Bear Down Wildcats

By the way, business competitors working together for mutual benefit happens all the time. There's even a business term for it. It's called collaboration. A more recent term you might have heard is "Coopetition," which comes from this Forbes article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/briannegar ... 905e07df86

And why would competitors cooperate? Lower costs and larger reach.

AzCatFan2 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 9:40 am

ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 9:36 am

AzCatFan2 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 9:35 am

ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 9:06 am

AzCatFan2 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 8:51 am
No reason a game can't be streamed on both ESPN+ and Amazon Prime or AppleTV at the same time.

Hey you were living in reality until you made this statement and then you went completely off the railing. No streaming service is going to share with another streaming service. Get off my lawn and talk about unicorns somewhere else.

Why? ESPN, Amazon, and Apple are all businesses. If the numbers work, and sharing Tier 3 rights across multiple streaming platforms is profitable for both partners, what would stop them from sharing? Tier 3 rights don't move needles, but any live sporting event is likely to be more profitable than almost all other programming at that time period. There are more and more cord cutters on a daily basis, and the next generation of of TV viewers graduating college is unlikely to ever subscribe to a cable service. It might, and I stress might because I don't know the numbers, make sharing live content across more than one streaming platform profitable enough for both to share.

Businesses aren't in the business of sharing money when they are direct competitors. Stop it. Get some help.

ESPN and FOX share PAC TV rights under the current contract. Aren't they in direct competition with each other? Why did all parties agree? Please explain why if something is mutually beneficial for all parties, even those that compete, why they wouldn't agree to it? They key, of course, is being mutually beneficial for all parties.

ESPN and FOX have countless options of games to air from different conferences. Amazon/Apple do not have a single deal with any collegiate conference. They are not going to share. You are ridiculous and I am officially ignoring your very existence.

My thoughts on those numbers are that if your team is good you will get viewership. USC’s numbers are not great given the number of eyes in the LA area.

And for us to have an average of over 800k a game with our recent records I think
Is amazing.

azcat49 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 10:17 am My thoughts on those numbers are that if your team is good you will get viewership. USC’s numbers are not great given the number of eyes in the LA area.

And for us to have an average of over 800k a game with our recent records I think
Is amazing.

Ultimately ESPN and the major networks choose the games of the real big schools or the schools that are at least very good at that time. Those networks will always outdo other networks like Fox Sports 1 and Conference Networks. You will also get more eyes if you're the only worthwhile game on I.E. the Pac-12's late window. That's all any of those numbers mean.

ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 9:58 am

AzCatFan2 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 9:40 am

ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 9:36 am

AzCatFan2 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 9:35 am

ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 9:06 am

Hey you were living in reality until you made this statement and then you went completely off the railing. No streaming service is going to share with another streaming service. Get off my lawn and talk about unicorns somewhere else.

Why? ESPN, Amazon, and Apple are all businesses. If the numbers work, and sharing Tier 3 rights across multiple streaming platforms is profitable for both partners, what would stop them from sharing? Tier 3 rights don't move needles, but any live sporting event is likely to be more profitable than almost all other programming at that time period. There are more and more cord cutters on a daily basis, and the next generation of of TV viewers graduating college is unlikely to ever subscribe to a cable service. It might, and I stress might because I don't know the numbers, make sharing live content across more than one streaming platform profitable enough for both to share.

Businesses aren't in the business of sharing money when they are direct competitors. Stop it. Get some help.

ESPN and FOX share PAC TV rights under the current contract. Aren't they in direct competition with each other? Why did all parties agree? Please explain why if something is mutually beneficial for all parties, even those that compete, why they wouldn't agree to it? They key, of course, is being mutually beneficial for all parties.

ESPN and FOX have countless options of games to air from different conferences. Amazon/Apple do not have a single deal with any collegiate conference. They are not going to share. You are ridiculous and I am officially ignoring your very existence.

Apple/Amazon will share if there is still a deal with ESPN for top tier rights, and the deal shared content for streaming rights. And the Apple/Amazon decision comes down to sharing rights and broadcasting live sports events, or not having any live content to showcase. Some of the pie is often better than none of the pie.

