Quantcast
Sports

Red roundup: Fox turns down $300 million Pac-12 TV deal

Comments

Return To Article
  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    April 23, 2011 8:51 a.m.

    @wedgie

    There is a cold and lonely ann arbor basement where that National Championship is a daily source of aggravation, frustration, and near suicide.

    LOL

  • sammyg Springville, UT
    April 22, 2011 7:30 p.m.

    Well Hedgie, now that we know that BYU has a shot equal to Army and Navy for BCS access it shall be interesting to see how things develop in the future.

    By the way, speaking of the future, I ran across this list and need your help. I know that because of BYU's horrible season last year it's obvious they are rebuilding this year which explains their absence from this ESPN's College Football Live Pre-Season Top 25.

    Am I'm missing something on Utah or is the following list a mistake? Please advise.

    1 Alabama
    2 Ohio State
    3 Boise State
    4 Texas
    5 Virginia Tech
    6 TCU
    7 Florida
    8 Iowa
    9 Nebraska
    10 Oregon
    11 Wisconsin
    12 Oklahoma
    13 Miami
    14 LSU
    15 USC
    16 Pittsburgh
    17 Georgia Tech
    18 Arkansas
    19 Penn State
    20 Oregon State
    21 Florida State
    22 Cincinnati
    23 Georgia
    24 Stanford
    25 North Carolina

    ouch!

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    April 22, 2011 6:31 p.m.

    "You see we can play that game all day and the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP will always win out no matter what else you try to compare it to."

    Ducky,

    You do understand that outside of the bubble sportsfans roll their eyes concerning that *NC ( that is the few sportsfans that remember). It kinda goes down as to what shouldn't happen or novelty as oppossed to any type warrented achievement.

    Secondly, it's a pitty the Y couldn't capatalize on such a glowing achievement, maybe a follow-up BCS bowl appearance would have taken the Y to a much different place it see's itself today.

  • BluCoug Provo, UT
    April 22, 2011 12:18 p.m.

    "Contrast that to Utah where 2 BCS banners hang in the stadium and two new logos appear on the field"

    Congratulations to the utes for have 2 great years out of the last 50! We'll measure the utes again to see what type of success is generated in another 50 years or so...

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    April 22, 2011 12:01 p.m.

    @ute4ever

    And who wouldn't give up a sugarbowl win over alabama for an actual NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.

    You see we can play that game all day and the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP will always win out no matter what else you try to compare it to.

  • ute4ever West Jordan, UT
    April 22, 2011 11:29 a.m.

    The only thing that BYU can hang their hat on is an affiliation with ESPN. Is that really what you want as the most recognizable thing in your program..."we have a contract with ESPN and will be seen on ESPN, ESPN2, or ESPNU at least 3 times a year." Well congratuations, because Cougar fans have arrived. Nothing their program has done in the past 20 years promotes national attention, but at least their TV deal will.

    Contrast that to Utah where 2 BCS banners hang in the stadium and two new logos appear on the field......the contrast couldn't be more stark.

    Who wouldn't give up an ESPN contract for a Sugar Bowl victory of Alabama?

  • The Disillusionist Alexandria, VA
    April 22, 2011 11:19 a.m.

    Re: Mormon Ute

    No. It means that Utah had a better year than BYU last year up until Utah's TCU debacle. You cannot extrapolate the demographic claims about fanbases that you are making based on that single statistic. Sorry.

  • Mormon Ute Kaysville, UT
    April 22, 2011 11:05 a.m.

    The Disillusionist,

    Okay, so check out these numbers from the Harvard College Sports Analysis Collective for the 2010 football season:

    Utah led the MWC in sellouts averaging 100.98% per game while BYU sold and average of 95.84% of their tickets per game. Utah was also 2nd nationally among non-BCS schools in sellout percentage.

    Those numbers indicate the trend is up for Utah and down for BYU. That backs up what I'm saying and is not limited to my neighborhood.

  • Mormon Ute Kaysville, UT
    April 22, 2011 10:48 a.m.

    sammyg,

    First of all, BYU's student body hasn't grown in over 20 years. That is the main reason their local influence is erroding. Second, yes BYU will always have a stronger national and international draw than the U, but it has very little to do with the growth of the University and everything to do with the growth of the Church. There are millions of people cheering for BYU all over the world whose only connection with the school is their LDS Church membership. Many of them don't even know a person who has attended the school. The U is basically dependent on alumni and relatives of alumni for a fan base. So comparing fan bases is an apples to oranges comparison and isn't worth arguing about.

    I have no idea what local channel we will be on and won't know until the TV deal is done. If FOX wins the bid for the PAC-12 there's a very good chance we'll see some games on FOX-13. We'll have to wait and see. Anything is better than the mtn.

  • The Disillusionist Alexandria, VA
    April 22, 2011 10:40 a.m.

    "Checking your facts helps avoid foot in mouth disease."

    Your very informal survey of Davis County/Kaysville demographics leaves me unconvinced.

