| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
stever
Joined: 16 Nov 2004
Posts: 6918
Location: https://womensbasketballdaily.net
Back to top |
|
FS02
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 9699
Location: Husky (west coast) Country
Back to top |
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11146
Back to top |
 Posted: 04/07/14 9:39 am ::: |
Reply  |
|
There aren't a lot of jobs that would tempt Graves, I don't think, but if Oregon is willing to invest, then that would be one of them.
And speaking of investment, one of the keys that usually doesn't get publicized is assistant salaries. Note that Kentucky was paying $185,000 for an assistant -- it's one thing to pay the head coach $500,000, say, but if his assistants are all getting $70,000, then that's an issue.
But Oregon has great facilities, it's within Graves' recruiting area, and if they're willing to pony up, it wouldn't be a surprise to see him in Eugene.
If so, the Pac-12 just got even better. Cori Close has a great recruiting class coming in at UCLA; Lindsay Gottlieb has two McDonald's all-Americans at Cal; Cynthia Cooper is on the rise at USC; Oregon State has a very good coach; Washington has a very good head coach, great facilities and a young star (Kelsey Plum); and Stanford is still Stanford.
_________________
Oṃ TÄre TuttÄre Ture SvÄhÄ
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7841
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 10:34 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
There aren't a lot of jobs that would tempt Graves, I don't think, but if Oregon is willing to invest, then that would be one of them.
And speaking of investment, one of the keys that usually doesn't get publicized is assistant salaries. Note that Kentucky was paying $185,000 for an assistant -- it's one thing to pay the head coach $500,000, say, but if his assistants are all getting $70,000, then that's an issue.
But Oregon has great facilities, it's within Graves' recruiting area, and if they're willing to pony up, it wouldn't be a surprise to see him in Eugene.
If so, the Pac-12 just got even better. Cori Close has a great recruiting class coming in at UCLA; Lindsay Gottlieb has two McDonald's all-Americans at Cal; Cynthia Cooper is on the rise at USC; Oregon State has a very good coach; Washington has a very good head coach, great facilities and a young star (Kelsey Plum); and Stanford is still Stanford. |
It would be nice to see the Pac-12 be somebody besides just Stanford. Of course it would be nice if somehow we out here in the ESPN-controlled east could actually SEE those teams, too. We get overdosed on UConn and the ACC here in northern VA because I guess they think that's all we care about…..since that's all THEY care about!  Oh well, if I get lucky maybe JMU will schedule UCLA again and I can see them live…..I dunno, though, JMU beat them last fall!
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
|
dtsnms
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 18815
Back to top |
|
Phil
Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 1273
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 11:40 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
There aren't a lot of jobs that would tempt Graves, I don't think, but if Oregon is willing to invest, then that would be one of them.
And speaking of investment, one of the keys that usually doesn't get publicized is assistant salaries. Note that Kentucky was paying $185,000 for an assistant -- it's one thing to pay the head coach $500,000, say, but if his assistants are all getting $70,000, then that's an issue.
But Oregon has great facilities, it's within Graves' recruiting area, and if they're willing to pony up, it wouldn't be a surprise to see him in Eugene.
If so, the Pac-12 just got even better. Cori Close has a great recruiting class coming in at UCLA; Lindsay Gottlieb has two McDonald's all-Americans at Cal; Cynthia Cooper is on the rise at USC; Oregon State has a very good coach; Washington has a very good head coach, great facilities and a young star (Kelsey Plum); and Stanford is still Stanford. |
I had this exact conversation with a Middle Tennessee fan last night. It used to be the Pac 12 was two teams, always Stanford, plus either AZ State or Cal, but rarely both.
I'm a big fan of Neighbors, so expect a lot from UW. I don't follow what's going on at Wash State, but they used to be a bottom feeder and this year look very good. Cal looks solid and UCLA on the rise. I sat in on a presentation by Close and was impressed.
