news, not deserving of its own thread, Greg Sankey spoke today on the subject of future realignment. When asked if the SEC had been actively talking to prospects he essentially said, "No Comment" with the proverbial I can neither affirm or deny stuff. Then he was asked if he had heard of plans to form a super conference with the best programs over and above the rest of the P schools. Sankey had a reply to that. He said that he had never heard any such idea floated by anyone in the industry and had only heard of such through the public and media asking questions about it.

In other words he completely dismissed the notion as being hooey.

(04-25-2017 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Something else in the piece that was linked is telling. The PAC wants to emphasize money sports over Olympic sports on their channel. This indicates to me that Network intervention is implied. FOX has a studio in Hollywood.

And in other news, not deserving of its own thread, Greg Sankey spoke today on the subject of future realignment. When asked if the SEC had been actively talking to prospects he essentially said, "No Comment" with the proverbial I can neither affirm or deny stuff. Then he was asked if he had heard of plans to form a super conference with the best programs over and above the rest of the P schools. Sankey had a reply to that. He said that he had never heard any such idea floated by anyone in the industry and had only heard of such through the public and media asking questions about it.

In other words he completely dismissed the notion as being hooey.

Indeed, interesting comments.

Sankey speaks to media group

For what it's worth, this is the 2nd president of PTN to depart. The real issue is not her, and probably not the first guy either. It's that Larry Scott and the first deputy commissioner (former Big 12 commissioner Kevin Weiberg, who has also departed) sold the school presidents/chancellors on the idea that owning 100% of the network was the best thing ever. But it's been shown that having ESPN or Fox pulling the load and throwing their weight around with cable/satellite providers is actually much better.

(04-26-2017 01:15 PM)Wedge Wrote:  For what it's worth, this is the 2nd president of PTN to depart. The real issue is not her, and probably not the first guy either. It's that Larry Scott and the first deputy commissioner (former Big 12 commissioner Kevin Weiberg, who has also departed) sold the school presidents/chancellors on the idea that owning 100% of the network was the best thing ever. But it's been shown that having ESPN or Fox pulling the load and throwing their weight around with cable/satellite providers is actually much better.

I'm betting that FOX picks up a % of it and that your distribution issues start to clear up. What some of the ACC guys are saying and what a source of mine on another site indicates is that ESPN wants to concentrate on the SEC and ACC and encourage the two to get closer. They also want to sew up Big 12 properties that they have an interest in acquiring to enhance or solidify positions they already hold.

That's why who goes to which conference from the Big 12 is not as essential a question as which Network group do they go to. There seems to be thought at both networks that merging broadcast rights, or the eventual merging of the two conferences they may ultimately control, is an economical plus, and a must for better organizing the CFP. We'll see. But it's going to get interesting fast now. Sankey yesterday was asked about the SEC's realignment involvement and was it active. Sankey neither affirmed nor denied or activity or the ability to talk about targets.