(02-20-2024 02:04 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The best part about conspiracy theories is that they remove agency from everyone except the supposed conspirators. They also give perfect future predictive skills to the unnamed squirrel in the closet (the secretive employee who somehow remains and is always focused on CFB realignment) surviving countless reorgs, ownership changes, shifting directives and corporate goals, layoffs and other turmoil. In fact these conspiracy theories remove agency from the evil company itself and place it solely on the squirrel in the closet who pulls the strings.

Other than that, it seems reasonable.

Right. At the core of people that want to believe conspiracy theories is the desire to believe that big things (particularly big things that we don’t like) that occur can’t possibly be random. It must be that the refs were paid off. It must be that the NFL wanted Taylor Swift at the Super Bowl. It must be that ESPN or Fox told X to do Y. It must be that A paid off B and was college roommates with C and now our gas prices are out of control. We can go on forever with examples. The root of most conspiracy theories is that there is a simplistic explanation of control - a person/entity/group that is the proverbial man behind the curtain - that can somehow manipulate incredibly complex things involving dozens of people and decisions to get to a certain outcome. In contrast, real life generally says that there are lots of people/entities/groups acting in their individual capacities that result in the applicable outcome.

In essence, conspiracy theories paradoxically use complex tales of how things happen but are generally rooted in a very simplistic (and dare I say naive) belief that there must be some master plan from a single source of control. It’s an odd sort of comfort where people want to believe that big events can be explained by some greater force that’s in control as opposed to applying, say, Adam Smith’s invisible hand or even straight evolutionary Darwinism where we get the optimal outcome *because* there’s no centralized control.

(02-20-2024 12:40 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  Okay, I'm biased; I'll grant you that. However, ESPN seems to have been a significant contributor in "destroying" college football in the past 20ish years. As you will recall, they lowballed the B1G, encouraging the shift toward FOX and creating the Big Ten Network. (End of ACT 1)

Next, they threw some of the most compelling Pac-12 games on at 10:30 EST, all but ensuring the vast majority of the country wouldn't be watching the boys out west.
(End of ACT 2)

Now, the ACC is on the verge of being picked apart, why, because the company in Bristol bent the ACC over and railed Tobacco Road with a one-sided contract that looks out for the interests of ESPN, but not of one of its primary oollege partners.
(End of ACT 3)

The only conference that ESPN has not tried to get over on is the SEC, and I think they'll continue looking after their number 1 college property.

I for one am perfectly okay that the B1G isn't on ESPN anymore. I know their job is to look out for their shareholders and their interests. Still, I think that the way they've gone about it has materially damaged certainly the regionalism of college football and perhaps college football as a whole.

ESPN didn't kill the PAC-12. FOX, the Big Ten and the Big XII did. The reports we hear today are that ESPN offered the PAC a media deal and the PAC balked at it. That's not ESPN's fault.

I'd say one thing- the regionalism of college football stopped in large part when the BCS came around. All of a sudden all the games across the nation mattered.

(02-20-2024 12:40 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  Okay, I'm biased; I'll grant you that. However, ESPN seems to have been a significant contributor in "destroying" college football in the past 20ish years. As you will recall, they lowballed the B1G, encouraging the shift toward FOX and creating the Big Ten Network. (End of ACT 1)

Next, they threw some of the most compelling Pac-12 games on at 10:30 EST, all but ensuring the vast majority of the country wouldn't be watching the boys out west.
(End of ACT 2)

Now, the ACC is on the verge of being picked apart, why, because the company in Bristol bent the ACC over and railed Tobacco Road with a one-sided contract that looks out for the interests of ESPN, but not of one of its primary oollege partners.
(End of ACT 3)

The only conference that ESPN has not tried to get over on is the SEC, and I think they'll continue looking after their number 1 college property.

I for one am perfectly okay that the B1G isn't on ESPN anymore. I know their job is to look out for their shareholders and their interests. Still, I think that the way they've gone about it has materially damaged certainly the regionalism of college football and perhaps college football as a whole.

The Big Ten made their own decision to go with FOX. ESPN is in every sport, and they are spread thin. They can't pay everybody what they want or what they think they are worth. ESPN reportedly turned down a $380 million annual deal with the Big Ten for 13 games. That was too much for a weekly game.