If Graves goes to Oregon and Oregon State can keep it up, they will be one of the top conferences.
|
|
Phil
Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 1273
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 11:45 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| dtsnms wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
It would be nice to see the Pac-12 be somebody besides just Stanford. Of course it would be nice if somehow we out here in the ESPN-controlled east could actually SEE those teams, too. We get overdosed on UConn and the ACC here in northern VA because I guess they think that's all we care about…..since that's all THEY care about! Oh well, if I get lucky maybe JMU will schedule UCLA again and I can see them live…..I dunno, though, JMU beat them last fall! |
That's not ESPN's fault these days. It's the PAC's own fault by limiting telecasts of its games to the PAC Network, which almost no one in the East (and many people in the West) don't get.
Heck, it's the same for football. Two years ago people in the East could watch lots of PAC football games on Fox Regional sports networks. There was at least one late (like 10:30 pm EST) game every week. Now those are all on the PAC network so few people in the East get to see them.
Get ready to see fewer games as more of them get shifted to conference-specific networks. The SEC network is the next in line. If you don't get the SEC network on your cable or satellite system, a lot of games you see today will be off limits.
Five year from now, you'll probably have to subscribe to the cable or internet network of the conferences you want to watch, or be limited to only seeing the most popular teams on ESPN. |
EXACTLY! I've been on my soapbox about Pac 12 Network failing to sign a deal with Directv all season. Totally a huge mistake on their part. |
ESPN isn't responsible for the time zone challenge. A 7 pm PST means a 10 pm east coast start, a game ending at midnight. I'll stay up for something special, like UW- Stanford, but not much else.
I was only vaguely aware of the PAC 12 limitations, but that squares with my recollection - they are shooting themselves in the foot, and the blame isn't necessarily ESPN.
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 12:13 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Phil wrote: |
| dtsnms wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
It would be nice to see the Pac-12 be somebody besides just Stanford. Of course it would be nice if somehow we out here in the ESPN-controlled east could actually SEE those teams, too. We get overdosed on UConn and the ACC here in northern VA because I guess they think that's all we care about…..since that's all THEY care about! Oh well, if I get lucky maybe JMU will schedule UCLA again and I can see them live…..I dunno, though, JMU beat them last fall! |
That's not ESPN's fault these days. It's the PAC's own fault by limiting telecasts of its games to the PAC Network, which almost no one in the East (and many people in the West) don't get.
Heck, it's the same for football. Two years ago people in the East could watch lots of PAC football games on Fox Regional sports networks. There was at least one late (like 10:30 pm EST) game every week. Now those are all on the PAC network so few people in the East get to see them.
Get ready to see fewer games as more of them get shifted to conference-specific networks. The SEC network is the next in line. If you don't get the SEC network on your cable or satellite system, a lot of games you see today will be off limits.
Five year from now, you'll probably have to subscribe to the cable or internet network of the conferences you want to watch, or be limited to only seeing the most popular teams on ESPN. |
EXACTLY! I've been on my soapbox about Pac 12 Network failing to sign a deal with Directv all season. Totally a huge mistake on their part. |
ESPN isn't responsible for the time zone challenge. A 7 pm PST means a 10 pm east coast start, a game ending at midnight. I'll stay up for something special, like UW- Stanford, but not much else.
I was only vaguely aware of the PAC 12 limitations, but that squares with my recollection - they are shooting themselves in the foot, and the blame isn't necessarily ESPN. |
Plus today, there are so many "sports networks" that are in dire need of things. I mean, on DirecTV I now have Fox Sports, Fox Sports 1, CBSSports Network, NBCSports Network...they all need good programming in the worst way. There are plenty of options to get the Pac-12 some additional exposure nationwide.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 12:22 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| Phil wrote: |
| dtsnms wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
It would be nice to see the Pac-12 be somebody besides just Stanford. Of course it would be nice if somehow we out here in the ESPN-controlled east could actually SEE those teams, too. We get overdosed on UConn and the ACC here in northern VA because I guess they think that's all we care about…..since that's all THEY care about! Oh well, if I get lucky maybe JMU will schedule UCLA again and I can see them live…..I dunno, though, JMU beat them last fall! |
That's not ESPN's fault these days. It's the PAC's own fault by limiting telecasts of its games to the PAC Network, which almost no one in the East (and many people in the West) don't get.
