So, this time it's the Pac-12 Network messing up the broadcasting of our Spring Games.

 

The Pac-12 Network will televise the spring football games of all 12 of its member schools, including the 10 departing for other conferences.

 

A conference spokesperson confirmed all 12 games will be broadcast on one of the Pac-12 Network linear channels. Arizona and Utah previously announced the Pac-12 would be televising their spring games.

 

Talks between the Pac-12 and Big Ten regarding the broadcast rights for the spring games for Oregon, Washington, UCLA and USC, concluded with the sides unable to come to an agreement. However, the Big Ten Network is sending reporters to each of those games and “working with the schools to obhtain footage for coverage on BTN,” according to a network spokesperson.

 

Pac-12 Network to broadcast 12 spring football games, including for departing schools

WWW.OREGONLIVE.COM

---

Talks between the Pac-12 and Big Ten regarding the broadcast rights for the spring games for Oregon, Washington, UCLA and USC, concluded with the sides unable to come to an agreement

 

This was back in December:

 

Who will broadcast Oregon, departing Pac-12 schools’ football spring games?

 

Who will broadcast the spring football games of the 10 departing Pac-12 schools, including Oregon, is yet to be determined.

 

The Pac-12 controls the rights to the spring games of its member schools. However, with Oregon, Washington, UCLA and USC departing for the Big Ten, Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah heading to the Big 12 and Cal and Stanford on their way to the ACC, the Pac-12 would be showcasing football teams that are leaving the conference.

 

The Pac-12 does not wish to broadcast the spring games of those schools via the Pac-12 Network, according to a league source, and talks are under way with other entities to broadcast the games.

 

Big Ten COO Kerry Kenny said there is “work being done on that right now,” but declined further comment about discussions between the conference and the Pac-12 regarding Oregon, UCLA, USC and Washington’s spring games.

 

Big Ten Network president Francois McGillicuddy said he’s “hopeful that there might be an opportunity” for the conference network to broadcast the spring games of the four incoming schools.

 

Who will broadcast Oregon, departing Pac-12 schools’ football spring games?

WWW.OREGONLIVE.COM

---

The Pac-12 does not wish to broadcast the spring games of those schools via the Pac-12 Network, according to a league source, and talks are under way with other entities to broadcast the games.

 

Bummer, PIG2 will squeeze for what they can, guess I’ll only see it if I drive down. No way am I paying a dime to get back on the P12 Network at this point.

Edited March 17, 20241 yr by JabbaNoBargain

Does that mean that whatever miniscule revenue is generated will go to the Pac Who? Kind of embarrassing. Imagine being dumped, but still honoring a commitment to film your ex giving a speech for their online associates. Give me a P, give me an A, give me a T, give me an H, give me an E..... Blah blah blah.

Not surprising. Teams don't formally leave the PAC and join their new conferences until August. 

 

This makes sense even if it's not desirable. 

Francois McGuillicuddy?  In my mind, I picture a French restaurant serving Guinness and bad Irish food. 

 

Whatever, he manages a terrific network. Night and day from the Pac-12 Network amateur hour. No worries about the 2025 spring game being covered from kick-off to the final whistle by BTN.

On 3/18/2024 at 4:07 PM, David Marsh said:

Not surprising. Teams don't formally leave the PAC and join their new conferences until August. 

 

This makes sense even if it's not desirable. 

Maybe technically so, but I can’t believe any of their broadcasts of spring games is very profitable, I mean I’ve seen the sponsors for the regular season when the league wasn’t about to disintegrate. 

 

What about embarrassment? What about if they are legitimately trying to rebuild? Branding success? I mean how do you gracefully cover teams that are leaving in a few months with a straight face? They should have sold all rights and saved some money and embarrassment.

 

But instead they’re being codpieces…why are we playing them?

Edited March 19, 20241 yr by JabbaNoBargain

Maybe, just maybe we are playing them because of over 120 years of history.  An amicable divorce is far more preferable than prolonged bickering.  Some of us have wives and children, even a daughter-in-law who wear orange.  I happen to have all three.

On 3/18/2024 at 11:45 PM, Grandpa Duck said:

Maybe, just maybe we are playing them because of over 120 years of history.  An amicable divorce is far more preferable than prolonged bickering.  Some of us have wives and children, even a daughter-in-law who wear orange.  I happen to have all three.