  • Mormon Ute Kaysville, UT
    April 22, 2011 10:37 a.m.

    Just the FAX,

    I didn't say the U has been the school of choice historically, yet your comment refers to history. Yes, BYU built their 65,000 seat stadium more than 30 years ago when the U couldn't even fill a 30,000 seat stadium. Now we sell out our 45,000 seat stadium for every game and my bishop gets letters from BYU offering seats for our youth at $1 each to help fill that 65,000 seat stadium in Provo. That's the trend I am talking about and it is happening right now.

  • Mormon Ute Kaysville, UT
    April 22, 2011 10:31 a.m.

    The Disillusionist,

    You must have lived out of state too long. Two kids on my street with parents who graduated from BYU are currently attending the U. It was hard on their parents at first, but they came around and accepted that it was the best choice for their kids. I see this happening more and more. When I was growing up in Davis County there were far more BYU fans than Ute fans, but that has changed and continues to evolve. Those of you who have left Utah have lost touch with what is happening.

    It is acutally easy to see how. As I said, it is so hard to get into BYU that fewer local kids go there now and the kids from our of state or international students often go back home when they're done at the Y. As far as the not living on campus idea, both the kids from my neighborhood live on campus at the U and the U has begun construction on another dorm building to accomodate the rising demand for on campus housing. Checking your facts helps avoid foot in mouth disease.

  • The Disillusionist Alexandria, VA
    April 22, 2011 6:31 a.m.

    Re: Mormon Ute

    "Don't kid yourself. So few local kids get into BYU now that Ute fans in my neighborhood are about the same number as BYU fans."

    And, as we all know, Kaysville is a perfect cross-section of the rest of the state of Utah. :) I hold to my earlier point.

    The U of U is the "school of choice" for Salt Lake County twenty-somethings (and thirty-somethings) who wish to live at home while pursuing their undergrad degrees on a 10-12 year plan. They can even join a fraternity/sorority without leaving the comfort of their mothers' basements.

  • sammyg Springville, UT
    April 22, 2011 5:56 a.m.

    M ute... Don't kid yourself.

    While the ESPN bus drives on by and heads to more storied programs in the PAC 10.1.1 beta you can keep telling yourself that the university will be catering to the locals while they try to increase their numbers in out of state and int'l enrollmens and raising academic enrollment standards.

    And while this is going on BYU continues to grow nationwide, oops I meant to say worldwide.

    And finally... what local channel will you be on for the 'locals' U so much love and cater to?

  • Just the FAX Olympus Cove, Utah
    April 21, 2011 11:35 p.m.

    "but the U is rapidly becoming the school of choice throughout Utah."

    Which of course explains why BYU has had a 65,000 seat stadium for 30 years, and Utah still only has a 45,000 seat stadium.

    You're delusional Mormon Ute if you think the Utes are even close to BYU in fan support in Utah. BYU's fan base in Utah is at least twice as large as Utah's, probably even larger than than.

  • BluCoug Provo, UT
    April 21, 2011 10:48 p.m.

    "but the U is rapidly becoming the school of choice throughout Utah."

    I highly doubt that!

  • BluCoug Provo, UT
    April 21, 2011 10:46 p.m.

    WOW the greed of the PAC-12! After closing a deal with the Big 12, Fox could care less. Time to embrace Comcast and the new Pac-12 channel, only available to premium subscribers! Rumor has it, they will be leasing space right next to the MTN channel. Congratulations!

  • Wally West SLC, UT
    April 21, 2011 10:36 p.m.

    re: belgie | 4:32 p.m. April 20, 2011

    Versus is owned by NBCUniversal (formerly Comcast) and last I checked Comcast is a Media Conglomerate much like ESPN/ABC/Disney.

    I'm not saying that Vs will take off but as a broadcast medium is better shape than ESPN.

    Don't forget ESPN was a regional network like NESN; people were skeptical of its transformation back in the early to mid 80's.

  • Mormon Ute Kaysville, UT
    April 21, 2011 10:05 p.m.

    The Disillusionist,

    Don't kid yourself. So few local kids get into BYU now that Ute fans in my neighborhood are about the same number as BYU fans. BYU fans may be spread all over the nation, but the U is rapidly becoming the school of choice throughout Utah.

  • phoenix Gilbert, AZ
    April 21, 2011 8:46 p.m.

    "That possibility of 20 M extra people in the Pac 12 covered west may add a premium."

    You're only kidding yourself if you think Idaho, Montana, Wyoming and New Mexico are PAC 12 country.

    As I said before, a more realistic population base for the PAC 12 is less than 50 million -- California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and to some extent, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, and Hawaii.

    There is no premium for the PAC 12 when you consider that most of the games in the PAC 12 occur after the Eastern and Central time zones have tuned out, so there's very little spillover of fans from those areas watching PAC 12 games, while there's a lot of spillover from PAC 12 country watching games in the SEC, Big Ten, and Big 12.

  • The Disillusionist Alexandria, VA
    April 21, 2011 7:04 p.m.

