There should be a giant sign in every city, town and everywhere you look that says parents stop ruining youth sports. It’s not the NFL, it’s not college or even high school. No one cares but you, stop trying to win the sports lottery, let your kids be kids and play. Fights at youth sports is becoming the normal.
Being a former PAC 8 player in 1973-74. it's hard to wrap my head around the changes taking place in college football. I know progress and opportunity dictates the future, but I feel like I'm on a Mister Toad's Wild Ride. I'm sure the new TV/Streaming contract will be awesome, and the Big 10 jump and possible new schools will work into new rivalries, but I kinda like the OLD DAYS.
No issues with the PAC 12 Network in my world. It’s been on my local cable since day one. I really enjoy coverage of all the other sports, besides football. Agree that professionalism sometimes is lacking, but that’s to be expected - (see FOX Sports PAC12 After Dark…bush league at best)
Those in the StreamingBusiness of serving KoolAid will more than likely win. “But it’s the future!” they say…too bad. Kind of parallel to the “Transportation Electrification” forced future…
Until I can seamlessly switch between cable and streaming, I will despise streaming. As it is, it takes 1-2 minutes to switch to a streaming network and the same going back to cable.
First, wow, a whole minute or two even. Second, I use chrome cast and it takes like no time whatsoever. Just pull up the link for Fubo with one click and click on the Chromecast icon in the top right area of my screen. Done.
True enough. But that is Amazon only. Not many college games on Thursday nights. Fubo has all the channels so switching is easy. But it is NOT as easy as simply punching a remote, I give you that. It takes two clicks, so not bad, but still is a bit irritating. I guess, I just don't mind much because I am so sick and tired of cable companies and Direct TV.
The Pac12 will be fine. And I predict that USC and UCLA will soon be falling with egg on their face and heads hanging, regretting their greedy decision. Nobody has repealed the Law of Karma yet. The conference experience is about much more than money, and involves more people than the administrators and operators. I keep hearing Herb Kelleher, founder of Southwest Airlines saying, "The business of business isn't business. The business of business is people"
Streaming is the future. The trend is set and technology will soon match cable and network. Viewers don't care how the picture on the screen gets there. Here is telling information about the trend (and future of sports viewing):
* Of the top 100 TV programs in 2021, 75 were NFL games
* Amazon is spending $1 billion a year to host Tuesday Night Football
* 13 million viewers Chargers vs Chiefs on Amazon Prime (More people signed up during that period than any time before). In 2021 there were a total 6.5 million Amazon Prime viewers
*Average age (46) of Amazon Prime viewer was 7 years younger than traditional TV viewer (53)
* Major League Soccer and Amazon TV signed $2.5 billion deal
While I think the PAC-12 channel is an essential channel, the channel has a definite "slacker" look to it.
The demeanor and appearance on PAC-12 After Dark is hard to watch and impossible to admire. The cast is a bunch of aging Frat types with no socks, ratty clothes and poor posture. They need to toss the couch and some professionalism to their act.
No socks! That’s the “in” style now, Tom. (Which means smelly feet are also very fashionable.)
Personally, I like the casual vibe of that program. A refreshing change from the stiff, stale, jacket-and-tie-behind-big-desk format you see everywhere else. It’s FOOTBALL for God’s sake, not election coverage!
I can not tell how good the PAC-12 network is because I have never seen it because I have Direct TV. I am disappointed that the PAC-12 network never really cared about Direct-TV customers. I hope they choose Amazon for their network because I purchased prime for Thursday night football. I also get other deals with prime too.
Oct 4, 2022·edited Oct 4, 2022Liked by John Canzano
John, I keep reading this, but did you ever try Sling?
I shifted from Cable to Sling primarily because I had younger kids who were more into streaming and pushed it in general (starting with Netflix, Itunes, Hulu, etc. & also, I wanted the Pac 12 network.
Streaming is frankly so much better than Cable in that I can go anywhere in the U.S. & watch it from my IPad or phone.
I've never thought something easily available for a reasonable price was a mess, but I can see from the comments here that many people are adverse to streaming.
I've used pretty much all of them over the last 5+ years. The "traditional" network streaming services are poor imitations of cable. Very expensive to get all the sports networks and Pac 12 is only available on 2, often no local networks (ABC, Fox, etc.) which is critical when OTA is not available, and result in a minute delay of the broadcast.
