I live in Austin, TX and all The CW programs on Dish Network here are in high definition. On the CW Roku app on my TV every Pac-12 game they aired last year is available to stream any time in HD. At all of The CW’s media upfront meetings with advertising partners, The CW has been very outspoken and pleased with their affiliation with the PAC-12. PAC-12 football was their 7th most watched programming last fall and their ACC football broadcasts didn’t make the top 20 in ratings.
I have to give The CW a wide berth because you could feel them tweaking and improving week to week. They were new to this. Think another year and Pac-12 Enterprises could feature more improvements.
Greg, interesting. My DISH CW is standard def and a clearly inferior picture ...not sure it even matches "standard def." There must be something regional after the feed from the local CW affiliate that the satellite picks up?
CW is a great partner for the PAC to have. Available over the air by antenna across the country, plus on most cable and TV streaming services. I thought the CW had a great game presentation last season, and their studio content was good as well.
How long before Netflix gets involved in broadcasting games? New PAC 12 with its own broadcast abilities would be a great partner. I see Netflix has a documentary on the history of Boise State Football rise from a Junior College to its current stature coming out soon.
Glad to hear CW is going to be one of the TV partners, although I have to agree with Ben Johnson that the broadcasts need to be in HD or 4K, so that the PAC 12 doesn't look podunk.
So John, I live outside of Corvallis and use DISH Network for my over-the-air TV provider. We are "forced" to take the Eugene local stations instead of Portland local stations because of where we live (Benton County) per DISH policy, assuming we want "local" channels like ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, CW and PBS. The Eugene CW affiliate does not broadcast in HD, it is standard definition, and the overall quality is far inferior to what the Portland CW broadcast quality in HD is like. As you know, it is a world of difference. Everything looks "blurry" or "grainy" and the graphics are harder to read. If there was a way for the CW to require all of its affiliates to broadcast 100% in HD, the CW would be a great option for the new PAC.
Kurt. That is an issue with Dish. I live in Eugene and I have Hulu Live. The CW is in HD. This came up during the season last year and was disproven. For whatever reason, Dish has decided to downgrade the signal.
That's funny, because my wife called DISH last fall during football season and they said it was the Eugene affiliate. Guess we'll be calling BOTH of them this week again!
CW apparently has to broadcast through their local affiliates, probably for contractual / advertising reasons, and so you get the signal the affiliate offers, even if it is delivered digitally. It seems kind of silly for CW. But that is the old cable broadcast model to allow local stations local ad revenues. KEZI does a lot of local Eugene advertising off its programming feed, for example. CW should find a way to cut over its digital HD broadcast to the local stations for their local ads but keep the rest a corporate feed. I don't know if there are any FCC regulations in the way of doing that.
After the Ryan Leaf interview a week or so back, I was going to be shocked if the CW wasn’t involved in some capacity. Hopefully they have that broadcasting slot still available for him.
For the 100th time, the CW is NOT AVAILABLE IN 100% OF ALL HOMES!!! The CW is not carried on multiple streaming services such as YouTube TV, Spectrum, etc., at least not in all.geographical areas of the country. Its only carried as "on demand" content with zero live television events. I'd say that's just as big of problem as the old Pac 12 Network not being on Direct TV since many households have dropped the big cable and satellite services in favor of streaming services. Add in the fact The CW is not broadcast in HD in multiple areas where it is available and this seems like a backwoods second rate deal the conference continues to pursue. If this is what the conference ends up with, they might as well just go to distributing games to interested parties on 8mm film reels, it seems about as advanced. Didn't the conference negotiate the CW deal last year all on their own? Just what the hell did Octagon bring to the table then? This is pathetic if true.
The 99.8% availability is true but has a lot of caveats. As Jim says it is not available OTA in HD everywhere. In many places, including some places in Oregon, it is carried as a secondary signal for one of the other four networks in SD only. In addition, when it is carried as a secondary signal the local affiliate does not have to show the network feed. This happens when the local affiliate has an agreement with a local pro team, as an example. Last year there was at least one game you could not view if you lived in Los Angeles. Streaming does not resolve this issue as they only have agreements with the local affiliates and will only show the feed they provide. Lastly, with both streaming and satellite you are at the mercy of what they consider is your local market. If you local market does not have the CW then you are out of luck. The real issue this causes is that in most of rural Oregon east of the Cascades, you cannot get the CW. Your only option is to travel up to 100 miles and convince a bar to put it on. Lakeview is an example. You have to travel to KFalls.
