redwingillini11
White and Sixth
- North Aurora
Of course, as an Illini fan we would have been relegated to the worst options available the last couple decades (on the whole), but I’m talking about the B1G as a whole.Less interesting to whom? It's nice to see Illinois-Wisconsin on national TV, and if more of those spots are going to Oregon-Michigan, and we're on some overflow streaming service, that's worse for us even if the money is rolling in. Like AutoPoster3000 said, the current B1G "product" is compelling enough that there's no reason to hand out more motorcycles.
True, but I still find most of his posts informative.doomsday is part of his schtik
doomsday is part of his schtik
So much candor you can't stand it and full refunds available on all takes, that's the Gritty GuaranteeTrue, but I still find most of his posts informative.
Yeah you gotta feel bad for schools like Oregon State and Wazzou though. If UW and UO leave, the Big 12 will likely pick off Az, ASU and Utah. I honestly have no idea if anyone will think the Bay Area schools have value. It’s a big market but I’m not sure what their viewership is. I don’t know if the PAC 12 can even be rescued at this point even if they add San Diego State and SMU.yeah, I think at this point it's just reaching a deal. doesn't imply that that will be cake, but I'm expecting a deal.
am very interested in what goes down with the Bay area schools: a lot more unknowns there
Broadly supported the Nebraska addition at the time (which I regret in retrospect), and completely understood the logic.
Hated the Rutgers and Maryland additions, totally understood the logic, just thought it was badly mistaken (partial credit on that).
Hated USC and UCLA, though totally understood the power that had financially and in the broader chess match.
This one I would just be totally flabbergasted by. Just throwing money town the toilet. Terrible for the Big Ten, terrible for Illinois, terrible for college sports. We already killed the conference system, now we're defiling the corpse.
So much candor you can't stand it and full refunds available on all takes, that's the Gritty Guarantee
Damn right I have. I'm right!My dude, you've been braying about the oncoming demise of the revenue stream (via cord cutting) for over a decade.
it cant be. the ones left from the PAC9 with no landing spot merge with the SMU, SDSU, Boise st, Fresno , the Nevada's and misc others and keep the name PAC .Yeah you gotta feel bad for schools like Oregon State and Wazzou though. If UW and UO leave, the Big 12 will likely pick off Az, ASU and Utah. I honestly have no idea if anyone will think the Bay Area schools have value. It’s a big market but I’m not sure what their viewership is. I don’t know if the PAC 12 can even be rescued at this point even if they add San Diego State and SMU.
Maybe this is obvious and goes without saying, I don’t know. But market incentives led to the creation of this two-conference college major league. Those same market incentives aren’t going to want to stop there. From a revenue maximization standpoint, the college major league would consist of the 20-24 or so programs that are the most marketable—i.e., have the greatest viewership. That’s what future streaming platform partners are going to want from their media rights deals. Clicks equals advertisers and subscription fees.The far more interesting question to me is where does this all end up in ten years?
Content delivery is in a transition phase. Clearly, the audience for cable and over-the-air networks is shrinking, and will continue to do so. That reduces the money that networks can pay for rights. ESPN, for example, has lost 25 million subscribers over the past decade (from 100mm to 75mm), and that rate of loss is accelerating. What happens when its down to 50 million . . . or 40 million?
The answer is Washington and one of Stanford/Cal but not both to get two major metros with two schools, right?An interesting hypothetical is, if cable had the exact same prominence as it did circa 2010-2014 ... would a Cal or a Stanford get an invite before Oregon or Washington? It seems pretty universally accepted by most right now that Oregon and Washington bring more value. However, if we were back in the carrier fee days, would the Bay Area media market for BTN plus superior academics of those two schools outweigh the superior athletics of Oregon and Washington?
Yeah, it's a good question. I don't know, but the one thing I do know is that the powers that be at the top of the media industry also do not know.The far more interesting question to me is where does this all end up in ten years?
And this is the problem, it's not. Media corporations lit acres of money on fire trying to push forward streaming services in a low-interest rate environment but did not get the growth they were hoping for and now are frantically trying to cut costs.Streaming is growing, and as technology continues to improve, will continue to grow.
In theory that's right. In theory.From a revenue maximization standpoint, the college major league would consist of the 20-24 or so programs that are the most marketable—i.e., have the greatest viewership.
Is this in reference to Oregon/Washington? Or to the proposed four-pack?This one I would just be totally flabbergasted by. Just throwing money town the toilet. Terrible for the Big Ten, terrible for Illinois, terrible for college sports. We already killed the conference system, now we're defiling the corpse.
Is this in reference to Oregon/Washington? Or to the proposed four-pack?
Maybe this is my bias as a Pacific Northwest stan, but I cannot grok the catastrophizing on UO and UW. The logistical benefit of having western counterparts for USC/UCLA alone makes them worth considering.
Either.Is this in reference to Oregon/Washington? Or to the proposed four-pack?
I mean when you think about median air miles traveled for a conference schedule (and remember, football plays one of the smallest), it surely makes that number higher, right?Maybe this is my bias as a Pacific Northwest stan, but I cannot grok the catastrophizing on UO and UW. The logistical benefit of having western counterparts for USC/UCLA alone makes them worth considering.
Is this in reference to Oregon/Washington? Or to the proposed four-pack?
Maybe this is my bias as a Pacific Northwest stan, but I cannot grok the catastrophizing on UO and UW. The logistical benefit of having western counterparts for USC/UCLA alone makes them worth considering.