    Re: utesovertide

    How many of those "20 M extra people" (a specious number) do you think actually care about the Pac 10.1.1beta, let alone the U of U?

    How many people outside of Salt Lake County actually care about the U of U?

    Not a lot.

  • eagle Provo, UT
    April 21, 2011 7:00 p.m.

    I just love how the PAC-12 logo has Utah located in about Cedar City and CU in Pueblo...

  • utesovertide Salt Lake City, UT
    April 21, 2011 5:10 p.m.

    @Phoenix

    The Missou thing was just to show where the dividing line is. The 100 M estimate was based on the 1/3rd claim by SLCWatch

    But, you piqued my interest and so I went through and actually added up the state populations I want to include and listed them below:

    Arizona6,392,017
    California37,253,956
    Colorado5,029,196
    Hawaii1,360,301
    Idaho1,567,582
    Montana989,415
    Nevada2,700,551
    New Mexico2,059,179
    Oregon3,831,07
    Utah2,763,885
    Washington6,724,540
    Wyoming563,626

    Grand total: 71.5 Million people in the Western states. Take the total US population (313 M), subtract 71.5, and you have 214.5. Divide that by 5 (number of large leagues covering non-western population), and you have an average of 48.3 M people per league. That possibility of 20 M extra people in the Pac 12 covered west may add a premium.

    @Duckhunter

    Lately, you have been totally downing the Utes. I don't know what they did to you lately, but seriously, get real.

  • jedro Idaho Falls, ID
    April 21, 2011 4:01 p.m.

    I hear that Versus and the mtn are both really interested.

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    April 21, 2011 3:00 p.m.

    @phoenix

    There is some pac10 interest in the east simply because some people are simply fans of college football. I watch all sorts of college football including teams from back east simply because I like it.

    But you are absolutely correct that outside of the pac10 footprint the interest isn't great. I'm not even sure the state of Utah will watch that much pac10 football. Obviously utah fans will watch their games, and a few BYU fans will watch utah games in the hope they will be able to see them lose, but for the most part college football fans in Utah will watch BYU games much more than any pac10 games and fans of the other pac10 schools will mostly watch their team and that is it.

    Not many people will care to watch utah play washington st. or any other mediocre pac10 team. Next to no one but fans of those 2 schools will watch that game and that isn't very many people at all. There are maybe 3 team in the pac10 that anyone but fans of their school will care to watch and utah isn't one of them.

  • phoenix Gilbert, AZ
    April 21, 2011 2:28 p.m.

    utesovertide

    Your population comparison includes one serious flaw; west of Plato, MO puts Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Arkansas, Missouri, Louisiana, Iowa and Minnesota into the mix of "western" states -- those are all Big 12, Big Ten and SEC dominated states. It's doubtful there's any significant interest in any of those states for PAC 12 football and they certainly wouldn't be included in the marketing footprint which advertisers will be looking at.

    A more realistic population base for the PAC 12 is less than 50 million -- California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and to some extent, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, and Hawaii.

  • utesovertide Salt Lake City, UT
    April 21, 2011 1:25 p.m.

    @SLCWatch

    "The SEC, Big 12, ACC are in the half of the country with 2/3's of the population."

    That is kind of true, although it is shifting. According to the latest census in 2010, the population is divided evenly on the east and west in Plato, MO. The west outgrew the east by 13.8%. If that trend continues, we may see the dividing line of the country move even more west than Missouri.

    The other thing you didn't consider is that while over half to 2/3 of the country lives in East, South, and Midwestern states, there are 5 major conferences that cover that segment of the population.

    There is only one major conference in the west that covers or creates interest to nearly 100 million people, or 12 states (I included Hawaii in that figure because they have a lot of Pac 12 alumns there). That type of 'monopoly' might attract a premium if the deal is done right.

  • DevilishUte Tempe, AZ
    April 21, 2011 1:01 p.m.

    @ Sports Authority and SLCWatch

    Obviously you didn't read my full post, otherwise you wouldn't have felt it necessary to make additional comments. I understood your point in the first place about the time difference. Please re-read my initial comment in its entirety.

    To repeat, I acknowledge that the time difference is and will be a factor in whatever new deal is struck, but it hasn't stopped major networks from being interested in a PAC-12 deal. We'll have to wait and see how lucrative the deal is. One thing for sure is that it will beat what the MTN had to offer.

  • TJ Eagle Mountain, UT
    April 21, 2011 12:10 p.m.

    National media says that Utah and Colorado brought one thing in one sport to the PAC. The ability to play a conference championship in Football. I believe Utah's womens gymnastics is also a positive for the PAC although they compete out of conference more than they do in conference.
    300 Million is dreaming but I do think that the PAC will get between 150 and 200 Million per season. The networks have been overpaying the other conferences according to the experts so the PAC should be able to get a good deal. That is a good chunk of change that Utah will get and hopefully it will be enough to get them close to the level of BYU or at least to the level of the average PAC team.

  • -PSUYB- Scranton, Pennsylvania
    April 21, 2011 12:03 p.m.