That's where a new a la carte streaming model (either per game, per team, or per conference) is highly needed.
Honest question, why do people use Directv? Perhaps poor internet connections? Remote locations? I have used Dish Network back in the day, dealt with Comcast and Verizon FIOS for some stints but have been using SLING for a few years and I think I can get all I want... Perhaps im missing something that others want?
Yeah no idea why anyone would choose direct tv either at this time let alone the last few years, 5+ years ago maybe. Apparently its customers see things the same way as subs are dropping very fast.
I'm all in on the Amazon Prime deal. It is interesting to see some folks still complain about it though, mainly because I am surprised that anyone doesn't already have a Prime account at this point. Living in the past and missing out on one of the most convenient platforms that more than pays for its annual $100 subscription fee if you actually use it for shopping and whatnot.
I don't get these comments about "hating" the Pac-12 channel. As you mention it is a technically good channel with a lot of interesting material. Just because the distribution is poor and many cannot get it does not mean anyone "hates" it. They are just sad it is not available.
I agree, 100% the future is streaming and having the choice of where and when to watch the content. I really do hope that Amazon gets the deal if it goes that way, HUGE no thank you to apple, please dont go from one walled garden to another! Hopefully that will fix one of the things I really hate about the pac12 network, the app. it sucks, hard.
They changed it this year and its a more reliable but if you read the comments on it, it constantly crashes or disconnects (usually at add breaks when feed switching) when casting. And the stream quality is junk. Not sure if its broadcast in 720p/1080i or the compression is just HUGE but its terrible. Watching the game on fox or espn especially is a breath of fresh air. If the content is supplied by Amazon (which doesnt have a great bitrate either but miles better than pac12) it will improve. And yes its the p12 network, the "national"/provider level feed adds that run are crystal clear before it kicks back to the p12 feed and p12 adds that look like crap. Hopefully it will also stop the same damn obnoxious add from the single sponsor from playing 3 times in a row.
I hope the Pac12 does sell its content to Amazon, as I currently can't watch it on Directv. Watched the Beaver game against USC at my cousins house and was very impressed, USC announcing notwithstanding. Appletv very difficult to connect to. It would be nice to watch games at a reasonable hour.
BTW, why isn't Gebbia getting a shot as Beaver QB? He is more experienced than Gulbranson and has won some games. And he is mobile. Like to hear your take.
With you on the quality of Pac 12 Network. Big problem has been failure to secure place on Direct TV, which has led me to several costly and frustrating work arounds over the years. Pay for Direct TV AND Sling, just for Pac 12 Network? Ludicrous. Here's hoping the network stays intact and the conference finds a sensible way to stream into every home for less than Sling's $40/month.
Sorry if you only have direct tv (that sucks) but thats not a realistic at all. ATT has "Q1 2021, AT&T had 15.9 million pay-TV customers, including DirecTV, U-Verse, and DirecTV Stream subscribers" and are losing them at a good rate. Amazon has 150+ million. The vast majority of everyone would be served by amazon hosting the content on a service they already have.