Heck, it's the same for football. Two years ago people in the East could watch lots of PAC football games on Fox Regional sports networks. There was at least one late (like 10:30 pm EST) game every week. Now those are all on the PAC network so few people in the East get to see them.
Get ready to see fewer games as more of them get shifted to conference-specific networks. The SEC network is the next in line. If you don't get the SEC network on your cable or satellite system, a lot of games you see today will be off limits.
Five year from now, you'll probably have to subscribe to the cable or internet network of the conferences you want to watch, or be limited to only seeing the most popular teams on ESPN. |
EXACTLY! I've been on my soapbox about Pac 12 Network failing to sign a deal with Directv all season. Totally a huge mistake on their part. |
ESPN isn't responsible for the time zone challenge. A 7 pm PST means a 10 pm east coast start, a game ending at midnight. I'll stay up for something special, like UW- Stanford, but not much else.
I was only vaguely aware of the PAC 12 limitations, but that squares with my recollection - they are shooting themselves in the foot, and the blame isn't necessarily ESPN. |
Plus today, there are so many "sports networks" that are in dire need of things. I mean, on DirecTV I now have Fox Sports, Fox Sports 1, CBSSports Network, NBCSports Network...they all need good programming in the worst way. There are plenty of options to get the Pac-12 some additional exposure nationwide. |
You miss the point. Certainly there are plenty of places the PAC COULD have its games televised, but that's not its business model. If it did that, it would diminish the value of its own network. It has chosen to create a private network and to keep all but a small number of showcase games on that network. So it's by the PAC's choice that those games will not be shown on regional networks or CBSSN, or FoxSports2, or the like. They want you to demand that your cable company pick them up and pay them a fee to carry the PAC network. They want enough people to demand it so that they can be paid for the millions of people that don't want it, aren't going to watch it, but get stuck paying for it anyhow. That's where the money is. If you can watch enough of their games on NBC Sports Network, you won't do that.
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 12:42 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| Phil wrote: |
| dtsnms wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
It would be nice to see the Pac-12 be somebody besides just Stanford. Of course it would be nice if somehow we out here in the ESPN-controlled east could actually SEE those teams, too. We get overdosed on UConn and the ACC here in northern VA because I guess they think that's all we care about…..since that's all THEY care about! Oh well, if I get lucky maybe JMU will schedule UCLA again and I can see them live…..I dunno, though, JMU beat them last fall! |
That's not ESPN's fault these days. It's the PAC's own fault by limiting telecasts of its games to the PAC Network, which almost no one in the East (and many people in the West) don't get.
Heck, it's the same for football. Two years ago people in the East could watch lots of PAC football games on Fox Regional sports networks. There was at least one late (like 10:30 pm EST) game every week. Now those are all on the PAC network so few people in the East get to see them.
Get ready to see fewer games as more of them get shifted to conference-specific networks. The SEC network is the next in line. If you don't get the SEC network on your cable or satellite system, a lot of games you see today will be off limits.
Five year from now, you'll probably have to subscribe to the cable or internet network of the conferences you want to watch, or be limited to only seeing the most popular teams on ESPN. |
EXACTLY! I've been on my soapbox about Pac 12 Network failing to sign a deal with Directv all season. Totally a huge mistake on their part. |
ESPN isn't responsible for the time zone challenge. A 7 pm PST means a 10 pm east coast start, a game ending at midnight. I'll stay up for something special, like UW- Stanford, but not much else.
