(12-09-2017 09:26 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 02:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 12:50 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 12:08 AM)JRsec Wrote:  I think maybe so. But we'll see. However I do agree the variables were just multiplied and the end of realignment is in sight if ESPN does wind up with the PAC.

That's really my angle. If purchasing the PAC makes reorganizing the entire landscape easier then it might be worth it. Get the PAC and you get the rest of it so to speak.

That and if ESPN wants decent content for their RSNs in the West then it wouldn't hurt to have the PAC on board even if people in the East aren't watching very much. Really, the PAC's only other choice would be to go all in with FOX and hope what little exposure that network gives them is enough to keep from being raided.

Don't you get the feeling that FOX is waiving the white flag on their pursuit of college football? What I think they get out of this is a much broader inventory to sublease from ESPN without having the overhead of rights deals. Face it, if Fox doesn't bid against ESPN then the Mouse gets the Big 10 and PAC rights for less, rearranges the college football world into those 4 regional conferences that guarantees each CFP involves all areas of the country, and they sublet all the games that FOX wants without regard to confining FOX to just half of the PAC, half of the Big 12, and roughly a little more than half of the Big 10. Now FOX can take a marketable SEC / ACC / Big 10 / & PAC game for each of its time slots. So you have 4 stations airing the games of the 4 conferences for each of their time slots on Saturday. CBS gets the #1 pick of the SEC right now but what if ESPN bids for that too in 2024? Or what if CBS doesn't bid and simply sublets their 2:30 game from ESPN every week? If ESPN sublets to FOX / NBC / ABC / & CBS they can sell up to 8 more mid afternoon and early night games. They make the #2 choice for ESPN and the #5 choice for ESPN2 each week and keep 8 games from the 4 power conferences. Then the conference networks pick 2 each and any left over are available for streaming services to run.

Heck they could even bid out the top selections every week and since they own the bowls they can sublet them as well.

And what's more, the best of basketball follows suit and they have the best of college baseball to air as well and complete coverage of the softball from regionals to finals.

That's a lot of product.

It does feel like that, yes.

FS1 never got as much distribution as ESPN did. FS2 is unavailable on a lot of packages. For the rest, outside of BTN, the other channels they have seem nonexistent.

Considering everything 21st Century Fox might be selling, sounds like they're streamlining. I'm a little surprised by that as I figured every major media company would end up with their own OTT service to offer their content. FOX looks like they want to rely on nothing but sports, news, and whatever they stick on the FOX broadcast network. I'm not savvy enough to understand why they would want to go in that direction, but I suppose they think simpler is better...at least right now.

The thing I've always wondered about Fox Sports is being that they were overpaying for everything in order to buy into the market, would it pay off in the long run? Maybe they decided it wasn't going to work and that bidding up everything just to compete with ESPN wasn't a battle worth winning?

On the flip side, seems like Disney is buying out the competition more than anything which could save them a lot of money when it comes to sports rights fees. That alone could justify the expenditure.

I'm not sure ESPN would lease out very many games if they gain so much control though...

1. I'm not sure FOX or any other network will have a large enough platform to make the expenditure worthwhile.

2. ESPN could probably jack up the price for their OTT service if they've got a number of games you can't catch anywhere else.

3. Probably most importantly, their RSN network would allow them to tailor their broadcast schedule to max out ratings. The biggest games would be on the national channels, but most of the others could be reserved for regional broadcasts. Kind of like how the major pro sports use these RSNs to broadcast in-market games. They're all on at the same time basically so it makes sense from that perspective.

What makes even more sense is that it gives ESPN the leverage to offer an "out of market" package. That's essentially what all the major pro sports do. They confine their biggest games to national broadcasts and show most of their content locally, BUT they will offer you a separate package(for a nominal fee of course) if you live outside the market where your favorite teams are. And these days, with people moving all over the country, this is an easy way to take advantage of demand and keep overhead low.

That sort of option could be constructed a lot of different ways, but I bet you would see something like that.

4. The conferences will still want as much good content on their channels as they can get because they directly profit from that.

Seriously, what if the PAC doesn't play ball and they get nibbled away. It could change realignment thought altogether.

Big 12:

Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal

California, Oregon, Stanford, Washington

Baylor, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah

Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State


Big 10:

Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska

Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue

Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers


SEC:

Arkansas, Missouri, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

Alabama, L.S.U., Mississippi, Mississippi State

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt

Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia


ACC:

Boston College, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Syracuse

Louisville, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami

That's not too bad really.