clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

The Pac-12 TV Deal

It is hard to argue that Larry Scott didn't put together a good deal for the conference.

The LA Times has some of the particulars...

Pac-10 Commissioner Larry Scott said the deal leaves room for the conference to launch its own network next year, similar to what the Big Ten Conference started in 2007 in partnership with Fox.

Whereas the Big Ten only owns 49% of its network, Scott said the Pac-12 will keep total ownership of its network.

Scott said the Pac-12 will save premium content for its conference network -- ESPN and Fox will have the rights to 44 football games a season with a Pac-12 network getting the rights to 36 football games.

"And the [Pac-12] network will have very high-quality games," Scott said, "with either the first, second or third selections in different weeks. The conference network will have the best game of the week a couple of weeks each season.

"The ESPN family and Fox will have 68 basketball games and we'll have over 100 games for the Pac-12, and again a high quality."

Scott said the league also plans to develop its own digital network, similar to ESPN3, that will carry up to 500 events a year. Scott said he expects a Pac-12 network and the digital network to be up and running by August of 2012.

One thing that stays in place is our match-up against Notre Dame. There were rumblings that the USC/ND game was going to fall prey to the out of conference scheduling rule that says that OOC games can't be scheduled after the third week in the season.

Again, I can't fault Larry Scott for getting such a lucrative deal for the conference as a whole. He really did a great job in getting this done.

But I am still left scratching my head that USC (and to a lesser extent UCLA) left so much on the table.

The L.A. schools bring so much to the table with their traditions in football and basketball respectively.

USC moves the needle nationally. Their brand alone has to generate better than 20% of what the Pac-12 will be getting in this deal. UCLA is probably between 10-15%. Why would USC leave so much on the table? The TV networks could care less how the money is split as the deal is the deal.USC and UCLA will now get 17.5% of the revenues...much less than the greater than 30-35% hat they bring in their brand recognition.

I won't comment on what they were thinking in the Morgan Center but as I noted last month what was USC thinking?

Everyone makes money here but I could care less about the other schools...they are making a good nickel because of USC and UCLA's brand. USC could have leveraged its position much better than it did. The rest of the conference would have been ecstatic simply tripling their revenues but with USC's (and UCLA) silence in not leveraging their brand the rest of conference quadrupled their earnings.

A buddy of mine said this on a message board...

Larry Scott is about Larry Scott. The PAC 12 is his tool.

He is one slick salesman. Turned out great for the conference, USC is making more money than it was. All the other scenarios never got past first base. It now is what it is.

If you are frustrated or pissed off about what USC could have pursued or gave up or the weeknight games etc...take it up with the guy(s) at USC who followed this path.

Scott did what he had to do for the conference and himself. USC followed. USC is accountable and responsible for joining in, not Larry Scott.

I am not defending Scott. I am just trying to frame this issue and put the eggs where they belong.

He hits the nail on the head.

Scott did what benefited Scott (and the conference as a whole). He is the conferences hero. Haden on the other hand let Scott run rough shod over USC instead of leveraging their brand.

A great day for the conference, not the greatest day for USC...