ESPN offered the PAC $30 million per school, and they turned it down. The PAC was stupid, incompetent, and arrogant. They could have made a reasonable counteroffer, and they didn't. Sporting events that start at 7:30 PM on the west coast are normal and they fill that time slot for ESPN.

The ACC signed a bad long term-deal with ESPN. Whose fault is that? I think ESPN has been good for college football, but you cannot satisfy everyone. I think if we are going to put blame on any entity for today's state of college football, a good place to start would be with the NCAA. The NCAA was slow to embrace reforms and that has led to a lot of what we are seeing today.

My point is ESPN, and every other company, acts on the information they have today about the valuation and the direction of the market. And the same holds true for those signing contracts. They all try to do what is best for them at the time.

Each move everyone made was in reaction to the last move, sometimes with surprises and wrenches thrown in there. We are very far from the vision that was assumed by the schools, conferences and media companies on 2010 and 2011. The landscape and changes, the growth in some forms and failure to grow in others was not at all clear back in 2011.

There is no squirrel in the closet at ESPN/Disney. If there were they'd have headed off the whole collapse of franchises like Star Wars, Marvel and Pixar. And never mind that FOX has its own soap opera as do the other companies.

Think of how different things might be if the Pac-12 had done just a couple things differently. The world would be totally different. We look at it today with perfect 20-20 hindsight and say it was inevitable. But of course it wasn't.

There is no grand conspiracy, just individual decisions and relationships that sometimes go up together or go south, forcing change. Accident and stupidity explain everything without any need of a guiding black hand. Forget the squirrel, he never existed.

ESPN killed the old Big East.

(02-20-2024 04:58 PM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  ESPN killed the old Big East.

Big East only started playing football for tv revenue. So ESPN kind of created Big East Football too.

(02-20-2024 02:21 PM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  

(02-20-2024 12:40 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  Okay, I'm biased; I'll grant you that. However, ESPN seems to have been a significant contributor in "destroying" college football in the past 20ish years. As you will recall, they lowballed the B1G, encouraging the shift toward FOX and creating the Big Ten Network. (End of ACT 1)

Next, they threw some of the most compelling Pac-12 games on at 10:30 EST, all but ensuring the vast majority of the country wouldn't be watching the boys out west.
(End of ACT 2)

Now, the ACC is on the verge of being picked apart, why, because the company in Bristol bent the ACC over and railed Tobacco Road with a one-sided contract that looks out for the interests of ESPN, but not of one of its primary oollege partners.
(End of ACT 3)

The only conference that ESPN has not tried to get over on is the SEC, and I think they'll continue looking after their number 1 college property.

I for one am perfectly okay that the B1G isn't on ESPN anymore. I know their job is to look out for their shareholders and their interests. Still, I think that the way they've gone about it has materially damaged certainly the regionalism of college football and perhaps college football as a whole.

ESPN didn't kill the PAC-12. FOX, the Big Ten and the Big XII did. The reports we hear today are that ESPN offered the PAC a media deal and the PAC balked at it. That's not ESPN's fault.

Yup. And FOX didn’t even want to give a full pay to UW and UO.

If UVA and UNC (in 2030s) joins the SEC, then the B10 would stay put.

I think UNC and NC state (again in 2030s) to the SEC is more likely. Even in this case, I don’t think the B10 would make any move other than waiting for ND.

BE followed the same path Pac did.
none of the schools were on the same page to move forward.
ESPN made an offer and BE turned it down

(02-20-2024 12:40 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  Okay, I'm biased; I'll grant you that. However, ESPN seems to have been a significant contributor in "destroying" college football in the past 20ish years. As you will recall, they lowballed the B1G, encouraging the shift toward FOX and creating the Big Ten Network. (End of ACT 1)

Next, they threw some of the most compelling Pac-12 games on at 10:30 EST, all but ensuring the vast majority of the country wouldn't be watching the boys out west.
(End of ACT 2)

Now, the ACC is on the verge of being picked apart, why, because the company in Bristol bent the ACC over and railed Tobacco Road with a one-sided contract that looks out for the interests of ESPN, but not of one of its primary oollege partners.
(End of ACT 3)

The only conference that ESPN has not tried to get over on is the SEC, and I think they'll continue looking after their number 1 college property.