    Hedgehog,

    Seriously?
    No matter the timing, the PAC12 will never hold any weight to the Big10 or SEC.
    I cannot believe anyone who lives in Ann Arbor would even dare to argue the point.
    I can guarantee you that the PAC deal will not exceed that of the Big 10 or SEC, because the ratings are not even close, and nationally the PAC does not hold much more respect then the MWC, WAC, or Big East, besides USC and Oregon.

    The PAC network would certainly do well on the West Coast, spreading inland to about Colorado. But back East, the only PAC games anyone watches are the ones played against a BIG 10 or SEC school. So really what does any East Coast network have to gain in signing with the PAC? Nothing.

    I think the PAC deal will end up somewhere between 160-200 million, which is awesome. But It absolutely will not eclipse the Big 10 or SEC tv contract. Any network would be completely insane to pay more for a lesser product.

  • TheSportsAuthority Arlington, VA
    April 21, 2011 11:39 a.m.

    DevilishUte

    You're missing SLCWatch's point. No matter how good a few teams in the PAC 12 may be, the PAC 12 will never be as valuable a television sports property as the SEC, Big Ten and Big 12. It's all about location. Games in the SEC, Big Ten and Big 12 are naturally going to be played/televised earlier in the day, which takes up most of the television time slots when most of the country is watching. By the time when most PAC 12 games are played, in the evening, Pacific Time, the majority of fans in the Eastern and Central time zones have tuned out.

  • SLCWatch Salt Lake City, UT
    April 21, 2011 11:38 a.m.

    DevilishUte
    The Hawaii example was an extreme-No one watches games that start at 2:00 AM

    Yes the PAC 12 has a fan base. The point isn't fan base, talent, great competition or wonderful schools. The point is an TV executives point in out all the time. No one wants to watch games that begin at 10:00 pm on the East coast. 33% of the population is going to bed.

    Again the point is the PAC12 can't be unrealistic and think they can get SEC money for games no one is going to stay up to watch. Yes there is interest, not nationwide (everybody stay up to see Stanford vs Cal) but interest.

    Football can schedule games to come on as East coast games end. But you don't get day long coverage like the east coast. Even avid football fans quit after 6-7 hours in a day.

    The PAC12 will get adaquately compensated to be sure. It's just not going to be more than the SEC as an example.

  • DevilishUte Tempe, AZ
    April 21, 2011 11:09 a.m.

    @SLCWatch

    "Ever wonder why Hawaii games are not broadcast nationwide even when they were 11-0?"

    Hawai'i does not have nearly as large of a fan base as the PAC-12 has. That's the REAL reason, or at least one of the major drivers, that Hawaii games are not and will not ever be broadcast nationally.

    And, yes, the time difference does have an affect on viewership, but that has not stopped many of the national networks from being interested in signing a PAC-12 deal.

  • SLCWatch Salt Lake City, UT
    April 21, 2011 10:27 a.m.

    Ever wonder why Hawaii games are not broadcast nationwide even when they were 11-0?

    An important point to consider if you are a TV executive bidding on contracts with the conferences. The SEC, Big 12, ACC are in the half of the country with 2/3's of the population. People watch TV from 7:00 PM to 10:pm generally. No amount of pizzazz, hoopla or charisma can drag the PAC12 into the right time zone for advertisers for that 2/3's of the country. Hence they will not command the same level of money no matter how much Mr. Scott thinks they should.
    This not an attack on the PAC 12, Utah(for those who think every comment is about them) or quality of competition. It's just what a TV executive has to deal with.

    A PAC 12 Network will work for only 1/3 of the country at most (Don't know the exact amount of population for the Mountain and Pacific time zones so I am over estimating here.) It just won't command the same money.

  • OHBU Columbus, OH
    April 21, 2011 10:04 a.m.

    re: hedgehog

    Don't count on it. What does the PAC have that the B12 doesn't? The Big12 landed a good contract, but it couldn't catch the B10 and SEC. Texas is way bigger, marketing-wise, than USC. The Big 12 got a combined 130M between Fox and ABC/ESPN. They need to clear at least 200M to catch up the the bigger conferences. Is the PAC going to be able to blow the Big 12 out of the water? The championship may give them an edge over the B12, and timing may give them an advantage, but I don't see this higher than 170M...and that's a rosy outlook.

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    April 21, 2011 9:45 a.m.

    'He thinks his conference is worth more than the Big Ten or SEC, but that defies simple math

    OHBU,

    Its not math....it's timing. When the SEC and Big10 renew their contracts they will exceed the PAC12. But as it stands now, the PAC12 will be awarded the largest network contract in the nation.

    Deal with it.

  • OHBU Columbus, OH
    April 21, 2011 8:10 a.m.

    Here's why Scott is crazy with his estimates of PAC-10 values: He thinks his conference is worth more than the Big Ten or SEC, but that defies simple math. Schools in the Big Ten are huge, and their fan bases are huge, and the media markets they occupy are huge. Ohio State is literally twice as big as the University of Utah or USC or Oregon State or Stanford. Likewise, three of the four biggest stadiums in the country are in the Big Ten.