It’s not amicable in any way.
 

They tried and are trying to do exactly what we did (leave a dead conference), but no one wants them at the moment. So now we give them a home game, and they keep stealing millions of unearned dollars from us at every turn, and we’re supposed to be okay with that?
 

Thank you sir may I have another? Nope.

Edited March 19, 20241 yr by JabbaNoBargain

It’s not stealing when there is a written agreement that all 12 schools signed. The Court followed the plain language of the agreement.  Everybody agreed that if a school were to cut and run they would leave the money behind.  I look forward to beating the beavers next fall way more than some school like Texas Tech from half way across the country.  When the game comes, many more Duck fans will enjoy the former than the latter.

 

And, I will greatly miss trips to the Bay Area to play Cal and Stanford.  I am unlikely to go to New Jersey for Rutgers, or to Indiana.  
 

The Duck lawyers, and the other nine schools did not leave millions behind with a winning case yet to pursue.  We left because there was more money to be gained by leaving.  We really had no other option.

Everything you said is correct, but that is not amicable, it’s all openly hostile. I don’t support doing a massive, optional favor for someone that is openly hostile towards us.

 

The league rules were all designed around a single team leaving, not 10. Yes, there should have been a clause around what constitutes the league dissolving and there wasn’t, so technically the rodents have a leg to stand on, but that doesn’t make them our buds. The league ended and they’re using loopholes/legally gray areas to snatch away as much unearned $$ as possible.
 

This week alone the PIG2 will keep all units earned from the tournament, which by my math could be as much as $18M in week 1 alone. They’ve been leaches for decades and are taking it to new levels. These are dollars being earned by current league members, but nada for them because they are leaving in the future.

 

Anyway, there are countless posts dedicated to this, I won’t recreate them all. No mercy rule when we play in September, and I don’t wish them well.

Edited March 19, 20241 yr by JabbaNoBargain

On 3/19/2024 at 1:13 PM, JabbaNoBargain said:

Everything you said is correct, but that is not amicable, it’s all openly hostile. I don’t support doing a massive, optional favor for someone that is openly hostile towards us.

 

The league rules were all designed around a single team leaving, not 10. Yes, there should have been a clause around what constitutes the league dissolving and there wasn’t, so technically the rodents have a leg to stand on, but that doesn’t make them our buds. The league ended and they’re using loopholes/legally gray areas to snatch away as much unearned $$ as possible.
 

This week alone the PIG2 will keep all units earned from the tournament, which by my math could be as much as $18M in week 1 alone. They’ve been leaches for decades and are taking it to new levels. These are dollars being earned by current league members, but nada for them because they are leaving in the future.

 

Anyway, there are countless posts dedicated to this, I won’t recreate them all. No mercy rule when we play in September, and I don’t wish them well.

I agree. IMO, it's a form over substance argument to fall back on by-laws when 10 of 12 members are leaving. 

 

The by-laws were not amended with 2 of the 12 leaving but another 8 of 10 leaving could have altered the bylaws and this argument made in front of a 'friendly' state court judge in a Pac-12 jurisdiction other than Washington and Oregon could have obtained a contrary opinion. That means the matter would be moved to federal court.

 

Alternatively, the 10 departing members could have moved to bankrupt the Pac-12 and see what a bankruptcy court considering the comparable equity in the matter, would have determined. 

 

With the money involved, why not spend the money to litigate looking for an alternative decision? At the very least such an action would have slowed down the process and given the departing members negotiating leverage.

 

The departing members simply rolled over, giving OSU and WSU everything they asked for. Why? Because it is academicians and not business people in charge. The Pac-2 used litigation as a weapon and the Pac-10 should not have bent over. 

 

As to canceling out Texas Tech and instead tripping to Corvallis. Did anyone think to ask small business owners in Eugene/Springfield their opinion? Did anyone calculate the economic hit Eugene/Springfield would suffer? The hit to Oregon in merchandise sales, concessions, parking, etc.? Did anyone consider the atmosphere Oregon fans will experience in Corvallis? Did anyone consider the SOS hit playing a G5 and not a P4 team? Did anyone consider whether or not the game would be broadcast? 

 

Oregon did not hose over Oregon State, the marketplace rejected Oregon State with good reason.