Actually it's not. 51% also rounds up to 100%. And what percentage is it offered in HD? Yeah, not so great. All those other "minor" networks you mention are also 100% in HD.
Well, I am going with the media reports that the CW is available in 99.8% of TV households rather than someone with some sort of weird axe to grind against the CW citing nothing. And which major markets is the CW not available in HD? Nome, Alaska? Big Piney, Wyoming?
CW is much better than the Direct TV deal from the PAC12. I get CW in Phoenix over my Youtube TV account. I can also stream CW as another option and Cast it on my TV. I find the CW deal a lot better than Direct TV which I could not get on Hulu or Youtube TV
Very different circumstances Brian, from my perspective. With the old Pac 12 Network, your provider either had it or it didn't and if it did itveas HD without a question. If you wanted the Pac 12 Network, you knew up front which provider or providers you needed. Pretty much anything but DirectvTV. With The CW, same providers have it in one area but in other areas it doesn't. Each area negotiates their own CW agreement, not just at the provider level. Then, as others have shared, even if your area has negotiated an agreement with your provider, some areas carry it live while others only on demand. Then even if it is carried live in your area the local affiliate decides whether to broadcast in standard definition or HD. As far as telecommunications go in this country, that's about as primitive as it gets.
I don’t want to regurgitate what has already been said, but mid April was expected. MW had us over a barrel and now the media world is wringing the PAC. It’s business till a deal is signed and I’m trying not to worry too much for a repeat of the past failed deal. But we need to move on. I know they will have a deal and an 8th all sport member. Just wish the ink was dried now for the school and athletes need to know for stability in this new world of NIL, settlements etc. I just don’t want the PAC to be a feeder for the power 4, soon to be power 2.
Its all about the Money. If a PAC team pays up on NIL they will keep their players. No player is jumping to the B1G or SEC for less cash. There are no guarantees in those conferences.
We loved the quality of our 2024 PAC-12 coverage of PAC-12 Athletics on the CW; with our local affiliate for the CW in the Portland area being KRCW-TV, which is referenced as "virtual channel 32" (UHF digital channel 33). KRCW-TV is branded “Portland's CW”. For our viewing pleasure on the CW, you could actually see the seams on the football spinning in Hi-Def from the sideline replays; which IMO, is very good quality. ~~However, I'm guessing that the quality as delivered to the viewing public is greatly affected area by area by the local CW Affiliate because I've heard from friends of mine on the East Coast, and even some in California say that the quality was "very mediocre". Meanwhile we've heard no complaints from anyone in the Portland area.
Hopefully, JC can clarify. For some local Affiliates who only process broadcast lows bandwidth, maybe the Hi-Def capabilities of The CW might not available to the viewers in those cases,... maybe "like sucking a thick milkshake through a cocktail straw". ... Or maybe Hi-definition quality is more affected by the bandwidth capacity of the local internet / web carrier such as XFinity, Ziply, CenturyLink, Viasat, HughesNet, etc. What's your take JC ?
I like Fox as a a partner personally. Yes, they financed the Big-10 expansion, but the Pac-12 really did harm to themselves.
I also like the idea of creating a new look Pac-12 networks and do so to model after what The Big Ten network has done. If the Pac-12 were to think way outside the box, I'd partner with a couple of other conferences to create a true national platform, and brand the new channel as "Fox College Sports."
I can't recall the exact numbers, but a decent piece of the Big-10's media value comes for their network.
The only way you hit homeruns is by swinging for the fences. I want to see us hit a homerun here and not settle for a base hit.
Seems like a long time we've been analyzing, investigating, predicting what has/will happen with the PAC12. My mum, bless her departed soul, would tell me to forget the past - but not the lessons it teaches - and focus on the future. Fair enough - though I still have a bee in my bonnet over the damage caused by Champaign Larry and the PAC12 CEO group who enabled his reign of inept largesse. I know G. Kliavkoff is somewhat culpable too but I liked the hire at the time and think his only sin was maybe not seeing what was happening in LA until it was too late. I reckon he would not handle things the same again if given another shot.