I was only vaguely aware of the PAC 12 limitations, but that squares with my recollection - they are shooting themselves in the foot, and the blame isn't necessarily ESPN. |
Plus today, there are so many "sports networks" that are in dire need of things. I mean, on DirecTV I now have Fox Sports, Fox Sports 1, CBSSports Network, NBCSports Network...they all need good programming in the worst way. There are plenty of options to get the Pac-12 some additional exposure nationwide. |
You miss the point. Certainly there are plenty of places the PAC COULD have its games televised, but that's not its business model. If it did that, it would diminish the value of its own network. It has chosen to create a private network and to keep all but a small number of showcase games on that network. So it's by the PAC's choice that those games will not be shown on regional networks or CBSSN, or FoxSports2, or the like. They want you to demand that your cable company pick them up and pay them a fee to carry the PAC network. They want enough people to demand it so that they can be paid for the millions of people that don't want it, aren't going to watch it, but get stuck paying for it anyhow. That's where the money is. If you can watch enough of their games on NBC Sports Network, you won't do that. |
No, I didn't miss any point. As someone who is a fan of the Big Ten, I know all about a conference network and the value it can create for the conference. The Big Ten has found a way to effectively broadcast games on its' own network while still having very good deals with ESPN and other networks.
It seems pretty obvious that the Pac-12 has struggled to strong arm the cable/satellite TV companies into adding them to their lineup. If they can showcase some premier events on another outlet, they could potentially then try to force the hand again.
There problem will be the increased competition as the SEC Network gets ready to kick off as I think there will be much more interest in adding them to the list of channels as opposed to the Pac-12 Network.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 1:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| purduefanatic wrote: |
No, I didn't miss any point. As someone who is a fan of the Big Ten, I know all about a conference network and the value it can create for the conference. The Big Ten has found a way to effectively broadcast games on its' own network while still having very good deals with ESPN and other networks.
|
What deals would those be? They got some showcase games on ESPN. And otherwise we got to see them on the BTN. What Big 10 WBB games were broadcast anywhere else?
And most of us get the BTN because it was the first. I think it's going to be very interesting to see what DirecTV does both with the SEC Network, and with the BTN when the contract comes up for renewal this year. DirecTV found with the Longhorn network and the PAC network that the refusal to force all subscribers to pay for something only a small portion want (at the very high prices these sports networks demand) was met with a collective yawn by its customers and in their estimation they lost fewer than they would lose by jacking up rates.
They want all of these specialty sports networks to move to a subscription basis. ESPN might be able to use its strength with its core channels to leverage systems to carry the SEC network. The BTN has the advantage of already being carried. But all of these are prime candidates for a la carte treatment, and will probably end up there sooner rather than later. The SEC and BTN negotiations will be interesting to watch.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7841
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 1:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| purduefanatic wrote: |
No, I didn't miss any point. As someone who is a fan of the Big Ten, I know all about a conference network and the value it can create for the conference. The Big Ten has found a way to effectively broadcast games on its' own network while still having very good deals with ESPN and other networks.
|
What deals would those be? They got some showcase games on ESPN. And otherwise we got to see them on the BTN. What Big 10 WBB games were broadcast anywhere else?
|
Didn't realize this was suddenly just limited to WBB...however, that said, there were a few B1G WBB games on ESPN and ESPN2. My comment had to do with several B1G FB and MBB games are on ABC, ESPN, CBS, etc. THAT is where the money is...not WBB games.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 2:00 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| purduefanatic wrote: |
No, I didn't miss any point. As someone who is a fan of the Big Ten, I know all about a conference network and the value it can create for the conference. The Big Ten has found a way to effectively broadcast games on its' own network while still having very good deals with ESPN and other networks.
|
What deals would those be? They got some showcase games on ESPN. And otherwise we got to see them on the BTN. What Big 10 WBB games were broadcast anywhere else?
|
Didn't realize this was suddenly just limited to WBB...however, that said, there were a few B1G WBB games on ESPN and ESPN2. My comment had to do with several B1G FB and MBB games are on ABC, ESPN, CBS, etc. THAT is where the money is...not WBB games. |
I understand about football. Most prime B10 football games remain on ESPN/ABC. But as with most things, football is a different animal with different economics, and it is not the major content or revenue driver for conference TV networks. But for the rest of the sports, "few" is the operative word. There are a handful of major games on prime time ESPN, and the rest are locked up on the conference network.