I for one am perfectly okay that the B1G isn't on ESPN anymore. I know their job is to look out for their shareholders and their interests. Still, I think that the way they've gone about it has materially damaged certainly the regionalism of college football and perhaps college football as a whole.

Not too sure on that about the SEC. Not too sure about that.

(02-20-2024 12:40 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  Okay, I'm biased; I'll grant you that. However, ESPN seems to have been a significant contributor in "destroying" college football in the past 20ish years. As you will recall, they lowballed the B1G, encouraging the shift toward FOX and creating the Big Ten Network. (End of ACT 1)

Next, they threw some of the most compelling Pac-12 games on at 10:30 EST, all but ensuring the vast majority of the country wouldn't be watching the boys out west.
(End of ACT 2)

Now, the ACC is on the verge of being picked apart, why, because the company in Bristol bent the ACC over and railed Tobacco Road with a one-sided contract that looks out for the interests of ESPN, but not of one of its primary oollege partners.
(End of ACT 3)

The only conference that ESPN has not tried to get over on is the SEC, and I think they'll continue looking after their number 1 college property.

I for one am perfectly okay that the B1G isn't on ESPN anymore. I know their job is to look out for their shareholders and their interests. Still, I think that the way they've gone about it has materially damaged certainly the regionalism of college football and perhaps college football as a whole.

Are the fan base in in the SEC and Big 10 states are boycotting ESPM already for what they are doing? Especially the ACC as well. I find it all that all the streaming sites online are losing subscribers except for Youtube TV which is gaining. Who wants to spend extra money for getting Hulu, Disney Plus and ESPN + all separate? The P2 may find the money well would be dried up, and they would be getting less money in the future on their next contract. They are being way overpaid for their media rights.

The PAC12 commissioner killed the league. ESPN offered in the 30M and they turned it down. The Apple deal did not come close to those dollars, Don't blame ESPN for the PAC12 failed leadership.

It's fair to say that ESPN, in its genius, has made a hash of a few things.

Among fans it seems to be losing quite a bit of cred lately.

(02-20-2024 08:21 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(02-20-2024 12:40 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  Okay, I'm biased; I'll grant you that. However, ESPN seems to have been a significant contributor in "destroying" college football in the past 20ish years. As you will recall, they lowballed the B1G, encouraging the shift toward FOX and creating the Big Ten Network. (End of ACT 1)

Next, they threw some of the most compelling Pac-12 games on at 10:30 EST, all but ensuring the vast majority of the country wouldn't be watching the boys out west.
(End of ACT 2)

Now, the ACC is on the verge of being picked apart, why, because the company in Bristol bent the ACC over and railed Tobacco Road with a one-sided contract that looks out for the interests of ESPN, but not of one of its primary oollege partners.
(End of ACT 3)

The only conference that ESPN has not tried to get over on is the SEC, and I think they'll continue looking after their number 1 college property.

I for one am perfectly okay that the B1G isn't on ESPN anymore. I know their job is to look out for their shareholders and their interests. Still, I think that the way they've gone about it has materially damaged certainly the regionalism of college football and perhaps college football as a whole.

Are the fan base in in the SEC and Big 10 states are boycotting ESPM already for what they are doing? Especially the ACC as well. I find it all that all the streaming sites online are losing subscribers except for Youtube TV which is gaining. Who wants to spend extra money for getting Hulu, Disney Plus and ESPN + all separate? The P2 may find the money well would be dried up, and they would be getting less money in the future on their next contract. They are being way overpaid for their media rights.

What happens if they help put everyone else out of business first?

(02-22-2024 03:59 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  The PAC12 commissioner killed the league. ESPN offered in the 30M and they turned it down. The Apple deal did not come close to those dollars, Don't blame ESPN for the PAC12 failed leadership.

Apple offered $25M per school with incentives that should have easily met to bring them on par with the B12. Washington didn't like the amount of streaming involved. Sounds like Washington behaved "poorly" during the process and Klavikoff was too weak a leader to keep the band together. Washington ends up leaving for the B1G at half price and now more and more traditional broadcasters are moving to streaming. That is where things are heading, Apple was just ahead of the curve.