Personally, I pay for DirecTV for my tv viewing, Amazon , like Apple, or any other streaming device, is an extra. No matter how many Amazon has, they can't give me what Direct does, , in a similar case, I no longer have interest in the Blazers, as they cut Direct off completely, my choice to stay with Direct, rather than go to cable just for that . My choices
As I have stated before, unless ESPN infuses a large amount of money, very soon, the Pac-12 will be doomed as far as catching the big boys in football. Very simple; if a college gets $40 or more million more per year than another school, who do you think will have a big time program sooner? College players can now be paid legally for their services. They can tranfer schools without sitting out a year. Without millions and millions of dollars in tv revenue, sports , as we know them, would fade away; tv money runs all sports. ESPN rules sports on tv. The Big 10, SEC, and the ACC all get major funds from ESPN. Huge money rules the world, and the same goes for sports on tv. The Pac-12 never was the conference of champions, regardless of what Bill Walton still says. Football and basketball revenue pays for all the other sports. Name the last school from the Pac-12 to win a national championship in either sport; good luck. More than 10 years for sure, that the league has had a champion. Unless the Pac-12 is willing to show their league games in a time zone, with little competition, like after 6 pm PST, ESPN will not be interested in showing their games. Would you rather watch Alabama play during the day, versus the jv schools out west? Thought so, the SEC is years ahead of the Pac-12 in football. The gap will get larger before it gets smaller. I am a huge Duck fan, and I like the Pac-12. Even if you have poor eyesite, and do not know much about football, just watch an SEC game and compare it to Colorado of the Pac-12. Nothing the same, except they both play 11 players. USC and UCLA were very smart to join the BIG 10 in two years. Their revenue will go up more than $40 million, per year, each, versus the 10 schools left in the Pac-12. Hand Chip Kelley or Lincoln Riley that small amount of dollars each, and see what their teams will do. They can afford to hire the best high school players to go play for them in LA. The rich get richer, and the Pac-12 is on the verge of slipping farther behind the real teams in NCAA revenue sports. Thanks to Phil Knight, and Nike, the Ducks have great facilities for their atheletes. If you were a high school football player, and were sought after by many schools, would you rather go to Eugene, Or. and have cool uniforms, or get paid 100s of thousands of dollars for you and your parents, upfront, above the table, to go to another school. Forty million extra dollars goes a long ways towards building a major league college football team. No school out there, by joining the Pac-12 , will make this inferior conference any better; please miss me with San Diego State or Fresno State or Boise State, they combined do not have enough tvs. Larry Scott buried the Pac-12 with the first, and worst, tv package, to show games on your tv. The new Pac-12 head is a first cousin of Larry's; another nut job only out to collect a huge pay-check. Sad to see the Pac-12 sinking like the Titanic, and the clock is ticking loudly. Losing the two LA schools will hurt the Pac-12 forever, with no real hope besides a ESPN dream rescue, which I doubt will happen. GO DUCKS
Yes, but if Amazon is looking for content for its huge and I mean huge base and is willing to pay for the Pac 12 Network content, that is going to solve a considerable number of problems.
The PAC 12 networks caused me to fundamentally change the way I consume television. Back at launch I was an extremely pleased DirecTV subscriber. College Football is the #1 most important thing to my television viewing habits. Everything else is cake. So, I jumped to a cable provider to get PAC-12.
A couple years later streaming services started getting just as good as cable. I got in the habit of subscribing during football season and grabbing a freebie or a month here or there when needed.
To this day that is what I do. Availability is subjective. The Pac 12 has ALWAYS been available. Just not it the way that many want it.
Yep, Sling on my firestick during football season (I go Orange and Blue plus sports package = 65 bucks a month) and if my Beavs have a basketball season like last year just kill it after the football season. Love the control of Sling.
If Pac12 Network goes to Amazon then no need for the sports package (15 extra a month) just flip it to Prime. The biggest thing I want is a replay of all games instantly after the game. I love to rewatch games after I have "calmed down". I will watch the game again in parts the whole following week.
Last note, the football in 60 is great BUT man they edit out to much stuff. Id be happy with a football in 90 if they put in each play. Thats more content for us so we can follow the game flow and more ad rev for the network... why would you cut any content? I can skip 30 seconds anytime I want...
There should be a giant sign in every city, town and everywhere you look that says parents stop ruining youth sports. It’s not the NFL, it’s not college or even high school. No one cares but you, stop trying to win the sports lottery, let your kids be kids and play. Fights at youth sports is becoming the normal.
Being a former PAC 8 player in 1973-74. it's hard to wrap my head around the changes taking place in college football. I know progress and opportunity dictates the future, but I feel like I'm on a Mister Toad's Wild Ride. I'm sure the new TV/Streaming contract will be awesome, and the Big 10 jump and possible new schools will work into new rivalries, but I kinda like the OLD DAYS.
I miss the old days, too... I don't think you're alone.
YES! YES! YES!!! Apple or Amazon, either one. As Mr. Thompson points out, cable is dying. Streaming is where we are now.
Totally.
No issues with the PAC 12 Network in my world. It’s been on my local cable since day one. I really enjoy coverage of all the other sports, besides football. Agree that professionalism sometimes is lacking, but that’s to be expected - (see FOX Sports PAC12 After Dark…bush league at best)
Those in the StreamingBusiness of serving KoolAid will more than likely win. “But it’s the future!” they say…too bad. Kind of parallel to the “Transportation Electrification” forced future…
Sorry about that
Love all you do, John
GO DAWGS
I think 3-5 years and we'll all be streaming. I'm doing it now. We dropped DTV a few years ago. Never looked back.