"Gould told me .... values maximum exposure above revenue. "
That sounds like what UW said in early August 2023 when they felt Kliavkoff's streaming proposal was too weak on linear content.
"The most significant aspect of the move, though, is the visibility — playing in central and eastern time zones on major networks. It will open up recruiting and create some brand and marketing opportunities for a university tucked into the northwest corner of the country.”
Oregon and UW will always be 2nd tier programs in the Big10. The visibility thru tv ratings will always piggyback off tOSU, Michigan and Penn St fanbase which UO and UW fans will try to take credit for. When UO played UW in 2024, the viewership tanked without one of the Big10 'Biggies' to bolster it, proving my point.
Exactly... and NIL has invalidated any player advantage of being in those conferences. The TV deals are still good. But we will see how the next round of negotiations go. Everything has changed since the last. It still comes down to your donor group who are willing to pay for the players. That is no different than the NFL where some owners are willing to pay up for a winner and others aren't. I would rather be the Beavers than the Cougars in that regard.
Will be interesting to see in the "next round of negotiations" how much visibility means to the schools. That continues to be a factor that separates players being recruited to play in the B1G or SEC, from going to less visible conferences.
@Brian M. Hi Brian, I'm not sure NIL has eliminated the advantage of playing in the SEC, Big 10, or ACC. But what I am quite certain of is that once revenue sharing begins, schools in those conferences will spend, or come very close to spending, up to the cap, which I believe will be $20.5 million. Schools at the Group of 5 level will not. In fact, Scott Barnes, the OSU athletic director has started that the Beavs won't be spending at that level. That doesn't mean programs outside of the power conferences won't competitive teams, but they will have a hard time competing for the same level of talent.
Like I said, the ESPN and FSN financial deals are a differentiator. If OSU and WSU want, they have the money from the settlement to fund their programs at the B1G and SEC level. Barnes is on record saying OSU would be doing that. There is a long way to go over the next few years as all the moving parts settle out. It ain't over and the lady has yet to sing.
@Brian M. This from kerryeggers.com, "As it is, Oregon State won't be near the proposed $20.5 million revenue sharing cap. "And we aren't alone there," Barnes says. "Many of our sister institutions will be doing far less than the $20.5 million.
A year ago, to help cover lost revenue from the breakup of the PAC 12, the Oregon legislature through Senate Bill 5701 gave Oregon State a one-time funding boost of $10 million to help cover athletic scholarships for 2024-25.
"We have asked for $10 million (a year) ongoing," Barnes said. "We will continue to need help from the legislature."
I don't disagree that are change is coming, but this doesn't exactly sound like the plan is to fund at the Big 10/SEC level unless banking on continued help from the state is how it's going to happen.
Why wouldn't the state continue to help OSU? It's the flagship university of the state and football helps drive the economy in Corvallis. OSU will ask and the state will give, it's expected until the Beavers are able to do in on their own. $10M to $20M a year is reasonable.
You're hilarious! That 2nd tier school you speak of won the conference last year and is ranked in the pre season top 5....enjoy low def on the CW where your games are sandwiched around Hallmark movies and reruns of Gun Smoke!
Clearly Michigan and Ohio State are superior schools, superior football programs and are the 2 bell cows of the conference. We can include academics and school enrollment too. The only thing Oregon does is spend more money on football every year, and look what happened in the biggest duck football game in 10 years: 34-0 2nd quarter. Lanning following in 30 year old duck footsteps.
Gee, I thought Oregon went undefeated and ran the table their first year in the league. Maybe I am mistaken since you seem to know it all. That Beevur home schedule sure is a knockout though. I am surprised ESPN or Fox didn't pick it up for their Saturday Prime Time Window. Maybe if they schedule Linfield and Sac State in 2026 it will add more luster.
