Dave23

Finally the best of both worlds for us Montana peeps, unless of course you are in University of Montana fan and then not much will help. Go Bobcats!

Having a backup plan and not tying ourselves into a contract before the media deal with solidified is just smart business.

For the record I absolutely hate that field, the only one that is worse is Eastern Washington's which is bright red. But you remember it.

That was definitely one of the great game of Oregon's coming out party. The next decade was something to behold!

If that doesn't make highschool QB's want to be a Duck what will? Super proud to be a Duck!!

I believe the footprint of of BSU viewership is much larger than just Boise same as Oregon is much bigger than just Eugene. The viewership growth will come from playing other PAC teams on nationally televised games. How many people on this forum are even able to watch a Boise State game if they wanted to? I for one in Montana cannot watch a BSU games easily. BSU with their blue field and absolute rabid fan base will do quite well with greater TV exposure. SDSU games are available to a huge population and still have very poor viewership, not that I believe that SDSU shouldn't be part of the PAC but that BSU is in just as favorable a position if not more. I know anything out of the West Coast is not desirable to the media people with their headquarters on the coast but us people in the middle are extremely avid football watchers. When it really comes down to it football is decentralizing and becoming a nationwide sport with fan bases all over the world not just in the city that they are based in. Brand and brand loyalty will be the basis going forward for viewership. I know to people on the west coast Boise is the middle of nowhere but I'm five times more likely to root for them than I am a Southern California team.

cartm25, I believe your thought process on this is correct, living in Montana I see BSU gear all the time. The media market in rural states are much larger geographically than a small college in a big city in Texas that also has big time competitions from a top tier programs in the same city. I would definitely count the close to 2 million people in Idaho as part of the market and quite a few of the rural parts of Eastern Oregon, South East Washington, Northern Nevada and Western Montana as well. Ten years ago when BSU was doing well the only only jerseys that out number BSU here in Montana was the Montana schools. PS I'm 9 hours drive from Boise. I have never liked the media market metric as it make assumptions about the reach of any given market as being a very small geographical area. This may be true in Dallas or Houston area but it's not true in many of the best college towns of US. You have to look no further than North Bend or Eugene to prove this. Just promoting any of these teams to the PAC will raise their viewership can SDSU over come BSUs lead? BSU fans are as dedicated and hardcore as they come can we say the same for the SoCal market? Jugging from the current viewership I'd take BSU as favorite to be ahead of SDSU in viewership if they where both invited into to the PAC at the same time. SDSU taking away USC viewers is nothing but a pipe dream. There's just too many other things to do in Southern California than football. Compare that with the middle of nowhere Idaho where the only thing to do is football.

Yes, the second they didn't get Direct TV and Spectrum/Comcast to sign up nationally they should have taken it Direct to Consumer (DTC). I for one would have been a subscriber not just for football but baseball, basketball and the occasional track meet. I forget what the PAC Networks got for their TV deal but if 10 million viewers payed $5 a month for a subscription I'm sure that would be sufficient to cover the cloud computing bill and increased the payouts to the teams. This would have also kept the the PAC nationally relevant by not have 3/4 of the nation have to switch TV providers or sign up for $70 of sling TV a month to be able to watch all the PAC games.

I can definitely see your point. Maybe a better tact would be to talk to the team captains in private making them accountable for the rest of the team. This including them in the process and increasing their leadership responsibilities to make sure this behavior is not condoned. Not knowing what this player did makes it a lot harder to speak to but it seemed that all the players knew it was going on.

I agree with everyone above please, please, anything but Apple TV. That being said I think Amazon is the only real partner that will boost pac-12 viewership to new levels and they are the only ones with the infrastructure to seamlessly make it happen. The big difference between linear and streaming is I have to pay 100 plus dollars a month for Dish Network or I can pay $130 a year for Amazon Prime which I have already have for other reasons, so basically free. Even if they were to increase their subscription this by double I'm still saving a whole lot of money and I could really care less about all the other channels besides the sports channels, so why should I pay for them. Not sure this will happen but at some point in time teams may get paid in a true internet model of getting paid by the view which would greatly increase Oregon piece of the pie.

I do like that he let the team have a say in it but I'm not sure doing it in public is the best decision for team continuity. This might create animosity between players based on how they voted just like in politics. A better way of doing this might have been to poll the team in a secret ballot and release the kid in private. This would create accountability for the players and the team without causing divides.

Moga's deep balls are anything to behold, great touch and accuracy. In his Junior year highlight video he makes a lot of perfect deep throws hitting the receiver in stride. I think the main reason that he was underrated was due to the number of drops from his receivers which didn't translate into stats. Glad to see the QB position looks stocked for the future.

I'm really hoping the biggest streaming partner is Amazon. They have a huge subscription base, a whole lot of cash and not to mention the infrastructure to properly stream the games at 4k resolution. Apple may seem attractive to some but with their history of not playing well with others I would prefer to see it go to just about anyone else.

Just like the NFL Network time will take care of this. My Dad has a prime account but still didn't watch because he didn't know how to stream on his TV. He dose now as I've showed him how to do it. I personally didn't watch Thursday night football games for years after the NFL Network took over.

Great year with a nice postseason run. The coaching kept the team humming in into the tournament. What could have been, the Ducks were looking unstoppable in the mid season before all the injuries.

With The Ducks O they never seam to be out of the game. Great Game, they never gave up just like they've done all year! This team is scrapy with can do attitude, credit to the coaches creating a tightknit Team.

That's exactly why I Like it.

8-5 after 4 innings, Ducks coming back from 8-0. The Game is on ESPNU is just starting to get good!

Time to get it going, Ducks have faced worse.

Grinsell is looking good, time to get those bats going.

USC vs Notre Dame 6.68m Oregon vs Georgia 6.2m I should have been more concise in my original post. USC plays the team with the second largest fan base in all of college football every year at primetime on national TV. Living in Montana historically it been much easier to catch a USC game than an Oregon game on TV due to the coverage by the networks. All's I'm saying is Oregon should have more viewership than they do. I for one will definitely not be watch USC vs Michigan or Ohio State. I would much rather watch two PAC teams play, that is if I can actually get them on the TV.

Only fitting that Oregon "Uncle Phil" be on the cutting edge again.

I have no sold data on this but I imagine USC probably had more prime time spots with more nationally televised games. Just the Noter Dame game, every year, alone should give them a major boost to there viewership numbers. As Charles has stated the PAC 12 Networks have done Oregon no favors in viewership numbers. Just have better distribution would increased the number substantially.

I have to admit I was a little confused by what that article was getting at as currently you can watch all the games ESPN has on ESPN+ streaming. Did it allude to ESPN+ featuring games from other networks?

This is what you get now that college football is big business. Players are getting paid NIL money and maybe sooner than later they will get payed by University. Couple that with universities want to get paid 60 or 70 million a year and that money has to come from somewhere. I'm just hoping after this initial phase the streamers will consolidate down to two or three. I'm willing to wager that at some point Amazon or competitor will start offer a package deal on sports coverage similar to modern-day cable but streaming. At some point in time the 32 team mega conference will probably have its own DTC streaming service thus cutting out the middleman altogether.