  • IJ Hyrum, Ut
    April 21, 2011 8:09 a.m.

    Why shouldn't the other PAC teams welcome Utah and Colorado. As was pointed out, it gives the PAC a championship game which translates into more moeny.

    I apologize if I don't see an elevation in the quality of the sports, except for the lady Utes gymnastic team. Other than that, I don't see this move helping "The conference of Champions" a great deal.

  • Really??? Kearns, UT
    April 21, 2011 6:48 a.m.

    Is that what the Deseret News has come down to now, just a listing of links to other articles? I miss the real reporting.

  • sammyg Springville, UT
    April 21, 2011 2:24 a.m.

    In light of this new information the Mtn. retracts its earlier bid and now bids $10...

  • El Chango Supremo Rexburg, ID
    April 20, 2011 11:26 p.m.

    Fellow Cougs,
    You're embarrassing! Utah is in a great position in the Pac 12. Get over it!

    BYU is in a great position with independence. Be grateful!

    All you belittling Utah sound like insecure little children. BYU would have jumped at the chance to join the Pac. But, didn't happen. We did, however, get a great deal with ESPN. I'm quite excited!

    Seriously... get over it! Be glad your not Utah State stuck in the WAC.

  • flynn is the coolest Salt Lake City, UT
    April 20, 2011 11:06 p.m.

    Whatever TV deal the PAC gets, it will be better than the Mtn. I tried watching several U games (like ISU) last year and couldn't find it anywhere-in SLC!. Hopefully that will never happen again. I'm assuming Scott overpriced the bid because the PAC wants to be on ESPN.

    What's really crazy is that Texas landed a 300M deal (over 20 years) for one FB game a year (and some basketball games)! The entire PAC plays more than 20 games a year, and they can't land an equivalent annual TV deal? I wonder if ESPN would pay the 300.

  • utesovertide Salt Lake City, UT
    April 20, 2011 11:01 p.m.

    Will you guys leave the Utah State Bubble for a sec and go read the actual blog post by Wilner, including the comments? Most of the comments question Wilner's statement about what Utah and CU bring to the table. On commenter made a good point that without 12 good TV markets, a good Pac 12 Network deal would not be easy to sell. But with 12 TV markets in the top 30, the bidders will likely bring what is needed to the table to buy the rights to network, cable, Pac 12 network, and radio broadcasts.

    $300 M was a pie in the sky request to see if FOX would buy rights to network, cable, and radio rights and burying the chance of a Pac 12 network. I'm sure neither side really expected to see it go through with both sides wanting it to go to open bidding.

    And to those that think the big teams are going to go independent, you haven't been keeping up with what the Pac 12 as a conference plans on doing with their network. I'd like to see USC try to do that on their own.

  • mr. j Cottonwood Hts., Ut
    April 20, 2011 10:41 p.m.

    @mormonute

    i'm talking about Andrew Rich.

  • KamUte South Jordan, UT
    April 20, 2011 10:34 p.m.

    Does Veritas even know anything about sports? Makes this site very unpleasant and must be jealous of anything good that happens to Utah.

    Utah and Colorado don't care at this point whether they bring the value because they are in a great conference and without them, there is no Pac 12 championship game. There's the value proposition. That game alone will bring more revenue to Utah than the MTN network paid per year.

    Question: Would BYU brought more value to the Pac 12? It doesn't matter because they will NEVER be invited.

  • Mormon Ute Kaysville, UT
    April 20, 2011 10:26 p.m.

    mr. j,

    Neither was ours. Chaz Walker has always been a linebacker. I thinky you are confusing him with Brian Blechen.

  • aggieblue Saint George, UT
    April 20, 2011 10:26 p.m.

    Pac 10 Non BCS games last year
    New Mexico
    Portland State
    Sacramento State
    BYU
    Hawaii
    TCU
    Boise State
    Northern Arizona
    Toledo
    Citadel
    UC Davis
    Houston
    Montana State
    SMU

    The conferences represented here are Big Sky, Pac West, USA, WAC

    The Pac 10 lost three of those games, want to try and guess which ones.

    The TV deal will depend on how well the pac commissioner can convince the bidders that they will be a strong conference and able to win those games outside their friendly home confines. Michigan and Appalacian State (remember that one) Utah beat mich that year also, but the App state win took some glitter off the ute win.

    Looks like a tough sell.

    The article doesn't give Utah and Colorado much value to bring to the table.
    either, perhaps this is why the Pac 12 has determined to not give a full share right away.

    When USC goes independent who will they be able to bring into the conference to keep a championship game. Boise State (small market)BYU(not interested, too much to loose). The future is very uncertain for the Pac 12.

  • Mormon Ute Kaysville, UT
    April 20, 2011 10:23 p.m.

    belgie,

    Most of us are hoping Comcast/NBC doesn't win the bid.