We're not talking Tier 1 rights here. We're talking some Tier 2 and all Tier 3. Don't think ESPN would like to stream Tier 3 PAC games on ESPN+? Of course they would. Now, imagine if the deal is Amazon, for example, buys the PAC-12 Network, and produces all the PAC games, and allows them to be streamed on ESPN+. ESPN gets extra live content on its streaming platform it doesn't have to pay money for. Instead, in return, ESPN allows for certain, Tier 3 games to be streamed on Amazon Prime. Amazon gets more live content it doesn't have to pay to produce.

Again, I don't know the numbers, but Tier 3 games aren't the most profitable for any network. Neither ESPN nor an Amazon would be giving up much by allowing Tier 3 content to be shared across platforms, but they would save money on production costs, and could share promotional costs--just like the Forbes Article! Imagine that!

ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 10:19 am

azcat49 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 10:17 am My thoughts on those numbers are that if your team is good you will get viewership. USC’s numbers are not great given the number of eyes in the LA area.

And for us to have an average of over 800k a game with our recent records I think
Is amazing.

Ultimately ESPN and the major networks choose the games of the real big schools or the schools that are at least very good at that time. Those networks will always outdo other networks like Fox Sports 1 and Conference Networks. You will also get more eyes if you're the only worthwhile game on I.E. the Pac-12's late window. That's all any of those numbers mean.

Makes sense and channels matter. I think ESPIN recognizes our weakness and at least right now, with two weeks to go, is under bidding our value. I think it might go up by the 8/4 deadline.

It is interesting that those late night numbers are significantly higher than any replay or other programming which does show we bring value. Of course it also diminishes our national brand as fewer see us relative to the earlier day games.

It seems ESPIN needs that west coast teams for programming but their low ball offer seems to point to trying to further contract the P5 conferences. Not sure why

ESPN will low ball PAC-12. PAC-12 will announce that they are in talks with Amazon or Apple to hold off the freak out. Throw in SDST and some other bleh team. Maybe that can buy the PAC-12 conference more time.

If the UofA jumped to the Big 12 by itself, I would have to believe there would be at least one Pac-12 school that would decide to follow. The domino effect would begin.

All these rumors are just getting out of control. Unequal revenue sharing, kicking out undesired members, just crazy stuff

And when did Scheer become a source many people are referencing?

Merkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 8:19 am And when did Scheer become a source many people are referencing?

Because he doesn't shut up?

I think the viewership numbers are misleading because if you stripped out the out-of-market viewers for the Pac-12 schools since it's the last time slot of the day, my guess is the numbers would be very similar. ESPN won't go much beyond their initial offer because they feel that is the appropriate FMV for the new TV deal.

Irish27 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 25, 2022 9:41 pm If the UofA jumped to the Big 12 by itself, I would have to believe there would be at least one Pac-12 school that would decide to follow. The domino effect would begin.

Would the ABOR allow Arizona to go alone without ASu? And would the per school payout be any better in the BIG 12? Probably not.

My guess is ASu doesn't want to go to the BIG 12. Neither does Colorado, Utah, or any other PAC school. If Arizona went alone, ASu would go to the ABOR and try and block it.

But again, why would we go to the BIG 12 for same money? In the end, if we're not making at least $10 million a year more, it's not worth moving. USC and UCLA won't have to care about travel costs with all the extra money they are making, but if the payout in the BIG 12 is only a few extra million, our extra travel costs to W. Virginia, Orlando, and Cincy will eat up that extra budget.

The BIG 12 will be our likely landing spot, but no need to rush. If the PAC is to survive this round, any deal will not be long term. No school will want to be locked into a contract like the ACC. So any new contract will be likely five years, max. Because the reality is, if/when the BIG 10 expands to include more west schools, this will signify the end of the PAC. Questions are, who does the BIG 10 take, and does the SEC decide it wants a Pacific coast pod. Right now, the BIG 10 and SEC seem content to wait until Notre Dame first.

An ASSU trustee I spoke to recently is absolutely convinced they will be in the SEC west before they ever go BIG 12

azcat49 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 9:08 am An ASSU trustee I spoke to recently is absolutely convinced they will be in the SEC west before they ever go BIG 12

Merkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 8:19 am And when did Scheer become a source many people are referencing?

Because he's an Arizona insider and at this point in time the Arizona administration is by far the most adamant and vocal about leaving the wasteland that is the Pac-12.