Doug: I think Orange was more referring to media rankings, not just win-loss record. Though, it's true though that Oregon's highest viewership rated games came against Ohio State (twice), Michigan, Penn State, and Illinois. As a side note about TV viewership ratings, Ohio State was #3 (5.2M viewers/game), Michigan #5 (4.0M), Nebraska #13 (2.5M), and UO, PSU and u$c all tied at #14 (2.4M). Iowa #22 (1.8M), #23 Indiana (1.7M), Wisconsin #27 ($1.5M), UCLA (#21 ($1.4M), Illinois #31 (1.2M), UW #32 (1.2M), Purdue #40 (880K), Mich. ST. #42 (846K), Minn. #45 (795K), and Northwestern #59 (494K).
I know your reply was meant more as a jab, but I don't think that Orange was suggesting that the late night exit by UW & UO in any way helped the PAC-12 media negotiations. Can you really blame many PAC-12 fans & Apple-TV's Royce Dickerson for being angry that after months of negotiations, that Scholz or Cauce did not bother to even come back with an expected counter-offer back to Dickerson to meet or exceed the FOX/ B1G offer to save the PAC-12 ??, ..... but instead, they quickly ended negotiations and came out with a late night press release that a deal was struck with FOX / B1G-10 on 50% membership deal for 6 years. That quick late-night exit which effectively blew up the PAC-12 conference defies all negotiating business protocol, and was a slap in the face to the remaining members of the PAC-12.
Go Beavs, and go Cougs!
I live in Austin, TX and all The CW programs on Dish Network here are in high definition. On the CW Roku app on my TV every Pac-12 game they aired last year is available to stream any time in HD. At all of The CW’s media upfront meetings with advertising partners, The CW has been very outspoken and pleased with their affiliation with the PAC-12. PAC-12 football was their 7th most watched programming last fall and their ACC football broadcasts didn’t make the top 20 in ratings.
I have to give The CW a wide berth because you could feel them tweaking and improving week to week. They were new to this. Think another year and Pac-12 Enterprises could feature more improvements.
Greg, interesting. My DISH CW is standard def and a clearly inferior picture ...not sure it even matches "standard def." There must be something regional after the feed from the local CW affiliate that the satellite picks up?
CW is a great partner for the PAC to have. Available over the air by antenna across the country, plus on most cable and TV streaming services. I thought the CW had a great game presentation last season, and their studio content was good as well.
How long before Netflix gets involved in broadcasting games? New PAC 12 with its own broadcast abilities would be a great partner. I see Netflix has a documentary on the history of Boise State Football rise from a Junior College to its current stature coming out soon.
I have always liked what Netflix has done in sports.
Love this comment Greg!
The CW and PAC-12 were a great partnership last year. It works well for both sides.
Great update John. Keep writing what moves you to write…thanks!
Nothing new here. Again. Please wait until there's something other than what keeps getting repeated.
Lots of new information in this. Thanks for reading.
Glad to hear CW is going to be one of the TV partners, although I have to agree with Ben Johnson that the broadcasts need to be in HD or 4K, so that the PAC 12 doesn't look podunk.
I am curious about the HD vs. LD debate. My TV looked fine and was in HD but I've heard from more than one reader who says they wrestled with it.
So John, I live outside of Corvallis and use DISH Network for my over-the-air TV provider. We are "forced" to take the Eugene local stations instead of Portland local stations because of where we live (Benton County) per DISH policy, assuming we want "local" channels like ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, CW and PBS. The Eugene CW affiliate does not broadcast in HD, it is standard definition, and the overall quality is far inferior to what the Portland CW broadcast quality in HD is like. As you know, it is a world of difference. Everything looks "blurry" or "grainy" and the graphics are harder to read. If there was a way for the CW to require all of its affiliates to broadcast 100% in HD, the CW would be a great option for the new PAC.
blurry/grainy - yes, that is my experience
Kurt. That is an issue with Dish. I live in Eugene and I have Hulu Live. The CW is in HD. This came up during the season last year and was disproven. For whatever reason, Dish has decided to downgrade the signal.
That's funny, because my wife called DISH last fall during football season and they said it was the Eugene affiliate. Guess we'll be calling BOTH of them this week again!