Currently a Spectrum customer
Four TVs
Grandkids
Channel surfer
Heavy DVR user
I’ll get there eventually, I guess, probably kicking and screaming
But hey, I’m the guy that finally got a Gmail account when I retired only because my financial planner required it
Creature of habit
GO DAWGS
Until I can seamlessly switch between cable and streaming, I will despise streaming. As it is, it takes 1-2 minutes to switch to a streaming network and the same going back to cable.
First, wow, a whole minute or two even. Second, I use chrome cast and it takes like no time whatsoever. Just pull up the link for Fubo with one click and click on the Chromecast icon in the top right area of my screen. Done.
When you are switching between games, (e.g. Thursday night NFL on Amazon and a college game on ESPN), 5 seconds of waiting is a long time.
True enough. But that is Amazon only. Not many college games on Thursday nights. Fubo has all the channels so switching is easy. But it is NOT as easy as simply punching a remote, I give you that. It takes two clicks, so not bad, but still is a bit irritating. I guess, I just don't mind much because I am so sick and tired of cable companies and Direct TV.
The Pac12 will be fine. And I predict that USC and UCLA will soon be falling with egg on their face and heads hanging, regretting their greedy decision. Nobody has repealed the Law of Karma yet. The conference experience is about much more than money, and involves more people than the administrators and operators. I keep hearing Herb Kelleher, founder of Southwest Airlines saying, "The business of business isn't business. The business of business is people"
Streaming is the future. The trend is set and technology will soon match cable and network. Viewers don't care how the picture on the screen gets there. Here is telling information about the trend (and future of sports viewing):
* Of the top 100 TV programs in 2021, 75 were NFL games
* Amazon is spending $1 billion a year to host Tuesday Night Football
* 13 million viewers Chargers vs Chiefs on Amazon Prime (More people signed up during that period than any time before). In 2021 there were a total 6.5 million Amazon Prime viewers
*Average age (46) of Amazon Prime viewer was 7 years younger than traditional TV viewer (53)
* Major League Soccer and Amazon TV signed $2.5 billion deal
While I think the PAC-12 channel is an essential channel, the channel has a definite "slacker" look to it.
The demeanor and appearance on PAC-12 After Dark is hard to watch and impossible to admire. The cast is a bunch of aging Frat types with no socks, ratty clothes and poor posture. They need to toss the couch and some professionalism to their act.
No socks! That’s the “in” style now, Tom. (Which means smelly feet are also very fashionable.)
Personally, I like the casual vibe of that program. A refreshing change from the stiff, stale, jacket-and-tie-behind-big-desk format you see everywhere else. It’s FOOTBALL for God’s sake, not election coverage!
Yes, its FOOTBALL. not Ringling Brothers, not a homeless camp either. Nigel Burton looks like a wino
Wow it’s also not a fashion show, geez way to judge & make rude comments all at the same time🙄
Ouch!
I disagree on that point.
I look forward to Pac -12 After Dark and think the commentary is good.
I can not tell how good the PAC-12 network is because I have never seen it because I have Direct TV. I am disappointed that the PAC-12 network never really cared about Direct-TV customers. I hope they choose Amazon for their network because I purchased prime for Thursday night football. I also get other deals with prime too.
The distribution was a mess from GO.
John, I keep reading this, but did you ever try Sling?
I shifted from Cable to Sling primarily because I had younger kids who were more into streaming and pushed it in general (starting with Netflix, Itunes, Hulu, etc. & also, I wanted the Pac 12 network.
Streaming is frankly so much better than Cable in that I can go anywhere in the U.S. & watch it from my IPad or phone.
I've never thought something easily available for a reasonable price was a mess, but I can see from the comments here that many people are adverse to streaming.
I've used pretty much all of them over the last 5+ years. The "traditional" network streaming services are poor imitations of cable. Very expensive to get all the sports networks and Pac 12 is only available on 2, often no local networks (ABC, Fox, etc.) which is critical when OTA is not available, and result in a minute delay of the broadcast.
That's where a new a la carte streaming model (either per game, per team, or per conference) is highly needed.