I wonder if Washington and Oregon would be the newest schools the Big-10 is looking at? Seattle is the 12th largest tv market, https://oaaa.org/Portals/0/Public%20PDF ... Report.pdf

For those clamoring to get into the BIG 12 now, the money just won't be there. In fact, Wilner has a good article looking at football ratings between the BIG 12 minus OU and TX, and the PAC minus LA. The PAC is the clear winner, meaning the money will likely be better if we stay in the PAC. https://tucson.com/sports/pac-12-hotlin ... b78c3.html

As for the BIG 10, they will expand more to the west, and when that happens, the PAC will be gone. But the BIG 10 is waiting first to see what Notre Dame will do. Washington, Oregon, and Stanford are certainly on the BIG 10 radar, and if Notre Dame agrees to join, Stanford likely comes along too. I think the BIG 10 would love to add ND, Stanford, Washington, and Oregon, and be done.

The wildcard is the SEC, with ESPN pulling the strings behind the scenes. Does ESPN want to give up the 10 pm Eastern time slot completely to FOX? On a Saturday night in the fall, 10 pm Eastern, there is no other programming that can pull over 1 million viewers other than a football game featuring a current PAC school. If Oregon and UW end up in the BIG 10, ESPN is left with showing a Mountain West or a BIG 12 game featuring none of the most popular current PAC schools, assuming the BIG 12 is where the 4 corner PAC schools land in this scenario.

The late night start sucks, but time zone is the one thing us west coast schools have. Wilner mentions it in his article. BIG 12 games compete against the BIG 10 and SEC for start times. Late PAC games do not. If the top PAC teams all end up in the BIG 10, it will be more BIG 12 versus BIG 10 for TV viewers. If the SEC scoops up Oregon and UW, plus a few others, that changes things.

Supposedly ESPIN upped its offer to like 32m a team. I imagine it might go higher by the deadline.

Big (or should I have said B1G) question is would the northwest schools lock themselves into a 6-12 contract? So much seems to rest on ND

RondaeShimmy wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 9:52 am

Absolutely 100% correct. Why the hell would the networks want to show Arizona v Cal when they will have the potential to broadcast the B1G schools in the Pacific time slot?

Can't imagine Arizona would be a top pick for any network or time slot. You want a zero* win team from a small media area on your network?

*- UA did beat a Covid depleted Cal team.

Merkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 8:19 am And when did Scheer become a source many people are referencing?

How does someone so involved with UofA sports stay off this forum?

All that matters is that a PAC-12 tv contract without USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, and Stanford is not going be higher than the Big-12 tv contract. PAC-12 would be worth what at that point? 20mil a year at best? So, the question is do you trust Oregon, Washington, and Stanford to not accept 100mil a year if offered? If not, you have to look at big-12 even if it will be same money or even less money.

Merkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 3:39 pm Can't imagine Arizona would be a top pick for any network or time slot. You want a zero* win team from a small media area on your network?

*- UA did beat a Covid depleted Cal team.

1) UA got unlucky almost every other game so that is complete bullshit to call out especially for a fan
2) UA got the best time slot there is for week 1

Uh oh Merk. Machina labeled you #badfan.

Better Bear Down harder while grabbing your nuts.

SDSU got the best time slot to show off their new stadium. Arizona just happened to be the opponent. If the opponent was the Akron Zips they would still get the same time.

Larry Scott destroyed this conference 12 years ago.

Merkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 7:01 pm SDSU got the best time slot to show off their new stadium. Arizona just happened to be the opponent. If the opponent was the Akron Zips they would still get the same time.

No it wouldn't. Absolutely not

UAEebs86 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 6:04 pm Uh oh Merk. Machina labeled you #badfan.

Better Bear Down harder while grabbing your nuts.

Amazing how obsessed you are

You always wait for the last offer unless your spot is leaving. It ain't leaving yet

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 7:36 pm

UAEebs86 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 6:04 pm Uh oh Merk. Machina labeled you #badfan.

Better Bear Down harder while grabbing your nuts.

Amazing how obsessed you are

Stop calling people who were rooting for the 'Cats when you were still in diapers bad fans.

UAEebs86 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 7:37 pm

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 7:36 pm

UAEebs86 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 6:04 pm Uh oh Merk. Machina labeled you #badfan.

Better Bear Down harder while grabbing your nuts.

Amazing how obsessed you are

Stop calling people who were rooting for the 'Cats when you were still in diapers bad fans.

I didn't you obsessed little man

Go away Machina. You did call out Merk. You have no right to do that.