CW apparently has to broadcast through their local affiliates, probably for contractual / advertising reasons, and so you get the signal the affiliate offers, even if it is delivered digitally. It seems kind of silly for CW. But that is the old cable broadcast model to allow local stations local ad revenues. KEZI does a lot of local Eugene advertising off its programming feed, for example. CW should find a way to cut over its digital HD broadcast to the local stations for their local ads but keep the rest a corporate feed. I don't know if there are any FCC regulations in the way of doing that.
After the Ryan Leaf interview a week or so back, I was going to be shocked if the CW wasn’t involved in some capacity. Hopefully they have that broadcasting slot still available for him.
I like Leaf on Pac-12 games.
Better in broadcast booth than on the field as an NFL player, that is for sure. He can offer a lot of color given his experience
John, will we ever find out how much the 2024 media deal with The CW was worth?
For the 100th time, the CW is NOT AVAILABLE IN 100% OF ALL HOMES!!! The CW is not carried on multiple streaming services such as YouTube TV, Spectrum, etc., at least not in all.geographical areas of the country. Its only carried as "on demand" content with zero live television events. I'd say that's just as big of problem as the old Pac 12 Network not being on Direct TV since many households have dropped the big cable and satellite services in favor of streaming services. Add in the fact The CW is not broadcast in HD in multiple areas where it is available and this seems like a backwoods second rate deal the conference continues to pursue. If this is what the conference ends up with, they might as well just go to distributing games to interested parties on 8mm film reels, it seems about as advanced. Didn't the conference negotiate the CW deal last year all on their own? Just what the hell did Octagon bring to the table then? This is pathetic if true.
Oh no, the CW is only available in 99.8% of TV households, so it only rounds up to 100%.
In comparison, ABC is only at 97.7%, CBS is at 96.0%, Fox is at 95.8%, and NBC is at 88.9%.
The 99.8% availability is true but has a lot of caveats. As Jim says it is not available OTA in HD everywhere. In many places, including some places in Oregon, it is carried as a secondary signal for one of the other four networks in SD only. In addition, when it is carried as a secondary signal the local affiliate does not have to show the network feed. This happens when the local affiliate has an agreement with a local pro team, as an example. Last year there was at least one game you could not view if you lived in Los Angeles. Streaming does not resolve this issue as they only have agreements with the local affiliates and will only show the feed they provide. Lastly, with both streaming and satellite you are at the mercy of what they consider is your local market. If you local market does not have the CW then you are out of luck. The real issue this causes is that in most of rural Oregon east of the Cascades, you cannot get the CW. Your only option is to travel up to 100 miles and convince a bar to put it on. Lakeview is an example. You have to travel to KFalls.
Actually it's not. 51% also rounds up to 100%. And what percentage is it offered in HD? Yeah, not so great. All those other "minor" networks you mention are also 100% in HD.
Well, I am going with the media reports that the CW is available in 99.8% of TV households rather than someone with some sort of weird axe to grind against the CW citing nothing. And which major markets is the CW not available in HD? Nome, Alaska? Big Piney, Wyoming?
CW is much better than the Direct TV deal from the PAC12. I get CW in Phoenix over my Youtube TV account. I can also stream CW as another option and Cast it on my TV. I find the CW deal a lot better than Direct TV which I could not get on Hulu or Youtube TV
Very different circumstances Brian, from my perspective. With the old Pac 12 Network, your provider either had it or it didn't and if it did itveas HD without a question. If you wanted the Pac 12 Network, you knew up front which provider or providers you needed. Pretty much anything but DirectvTV. With The CW, same providers have it in one area but in other areas it doesn't. Each area negotiates their own CW agreement, not just at the provider level. Then, as others have shared, even if your area has negotiated an agreement with your provider, some areas carry it live while others only on demand. Then even if it is carried live in your area the local affiliate decides whether to broadcast in standard definition or HD. As far as telecommunications go in this country, that's about as primitive as it gets.
I don’t want to regurgitate what has already been said, but mid April was expected. MW had us over a barrel and now the media world is wringing the PAC. It’s business till a deal is signed and I’m trying not to worry too much for a repeat of the past failed deal. But we need to move on. I know they will have a deal and an 8th all sport member. Just wish the ink was dried now for the school and athletes need to know for stability in this new world of NIL, settlements etc. I just don’t want the PAC to be a feeder for the power 4, soon to be power 2.