  • Mormon Ute Kaysville, UT
    April 20, 2011 10:18 p.m.

    BYUCOLORADO,

    You and John Wilner are both missing one very important point. Without two more teams the PAC-10 wouldn't have a championship game, which stands to be a big draw even before the new TV deal gets done. Regardless of added value as far as TV market goes, Utah and Colorado made that possible. Most of us Ute fans are well aware we weren't first pick, but that doesn't mean we aren't happy to be there.

  • cooperpug Salt Lake City, UT
    April 20, 2011 10:16 p.m.

    CougFaninTX how does the comment "Prediction: Utes played in more BCS games the past 10 years out of the MWC than they will in the next 10 years out of the PAC" reflect on BYU? Every Cougar fan on here posting how aweful the Utes will be in PAC-12 rips their own team. Do you honestly think BYU would fair any better overall year in and year out considering BYU hasn't gone to the BCS once playing MWC competition? I hope both schools do well both as an indpenedent and in the PAC-12. The MWC was HORRIBLE period. Both schools are better off and will actually have meaningul competition win or lose.

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    April 20, 2011 9:48 p.m.

    I think scott purposely asked for far more than he knew FOX was willing to pay so that it would open up the contract for bidding. I still think he overestimates the value of the pac but to be honest with you even if he thinks it's worth $220 mil and they only wind up getting $180 mil it is still a huge bundle of cash.

  • pocyUte Pocatello, ID
    April 20, 2011 9:42 p.m.

    Realbass

    Your comments continue to show your ignorance regarding sports, your prejudice against the University of Utah, or your insecurity regarding their success.

  • CougFaninTX Frisco, TX
    April 20, 2011 9:41 p.m.

    hedgie, can you remind me, how much of the PAC loot do the Utes get next year and the year after? By 2013, USC will be independent, and the loot will dwindle.

    Prediction: Utes played in more BCS games the past 10 years out of the MWC than they will in the next 10 years out of the PAC.

  • Real Bass Idaho Falls, ID
    April 20, 2011 9:17 p.m.

    Did Scott price themselves out of the market? This league isn't that good.

  • Veritas Aequitas Fruit Heights, UT
    April 20, 2011 8:38 p.m.

    Serious?

    Fox turned down a $300 million deal to show the Utah vs. Colorado game?

    Come on, what were they thinking???

    I would have paid $15 for fifty yards seats on the first 10 rows for that brawl... (on a Thursday, if there were no new episodes of The Office on that particular Thursday)....

    Not a Friday or Saturday, though...

    I have things to do then....

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    April 20, 2011 8:08 p.m.

    As I recall, Colorado was invited and Larry hoped the Big-12 would implode and they'd suddenly be the PAC 16....(SEC wannabe's). When that didn't happen, well, they still needed another team to get to be the "PAC 12" so then Utah was the last eligible team to invite. It took Utah about 1/5th of a second to accept. (I don't blame them for that.) I guess they thought they could win the PAC 12 since that league seems to be floundering at present and they no doubt wanted to get away from Air Force, TCU and Boise State because it would be too embarrassing to lose to them each year. Utah showed their true strength last year when they met Notre Dame. Arizona has never played in the Rose Bowl and we have no reason to believe Utah is any better than them; Colorado isn't either, for that matter.

    So yes, Utah was a needed commidity to equal 12 schools; they bring nothing else except tied for smallest stadium in the conference. Cheer now, weep later, Utes!

  • mussingaround Palo Alto, CA
    April 20, 2011 6:44 p.m.

    "the PAC12 deal will be the biggest in the Nation. bigger than the SEC, BIG12 or Big10"

    bwahahaha!

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    April 20, 2011 6:24 p.m.

    'the PAC deal will still be a lot better than The MTN deal a.k.a. the deal that killed the MWC.'

    kewgfan,

    nooo, the PAC12 deal will be the biggest in the Nation. bigger than the SEC, BIG12 or Big10.

    Actually nothing is even close to what the PAC12 will bring in.

  • CougFaninTX Frisco, TX
    April 20, 2011 6:15 p.m.

    The only thing Utes and Buffs bring to the PAC is the opportunity for a conference championship game, that neither of them will likely be in. If it weren't for the championship game, neither would have received an invite.

    USC and Texas will be independent within a couple of years. When USC goes independent, the PAC deal will lose 25 - 30% of it's value. But don't get me wrong, the PAC deal will still be a lot better than The MTN deal a.k.a. the deal that killed the MWC.

  • WhatsInItForMe Orem, Utah
    April 20, 2011 5:34 p.m.

    BYU's deal with ESPN is looking better all the time!

    Texas has already shown signs of envy.

  • Veritas Aequitas Fruit Heights, UT
    April 20, 2011 5:33 p.m.

    I'm moving to Ann Arbor....

    Cheaper housing...

  • WhatsInItForMe Orem, Utah
    April 20, 2011 5:33 p.m.

    @ sid 6.7 ... Has ANYONE seen Obama's birth certificate?