I agree in that every year, I am chasing after a game I cannot get on Sling or ESPN. I end up buying a month on CBS or Peacock for a game.
However, between Sling & Disney/ESPN, I usually get everything.
I wonder if any major service is ever going to agree to a la carte.
I view a month on CBS as somewhat a la carte, if I remember to cancel.
Honest question, why do people use Directv? Perhaps poor internet connections? Remote locations? I have used Dish Network back in the day, dealt with Comcast and Verizon FIOS for some stints but have been using SLING for a few years and I think I can get all I want... Perhaps im missing something that others want?
My thoughts exactly & I added the Pac 12 network for $5 a month and love it. I think Dish owns Sling & obviously sees the future too.
The obvious issue (obvious to me only after reading many of these comments) is that a big chunk of the Country must not yet be ready for streaming.
In addition to the Pac 12, Sling has ESPN & Fox Sports packages.
I supplement this with the Disney Plus/Hulu/ESPN plus package.
Yeah no idea why anyone would choose direct tv either at this time let alone the last few years, 5+ years ago maybe. Apparently its customers see things the same way as subs are dropping very fast.
I'm all in on the Amazon Prime deal. It is interesting to see some folks still complain about it though, mainly because I am surprised that anyone doesn't already have a Prime account at this point. Living in the past and missing out on one of the most convenient platforms that more than pays for its annual $100 subscription fee if you actually use it for shopping and whatnot.
Prime is up to $139/year, so they better be adding a bunch of events if they're going to keep their customers. I think it was $89 when I signed on.
You can buy prime TV for around $10 a month if you don't need the Prime delivery benefits.
I don't get these comments about "hating" the Pac-12 channel. As you mention it is a technically good channel with a lot of interesting material. Just because the distribution is poor and many cannot get it does not mean anyone "hates" it. They are just sad it is not available.
I think you're right.
I agree, 100% the future is streaming and having the choice of where and when to watch the content. I really do hope that Amazon gets the deal if it goes that way, HUGE no thank you to apple, please dont go from one walled garden to another! Hopefully that will fix one of the things I really hate about the pac12 network, the app. it sucks, hard.
They changed it this year and its a more reliable but if you read the comments on it, it constantly crashes or disconnects (usually at add breaks when feed switching) when casting. And the stream quality is junk. Not sure if its broadcast in 720p/1080i or the compression is just HUGE but its terrible. Watching the game on fox or espn especially is a breath of fresh air. If the content is supplied by Amazon (which doesnt have a great bitrate either but miles better than pac12) it will improve. And yes its the p12 network, the "national"/provider level feed adds that run are crystal clear before it kicks back to the p12 feed and p12 adds that look like crap. Hopefully it will also stop the same damn obnoxious add from the single sponsor from playing 3 times in a row.
I hope the Pac12 does sell its content to Amazon, as I currently can't watch it on Directv. Watched the Beaver game against USC at my cousins house and was very impressed, USC announcing notwithstanding. Appletv very difficult to connect to. It would be nice to watch games at a reasonable hour.
That weekly digital obstacle course gets old...
Indeed.
BTW, why isn't Gebbia getting a shot as Beaver QB? He is more experienced than Gulbranson and has won some games. And he is mobile. Like to hear your take.
I think he's still on the long road back. Not sure the coaching staff thinks he's ready. I expect BG this week.
With you on the quality of Pac 12 Network. Big problem has been failure to secure place on Direct TV, which has led me to several costly and frustrating work arounds over the years. Pay for Direct TV AND Sling, just for Pac 12 Network? Ludicrous. Here's hoping the network stays intact and the conference finds a sensible way to stream into every home for less than Sling's $40/month.
I suspect it lands on Apple/Amazon.
Landing on Apple/Amazon, being a DirecTV sub, means no different than pac 12 network, Either GAH
Sorry if you only have direct tv (that sucks) but thats not a realistic at all. ATT has "Q1 2021, AT&T had 15.9 million pay-TV customers, including DirecTV, U-Verse, and DirecTV Stream subscribers" and are losing them at a good rate. Amazon has 150+ million. The vast majority of everyone would be served by amazon hosting the content on a service they already have.