Who knows maybe congress will step in and give some stability, but hell could freeze over too.
The PAC, like all the G6 conferences, is already a feeder league to the P2
Its all about the Money. If a PAC team pays up on NIL they will keep their players. No player is jumping to the B1G or SEC for less cash. There are no guarantees in those conferences.
Yes and no. Some kids will jump up to value the larger stage and opportunity. Not most, but not zero.
The bigger issue is that the Pac schools don’t have the revenue to match/compete
We loved the quality of our 2024 PAC-12 coverage of PAC-12 Athletics on the CW; with our local affiliate for the CW in the Portland area being KRCW-TV, which is referenced as "virtual channel 32" (UHF digital channel 33). KRCW-TV is branded “Portland's CW”. For our viewing pleasure on the CW, you could actually see the seams on the football spinning in Hi-Def from the sideline replays; which IMO, is very good quality. ~~However, I'm guessing that the quality as delivered to the viewing public is greatly affected area by area by the local CW Affiliate because I've heard from friends of mine on the East Coast, and even some in California say that the quality was "very mediocre". Meanwhile we've heard no complaints from anyone in the Portland area.
Hopefully, JC can clarify. For some local Affiliates who only process broadcast lows bandwidth, maybe the Hi-Def capabilities of The CW might not available to the viewers in those cases,... maybe "like sucking a thick milkshake through a cocktail straw". ... Or maybe Hi-definition quality is more affected by the bandwidth capacity of the local internet / web carrier such as XFinity, Ziply, CenturyLink, Viasat, HughesNet, etc. What's your take JC ?
I like Fox as a a partner personally. Yes, they financed the Big-10 expansion, but the Pac-12 really did harm to themselves.
I also like the idea of creating a new look Pac-12 networks and do so to model after what The Big Ten network has done. If the Pac-12 were to think way outside the box, I'd partner with a couple of other conferences to create a true national platform, and brand the new channel as "Fox College Sports."
I can't recall the exact numbers, but a decent piece of the Big-10's media value comes for their network.
The only way you hit homeruns is by swinging for the fences. I want to see us hit a homerun here and not settle for a base hit.
where can I get my Pac12 Football Championship Gear ?
Seems like a long time we've been analyzing, investigating, predicting what has/will happen with the PAC12. My mum, bless her departed soul, would tell me to forget the past - but not the lessons it teaches - and focus on the future. Fair enough - though I still have a bee in my bonnet over the damage caused by Champaign Larry and the PAC12 CEO group who enabled his reign of inept largesse. I know G. Kliavkoff is somewhat culpable too but I liked the hire at the time and think his only sin was maybe not seeing what was happening in LA until it was too late. I reckon he would not handle things the same again if given another shot.
"Gould told me .... values maximum exposure above revenue. "
That sounds like what UW said in early August 2023 when they felt Kliavkoff's streaming proposal was too weak on linear content.
"The most significant aspect of the move, though, is the visibility — playing in central and eastern time zones on major networks. It will open up recruiting and create some brand and marketing opportunities for a university tucked into the northwest corner of the country.”
https://sports.yahoo.com/inside-oregon-and-washingtons-jump-to-the-big-ten--it-was-both-of-us-or-none-of-us-141725222.html
Oregon and UW will always be 2nd tier programs in the Big10. The visibility thru tv ratings will always piggyback off tOSU, Michigan and Penn St fanbase which UO and UW fans will try to take credit for. When UO played UW in 2024, the viewership tanked without one of the Big10 'Biggies' to bolster it, proving my point.
Exactly... and NIL has invalidated any player advantage of being in those conferences. The TV deals are still good. But we will see how the next round of negotiations go. Everything has changed since the last. It still comes down to your donor group who are willing to pay for the players. That is no different than the NFL where some owners are willing to pay up for a winner and others aren't. I would rather be the Beavers than the Cougars in that regard.
Will be interesting to see in the "next round of negotiations" how much visibility means to the schools. That continues to be a factor that separates players being recruited to play in the B1G or SEC, from going to less visible conferences.