    If he has one and is withholding it to make his opponents look dumb, then he's pretty smart. If he doesn't have one, then well...

    @ everyone else...

    The Pac-10's recent football follies and failures are coming back to bite them. Their pickup of a non-AQ school and another down-and-out BCS football school didn't help their image one bit. Losing out on Texas really showed the West Coast Pac-?? their place.

    So much for all those millions the Utes were counting on.

    An open market means they'll have to settle for a lesser deal from somewhere else. And, where might that be? I doubt ESPN is licking their chops.

    Maybe the conference can start winning their way back into favor, now that the mighty MWC has been basically disbanded---you know, the conference that's had a winning record over the Pac-10 for some years now!

  • mr. j Cottonwood Hts., Ut
    April 20, 2011 5:10 p.m.

    I'm glad my teams leading tackler wasn't a free safety last year...

  • gizmo33 St. George, Utah
    April 20, 2011 4:59 p.m.

    doesnt really matter where the Pac 12 goes I dont have any interest in watching them play there are so many college teams out there it is impossible to have it come down to 2 seperate teams at the end of the season and have it come down to winner take all. and as far as the teams that get picked for the bowl games thats another nightmare its not how good they played its based on who likes which school the NCAA needs to be thrown out the window and its time for a change so that a college can get into a bowl game based on their winning record and not how well liked they are.

  • Veritas Aequitas Fruit Heights, UT
    April 20, 2011 4:42 p.m.

    Ibleedcrimson | 3:30 p.m.
    Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Veritas Aequitas

    "For someone without a horse in the race, you sure spend a lot of time pointing out the potential negatives of Utah and CU joining the PAC, well I mean paraphasing and cutting and posting the peices that support your agenda."
    ===
    I have and "Agenda"?

    LOL!!!

    What makes you think I have no horse in the race?

    I have followed Utah basketball and football, have had many friends and relatives and play and coach there, have been too many games, and will probably attend more games than many Ute Posters.

    Speaking of horses, it's not that I have no horse, it's just that I like to point out the horse fertilizer that over-zealous, arrogant Utah fans that live in hedges and bleed crimson constantly post (they never cut and paste, because that would show they read... and heaven forbid someone read the articles, so I'm very sorry if I bring the facts to you...)
    ===

    Wallbanger | 4:06 p.m.

    Why do Utah fans believe if you enjoy BYU sports, you are forbidden to have and opinion, or enjoy UofU sports (or the lack thereof)?

  • pocyUte Pocatello, ID
    April 20, 2011 4:37 p.m.

    Holy cow,

    Lot's of ignorant rhetoric on the board. Not signing with Fox was the first step to getting the deal on the open market, which is what Scott said would happen all along.

    The statement that Utah and Colorado don't increase the value of the contract is a little short sighted, and it has already payed off in millions of dollars to the Pac-12 with just the addition of next year's championship game. Remember the game that wouldn't have been possible without the addition of Utah and Colorado.

    It AMAZES me the lengths that BYU trolls go through to tear down Utah going to the Pac-12. We've hear everything from Utah will be bottom feeders, to they were the Pac-12's booby prize, to the fan's will stop going, won't ever get a BCS bid, to now, Utah adds nothing to the Pac-12 t.v. deal.

    Hey trolls, get over it, Utah is in the Pac-12.

  • belgie Tualatin, OR
    April 20, 2011 4:32 p.m.

    It's funny that the Utah sports are going to continue to be broadcast on Versus.

  • Laser Iowa City, IA
    April 20, 2011 4:15 p.m.

    From the article
    "Have to say, in all my conversations with industry analysts and sources familiar with the negotiations, I have not once heard anyone say: Utah and Colorado have helped raise the price.

    Not once."

    Utah and Colorado are anchors not sails. With USC on probation, not a lot of interest in the PAC 12.

    Re; wallbanger- You may want to pose the same question the hedgehog, what's his fixation with BYU?

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    April 20, 2011 4:10 p.m.

    Wilner isn't stating anything everyone, except for deluded ute fans, didn't already know. Of course utah adds no value to the pac10 other than being a 12th team so they can have a championship game. There is little in the way of a fanbase and outside of utah and one lonely ann arbor basement utah fans are no existant.

    But the truth is utah fans don't need to care about that. They got in and they are going to (eventually) get a peice of whatever pie the pac10 gets. If I was a utah fan I wouldn't care about the facts either other than the logo on the field.

  • Wallbanger Spanish Fork, UT
    April 20, 2011 4:06 p.m.

    Can someone please explain to me as to why so many byU fans are so interested and concerned with the Utes future? We'll be fine, and thanks for your concern. And where is sammyg? I'm absolutely shocked he hasn't commented on here yet. I'm a little bit worried about him.

  • The Disillusionist Alexandria, VA
    April 20, 2011 3:45 p.m.

    Re: hedgehog

    "250 million per sounds just about right...."

    Larry Scott has interlarded his conference with two schools that add no aggregate market value. So, not really.

    "It's great to be a UTE!!!"