I do think many of the departing 10 will have buyer's remorse in the coming years. USC and Colorado got what they wanted. UCLA thought they did, but with Calimony they are not on a level playing field in the B1G and they are not a football power. Of the remaining 9 schools, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, OSU, WSU, Utah and ASU all wanted to stay in the PAC. Both Washington and Arizona thought the grass will be greener elsewhere. Oregon is surprising in that regard, they felt the Apple deal was rather intriguing but decided to tie their fate with Washington. They have Phil Knight money so getting half the media rights for the next 6 years doesn't hurt them as much as it does Washington. Despite the move to the B1G, Washington got picked clean this year, losing coaches and players. They do have strong fan support but they are likely going to struggle in the B1G. I have read that the other PAC schools were trying to bring UCLA backed but UCLA wanted a bigger share that the rest of the schools and that didn't sit well with Washington and Oregon.

I really think things will substantially change before 2030. I think too many people reacted out of panic and didn't think things through very well. My personal belief is that football will become a separate entity and the rest of the sports will be in regional conferences. Travel for football is not nearly as bad as it is in sports like basketball or soccer.

(02-20-2024 08:49 AM)kundrky Wrote:  Or...you know...the SEC has put the best product on the field for the past 20 years. It's not a conspiracy, my Big 10 bro. The Pac 12 and ACC have been middling conferences and have been treated as such. The Big 10 itself has been slightly above middling on the field as well since the SEC's rise. UM this year and OSU in 2014 being once-a-decade exceptions.

Another thing that puts the lie to the OP's theory is that the late start times didn't seem to hurt the Pac all that much this past year. They had a great Conference, lots of great teams, and even subtracting out the Deion factor, they had a lot more eyeballs than in past years on their teams. Washington, Oregon, USC, UCLA, Utah, heck even Washington St and Oregon St all had games with 5m+ eyeballs, then throw in those crazy early season CU ratings and it was an Event. Not too unlike some of the really dominant seasons the SEC has had in the recent past, right? Hmmmm, so, compelling TV, matchups that people want to see, a whole lot of good teams, and all of a sudden people watch them. If the Pac had done a better job focusing on football and a few things broke the other way a few decades ago (like PSU didn't get that 7th vote, Stanford doesn't veto Texas in 1990, and Delaney doesn't form the BTN), and you might have seen Ohio St and Michigan moving to the Pac instead of USCLA moving to the B1G. If the Pac had started this football Renaissance 5 years ago instead of today, then they'd still be around and thriving.

The OP is completely correct, it’s not a conspiracy to say that espn is trying to Eliminate college conferences
Espn is owned by Disney is really all you need to know

(02-20-2024 08:59 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(02-20-2024 08:14 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(02-20-2024 02:04 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The best part about conspiracy theories is that they remove agency from everyone except the supposed conspirators. They also give perfect future predictive skills to the unnamed squirrel in the closet (the secretive employee who somehow remains and is always focused on CFB realignment) surviving countless reorgs, ownership changes, shifting directives and corporate goals, layoffs and other turmoil. In fact these conspiracy theories remove agency from the evil company itself and place it solely on the squirrel in the closet who pulls the strings.

Other than that, it seems reasonable.

Yup. Why would ESPN look out for the interests of the ACC in a contract negotiation with them? That is the ACC's job. Whether it was due to incompetence or lack of leverage, the ACC got a bad deal from ESPN. That isnt ESPN's fault and it isnt some conspiracy theory. It's ECON 101 levels of business acumen.

While that is true, you guys are missing a key point: ESPN has clearly favored the SEC in their coverage and, sometimes, by deals which were better than they had to be to get the contracts. That has not been the case with other conferences.

It's all about the ratings for ESPN, Fox, Amazon, Apple, all of them. The SEC and B1G get the ratings, so we get the money. If they Pac was getting 2023-type ratings for the past decade then they'd be getting close to SEC money instead of everyone packing their bags. If the Big 12 got SEC-level or nearly SEC-level ratings then perhaps OUT don't leave and none of this even happens yet.

(02-20-2024 12:23 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  I think the FOX/B1G deal was really good for College Football. BTN is a thriving network now, outperforming FS1 and ESPN2.

I think it was, too. More players in TV rights negotiations means higher costs for anyone to buy in and purchase some of those rights. Perhaps the biggest reason that the P2 are the P2 is that everyone wants a piece of us. The Pac learned to their dismay that companies aren't lining up to overpay to broadcast 3rd tier content, but for a steady diet of Michigan-Wisconsin or Georgia-Florida? Yeah, they really want those games.