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 5:39 pm 1) UA got unlucky almost every other game so that is complete bullshit to call out especially for a fan

Facts and evidence are hard for conservatives.

UAEebs86 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 7:32 pm

No school is going to sign a long term contract and be stuck like ACC schools are right now. Probably 5 year max. It should also be no surprise the BIG 10 is going to add more west coast teams, unless you think the BIG 10 is gong to leave the LA schools on an island.

The PAC likely survives this round, but this is the last contract the PAC signs. When it ends, Stanford is likely in the BIG 10. Washington and Oregon are either BIG 10 or SEC. The rest of us? TBD, but worst case is an invite to the BIG 12.

Scheer's comments mean nothing.

What else was the Big Ten commish supposed to say?

Merkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 7:55 pm

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 5:39 pm 1) UA got unlucky almost every other game so that is complete bullshit to call out especially for a fan

Facts and evidence are hard for conservatives.

Show your facts and proof UA would have lost if the regular Cal guys played

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 8:09 pm

Merkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 7:55 pm

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 5:39 pm 1) UA got unlucky almost every other game so that is complete bullshit to call out especially for a fan

Facts and evidence are hard for conservatives.

Show your facts and proof UA would have lost if the regular Cal guys played

I get you are simply deflecting or lost from the point Merk was making about you calling him out but I will bite anyway. They beat the fourth stringers 10-3, so I think simple projection has us losing by a couple touchdowns.

Certainly the B1G is driving the ship but USC as a member school might not want Oregon or UDub in that league. Why open up your fertile high level recruit recruiting area to those schools. Keep them out of your conference and you reclaim that area as your own.

No doubt the B1G isn’t done and it appears like it’s driven by FOX. Grab ND from NBC and then get Stanford and maybe Oregon and Washington and take the prime Saturday evening spot away from ESPIN.

Just makes me wonder what CBS (who lost the SEC to ESPIN) and NBC might be doing. Are they willing to bow out of college football?

gronk4heisman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 6:39 am

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 8:09 pm

Merkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 7:55 pm

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 5:39 pm 1) UA got unlucky almost every other game so that is complete bullshit to call out especially for a fan

Facts and evidence are hard for conservatives.

Show your facts and proof UA would have lost if the regular Cal guys played

I get you are simply deflecting or lost from the point Merk was making about you calling him out but I will bite anyway. They beat the fourth stringers 10-3, so I think simple projection has us losing by a couple touchdowns.

Trying to stay on topic but "think" and "projection" are not facts.
If you are a normal 1-11 team you don't have this type of yard differential. It is entirely in the realm of possibilities that UA beats Cal with Cal's starters that day.

As far as realignment as 49 said it is all TV driven and I bet NBC CBS and streaming play a role. How big is the question and we likely won't know until later in 2022

So many games last year we could have won. NAU, UDUB, Utah, UCLA even Oregon. We just didn’t know how to win. That was never clearer than the CAL game who we should have beat by 3 td’s but we struggled. They had no offense at all and we couldn’t put them away.

These coaches have more work to do then just upgrading talent. These guys need to believe we can win. Going yo be an interesting year

ABOR meets today but athletics is not on the agenda at all

Says later it may be a way to get Cal to the B1G

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 7:01 am

gronk4heisman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 6:39 am

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 8:09 pm

Merkin wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 7:55 pm

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Tue Jul 26, 2022 5:39 pm 1) UA got unlucky almost every other game so that is complete bullshit to call out especially for a fan

Facts and evidence are hard for conservatives.

Show your facts and proof UA would have lost if the regular Cal guys played

I get you are simply deflecting or lost from the point Merk was making about you calling him out but I will bite anyway. They beat the fourth stringers 10-3, so I think simple projection has us losing by a couple touchdowns.

Trying to stay on topic but "think" and "projection" are not facts.

If you are a normal 1-11 team you don't have this type of yard differential. It is entirely in the realm of possibilities that UA beats Cal with Cal's starters that day.

As far as realignment as 49 said it is all TV driven and I bet NBC CBS and streaming play a role. How big is the question and we likely won't know until later in 2022

The only way to show with "facts" would be for them to replay the game. I could say show me with facts that Arizona would lose to Alabama and you could not by the same measure.

Yards don't win, points do. And our coach was historically bad in the red zone, some of that was personnel but definitely no where near all. This is consistent with his other stops as a play caller.