    One wonders how true this can be if you have to keep telling yourself that.

  • Making Sense Herriman, UT
    April 20, 2011 3:35 p.m.

    Ahh, Hedgehog it's great to see you came out of your hole long enough to see your own shadow. Will be another several weeks of bitter comments.

    It'll be interesting how the pac-12 plays out this year with the expected adjustment to the divisions. Sad to see Colorado in the mix as they seemed to be invited for the Denver market rather than the product they market in their athletic department.

  • Ibleedcrimson Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 20, 2011 3:30 p.m.

    Veritas Aequitas

    For someone without a horse in the race, you sure spend a lot of time pointing out the potential negatives of Utah and CU joining the PAC, well I mean paraphasing and cutting and posting the peices that support your agenda.

  • Ibleedcrimson Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 20, 2011 3:26 p.m.

    Interesting comments on the San Jose Mercury article forums. I know one article isn't imperical proof, but I'd say most PAC-10 fans, at least those in NoCal are very supportive of CU and the UofU joing the PAC and recognize they bring value. What a breath of fresh air to read.

  • PAC man Anaheim, CA
    April 20, 2011 3:26 p.m.

    hedgehog

    "250 million per sounds just about right...."

    Is that microbes per liter of that black swamp water in Michigan?

    Impressive.

  • BYUCOLORADO Castle Rock, CO
    April 20, 2011 3:22 p.m.

    continued . . .

    BYU and Utah were demanding the lions share of viewers in the MWC yet getting an equal cut. However, I think Utah and Colorado (although Colorado has a big enough market to do it when they are playing well) won't be able to bring in 20million each of value and will seem like a leech instead of a contributor.

    There will be conference realignment issues again in about 5 years I bet. The bigger revenue earners will not want to support the smaller PAC12 schools any longer (and the same with other conferences).

  • BYUCOLORADO Castle Rock, CO
    April 20, 2011 3:19 p.m.

    Interesting part in the negotiations article about doubts as to whether Utah and Colorado even bring in an additional 40 million of value. The writer thinks that the PAC10 would have likely brought in 240 million without Utah and Colorado and questions whether it was a good idea to bring them in. I would have to agree. I live in Colorado and there aren't many watching Buffs games (only in Boulder because of years of futility). And Utah is a small market with MANY alums of the U still residing in the area. It is definitely a commuter, local school without any national following. I'd be interested to see the PAC12's commissioner explain why other teams piece of the pie is getting diluted.

    I think they were bummed that they had to go for their 5th and 6th choices for teams (and markets) and had to pull the trigger because they didn't want to look foolish not having landed a championship game. I see more upheaval in future years when USC and the other powers are tired of sharing their money with Utah and Colorado (similar to how the MWC was with BYU and Utah).

  • sid 6.7 Holladay, UT
    April 20, 2011 3:16 p.m.

    Of course FOX turned the deal down. They are too busy trying to prove President Obama dose not have a US Birth Certificate.

  • Veritas Aequitas Fruit Heights, UT
    April 20, 2011 3:08 p.m.

    Ann...

    "Great to be a Ute!!!"

    Why?

    The respect factor? "Athletic prowess"? Or just the ability to ride everyone's coattails?
    ===

    "Have to say, in all my conversations with industry analysts and sources familiar with the negotiations, I have not once heard anyone say: Utah and Colorado have helped raise the price.

    Not once....

    ...The question remains and I think its an important question :

    Will Utah and Colorado increase the leagues revenue TV revenue enough to make a 1/12th split of the pot greater than a 1/10th split of the pot.

    In other words: If the conference could get $200 million annually with 10 teams (for example), will it get $240.1 million with 12 teams.

    Are Utah and Colorado, and the inventory/programming/cable households they bring, worth an extra $40.1 million?

    Many industry analysts Ive talked to are highly skeptical about the value-added that Colorado and Utah bring to the table. They believe the per-school split would have been greater without expansion."

    ===

    Wow-- That must have left a mark...

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    April 20, 2011 2:44 p.m.

    250 million per sounds just about right....

    It's great to be a UTE!!!

  • williary Kearns, UT
    April 20, 2011 2:35 p.m.

    Guys, the blog is a list of returning tacklers for each team. Or possible replacements for a team's returning tackler who is not returning. That's it. Not a list of who will be the best tacklers next year.

    Seeing as Walker was the leading tackler last year for Utah, he returns this year, and Utah will play in the Pac-12 this year, what doesn't make sense about that?

    I wish the Y would start teaching reading comprehension.

  • Uteanymous Salt Lake City, Utah
    April 20, 2011 2:18 p.m.

    Be nice.

    They stamped "PAC 10.1.1beta Certified Beef" on his forehead and now he's an elite player.

  • Where's Stockton ??? Bowling Green, OH
    April 20, 2011 1:30 p.m.

    Walker's never played a Single down as a PAC player. Either DNews's Dirk Farcer or ESPN"s Ted Miller are way too far ahead of themselves. Utah's rowboat hasn't left the dock yet.