Personally, I pay for DirecTV for my tv viewing, Amazon , like Apple, or any other streaming device, is an extra. No matter how many Amazon has, they can't give me what Direct does, , in a similar case, I no longer have interest in the Blazers, as they cut Direct off completely, my choice to stay with Direct, rather than go to cable just for that . My choices
As I have stated before, unless ESPN infuses a large amount of money, very soon, the Pac-12 will be doomed as far as catching the big boys in football. Very simple; if a college gets $40 or more million more per year than another school, who do you think will have a big time program sooner? College players can now be paid legally for their services. They can tranfer schools without sitting out a year. Without millions and millions of dollars in tv revenue, sports , as we know them, would fade away; tv money runs all sports. ESPN rules sports on tv. The Big 10, SEC, and the ACC all get major funds from ESPN. Huge money rules the world, and the same goes for sports on tv. The Pac-12 never was the conference of champions, regardless of what Bill Walton still says. Football and basketball revenue pays for all the other sports. Name the last school from the Pac-12 to win a national championship in either sport; good luck. More than 10 years for sure, that the league has had a champion. Unless the Pac-12 is willing to show their league games in a time zone, with little competition, like after 6 pm PST, ESPN will not be interested in showing their games. Would you rather watch Alabama play during the day, versus the jv schools out west? Thought so, the SEC is years ahead of the Pac-12 in football. The gap will get larger before it gets smaller. I am a huge Duck fan, and I like the Pac-12. Even if you have poor eyesite, and do not know much about football, just watch an SEC game and compare it to Colorado of the Pac-12. Nothing the same, except they both play 11 players. USC and UCLA were very smart to join the BIG 10 in two years. Their revenue will go up more than $40 million, per year, each, versus the 10 schools left in the Pac-12. Hand Chip Kelley or Lincoln Riley that small amount of dollars each, and see what their teams will do. They can afford to hire the best high school players to go play for them in LA. The rich get richer, and the Pac-12 is on the verge of slipping farther behind the real teams in NCAA revenue sports. Thanks to Phil Knight, and Nike, the Ducks have great facilities for their atheletes. If you were a high school football player, and were sought after by many schools, would you rather go to Eugene, Or. and have cool uniforms, or get paid 100s of thousands of dollars for you and your parents, upfront, above the table, to go to another school. Forty million extra dollars goes a long ways towards building a major league college football team. No school out there, by joining the Pac-12 , will make this inferior conference any better; please miss me with San Diego State or Fresno State or Boise State, they combined do not have enough tvs. Larry Scott buried the Pac-12 with the first, and worst, tv package, to show games on your tv. The new Pac-12 head is a first cousin of Larry's; another nut job only out to collect a huge pay-check. Sad to see the Pac-12 sinking like the Titanic, and the clock is ticking loudly. Losing the two LA schools will hurt the Pac-12 forever, with no real hope besides a ESPN dream rescue, which I doubt will happen. GO DUCKS
Yes, but if Amazon is looking for content for its huge and I mean huge base and is willing to pay for the Pac 12 Network content, that is going to solve a considerable number of problems.
Were the FS1 Oregon-Stanford game announcers/commentators even at the game or in a studio somewhere?
They were in LA in a studio. Not in the stadium.
The PAC 12 networks caused me to fundamentally change the way I consume television. Back at launch I was an extremely pleased DirecTV subscriber. College Football is the #1 most important thing to my television viewing habits. Everything else is cake. So, I jumped to a cable provider to get PAC-12.
A couple years later streaming services started getting just as good as cable. I got in the habit of subscribing during football season and grabbing a freebie or a month here or there when needed.
To this day that is what I do. Availability is subjective. The Pac 12 has ALWAYS been available. Just not it the way that many want it.
Yep, Sling on my firestick during football season (I go Orange and Blue plus sports package = 65 bucks a month) and if my Beavs have a basketball season like last year just kill it after the football season. Love the control of Sling.
If Pac12 Network goes to Amazon then no need for the sports package (15 extra a month) just flip it to Prime. The biggest thing I want is a replay of all games instantly after the game. I love to rewatch games after I have "calmed down". I will watch the game again in parts the whole following week.
Last note, the football in 60 is great BUT man they edit out to much stuff. Id be happy with a football in 90 if they put in each play. Thats more content for us so we can follow the game flow and more ad rev for the network... why would you cut any content? I can skip 30 seconds anytime I want...