|
|
CalwbbFan
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 1474
Back to top |
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 3:36 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I have dish, which does get P12. But it doesn't have the deal with ESPN to get ESPN3. Some you win, some you lose. My only choices are dish or directtv. As Art says, I'm sure it's all about the $. But can be frustrating when your choices are limited.
|
|
FS02
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 9699
Location: Husky (west coast) Country
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 4:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I believe they'd like games to be seen in the east, but it's not the primary factor. In most sports, Pac 12 schools get very few athletes from anywhere east of Denver. Its most important to get exposure in the local area so that players' friends and family can see the games and kids don't leave for the east coast. (And of course, to make $$)
_________________
@dtmears2
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 4:13 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| FS02 wrote: |
| I believe they'd like games to be seen in the east, but it's not the primary factor. In most sports, Pac 12 schools get very few athletes from anywhere east of Denver. Its most important to get exposure in the local area so that players' friends and family can see the games and kids don't leave for the east coast. (And of course, to make $$) |
The Pac-12 Network exists so athletes' friends and families can see games? Pretty sure it exists to get more exposure for the schools and conference. Seeing as people "east of Denver" don't get to see much about the Pac-12 in general, it is vital to get into the living rooms of those people in order to grow the conference.
|
|
FS02
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 9699
Location: Husky (west coast) Country
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 6:08 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| FS02 wrote: |
| I believe they'd like games to be seen in the east, but it's not the primary factor. In most sports, Pac 12 schools get very few athletes from anywhere east of Denver. Its most important to get exposure in the local area so that players' friends and family can see the games and kids don't leave for the east coast. (And of course, to make $$) |
The Pac-12 Network exists so athletes' friends and families can see games? Pretty sure it exists to get more exposure for the schools and conference. Seeing as people "east of Denver" don't get to see much about the Pac-12 in general, it is vital to get into the living rooms of those people in order to grow the conference. |
But why does it need to "grow"? And isn't making more money growing?
_________________
@dtmears2
|
|
Norcalnick
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 22
Location: United States
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 7:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I think those criticizing the Pac-12 TV contract are a bit off base. The pac-12 network exists for games not picked up by larger carriers. Bigger games get on ESPN. The problem is that ESPN has no interest televising a pac-12 game that doesn't involve Stanford. You can blame that in the rest if the conference for not having consistently elite programs, or on ESPN for ignoring WBB teams beyond Stanford, UConn, Notre Dame and Tennessee.
The Pac-12 network has been a godsend for me as a Cal fan. I went from having maybe 5 games on TV a year to having 25. ESpN won't be airing more WBB games until the viewing public starts tuning in.
|
|
Nixtreefan
Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2539
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 9:02 pm ::: Agree |
Reply |
|
| The Pac 12 network really has nothing to do with ESPN etc, the problem they have with DirecTV is individual and all about business nothing to do with sports. I love having the games wish I could get the same from all over the country but again it is a business.
|
|
lynxmania
Joined: 18 Feb 2011
Posts: 10697
Location: Minnesota
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 9:04 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Oregon Ducks WBB @OregonWBB · 14m
We are happy to announce the seventh head coach in Oregon women's basketball history is Kelly Graves! #GoDucks
_________________
"stormeo don't miss"
|
|
Durantula
Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 5223
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/14 9:10 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Early on it was said that Louisville's assistant was a favorite for the job. I think what we are seeing this year is AD's saying they want a coach with head coaching experience. Assistant coach is just so much tougher to judge because especially in WBB. So far except the two controversial hires of Dykes and Summit the other head coaching jobs are being filled by coaches who are head coaches.
Maybe the hot shot assistants will need to reevaluate their strategy. I see some good assistants being too picky but the big programs seem to want head coaching experience. Take a lower job and make it a winner then you will get many more options.
|
|
|
|