@Brian M. Hi Brian, I'm not sure NIL has eliminated the advantage of playing in the SEC, Big 10, or ACC. But what I am quite certain of is that once revenue sharing begins, schools in those conferences will spend, or come very close to spending, up to the cap, which I believe will be $20.5 million. Schools at the Group of 5 level will not. In fact, Scott Barnes, the OSU athletic director has started that the Beavs won't be spending at that level. That doesn't mean programs outside of the power conferences won't competitive teams, but they will have a hard time competing for the same level of talent.
Like I said, the ESPN and FSN financial deals are a differentiator. If OSU and WSU want, they have the money from the settlement to fund their programs at the B1G and SEC level. Barnes is on record saying OSU would be doing that. There is a long way to go over the next few years as all the moving parts settle out. It ain't over and the lady has yet to sing.
@Brian M. This from kerryeggers.com, "As it is, Oregon State won't be near the proposed $20.5 million revenue sharing cap. "And we aren't alone there," Barnes says. "Many of our sister institutions will be doing far less than the $20.5 million.
A year ago, to help cover lost revenue from the breakup of the PAC 12, the Oregon legislature through Senate Bill 5701 gave Oregon State a one-time funding boost of $10 million to help cover athletic scholarships for 2024-25.
"We have asked for $10 million (a year) ongoing," Barnes said. "We will continue to need help from the legislature."
I don't disagree that are change is coming, but this doesn't exactly sound like the plan is to fund at the Big 10/SEC level unless banking on continued help from the state is how it's going to happen.
Why wouldn't the state continue to help OSU? It's the flagship university of the state and football helps drive the economy in Corvallis. OSU will ask and the state will give, it's expected until the Beavers are able to do in on their own. $10M to $20M a year is reasonable.
You're hilarious! That 2nd tier school you speak of won the conference last year and is ranked in the pre season top 5....enjoy low def on the CW where your games are sandwiched around Hallmark movies and reruns of Gun Smoke!
Clearly Michigan and Ohio State are superior schools, superior football programs and are the 2 bell cows of the conference. We can include academics and school enrollment too. The only thing Oregon does is spend more money on football every year, and look what happened in the biggest duck football game in 10 years: 34-0 2nd quarter. Lanning following in 30 year old duck footsteps.
Gee, I thought Oregon went undefeated and ran the table their first year in the league. Maybe I am mistaken since you seem to know it all. That Beevur home schedule sure is a knockout though. I am surprised ESPN or Fox didn't pick it up for their Saturday Prime Time Window. Maybe if they schedule Linfield and Sac State in 2026 it will add more luster.
Doug: I think Orange was more referring to media rankings, not just win-loss record. Though, it's true though that Oregon's highest viewership rated games came against Ohio State (twice), Michigan, Penn State, and Illinois. As a side note about TV viewership ratings, Ohio State was #3 (5.2M viewers/game), Michigan #5 (4.0M), Nebraska #13 (2.5M), and UO, PSU and u$c all tied at #14 (2.4M). Iowa #22 (1.8M), #23 Indiana (1.7M), Wisconsin #27 ($1.5M), UCLA (#21 ($1.4M), Illinois #31 (1.2M), UW #32 (1.2M), Purdue #40 (880K), Mich. ST. #42 (846K), Minn. #45 (795K), and Northwestern #59 (494K).
I know your reply was meant more as a jab, but I don't think that Orange was suggesting that the late night exit by UW & UO in any way helped the PAC-12 media negotiations. Can you really blame many PAC-12 fans & Apple-TV's Royce Dickerson for being angry that after months of negotiations, that Scholz or Cauce did not bother to even come back with an expected counter-offer back to Dickerson to meet or exceed the FOX/ B1G offer to save the PAC-12 ??, ..... but instead, they quickly ended negotiations and came out with a late night press release that a deal was struck with FOX / B1G-10 on 50% membership deal for 6 years. That quick late-night exit which effectively blew up the PAC-12 conference defies all negotiating business protocol, and was a slap in the face to the remaining members of the PAC-12.
https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach/which-college-football-programs-were-the-most-watched-in-2022-94eca4f6acbd
How are you measuring/determining tiers?