Poll: What should the Pac-10's new commissioner Larry Scott focus on?
by PaulSF on Mar 25, 2009 1:00 PM PDT
in News
31 comments
After 26 years as commissioner of the Pac-10, Tom Hansen is stepping down. His successor will be Larry Scott, current chairman and CEO of the Women's Tennis Association. The Oregonian's Bob Rickert thinks the choice is solid, but ponders what the incoming commissioner's first move will be:
"Scott's first focus is likely to be trying to get better television contracts or find innovative ways to create more exposure for the conference. The creation of a Pac 10 network, new media, partnerships with cable companies and networks of course are all possible with the right connections and new ideas. Scott looks like the right guy for a job like that."
What do you think? With poor bowl affiliations and awful TV contracts, as well as a complete lack of innovation and open-mindedness from the previous commissioner, what should Scott focus his efforts on first?
0 recs |
31 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I voted for “Re-work media contracts to increase national exposure”, but it isn’t even just national exposure.
It’s regional exposure too.
‘07 ASU @ Oregon wasn’t even suppose to be aired live originally.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-T-E-D".
by JShufelt on Mar 25, 2009 1:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Unfortunately, fixing bowl affiliation is going to be very tough. The Pac-10 doesn’t bring in as much money as other conferences, simple as that.
However, #1 thing that needs to be fixed is officiating and TV contracts. The current state of affairs is a total joke.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Mar 25, 2009 1:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I voted for the same thing you did, JShufelt
But actually, I think TV is going by the wayside sooner than later. The Pac-10 needs to position itself for that. If I was the Pac-10, I’d deliver content exclusively online through various online TV networks like Hulu and ESPN360. It’s cost effective, and it would set precedence for all other conferences, and for the NCAA in general. However, having graduated from Oregon’s J School, I’m pretty anti-Big Media.
Hi, I'm Paul Thompson, and I'm a quack-aholic.
by PaulSF on Mar 25, 2009 1:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Also, the Bay Area, the home of the Pac-10, is ALL about the Internet, and with companies like Google, Yahoo, etc., in the conference’s backyard, especially with Stanford as a member, innovating the way the conference disseminates its content is VERY feasible, and could even bring in a lot of revenue via online advertising.
Hi, I'm Paul Thompson, and I'm a quack-aholic.
by PaulSF on Mar 25, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t care if it’s big media, internet or what not…
I want a reliable way to watch any game, live, and free (Though I would honestly be okay paying a small fee if I could catch more than just Oregon games).
As much as I enjoy listening to Jerry Allan – being forced to listen to the radio feed, and can only watch it via Comcast Sports Network Replay, 3 hours later after the game, while most people are sleeping – is bullshit.
A few times this year, I couldn’t go to a local sports bar to catch a game, because it was only on CSN, and they didn’t have Comcast.
Fuck Tom Hansen – He’ll be gone shortly, but it was about 10 years too late.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-T-E-D".
by JShufelt on Mar 25, 2009 1:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem with relying on ESPN360 is that some internet providers do not allow access. So, for someone like me, on the East Coast, I can’t get it because the major provider (Time Warner Cable) does not allow access. So this would not provide the nationwide access. We need to get TV contracts. And the Pac-10 needs to stop scheduling games so late, preventing East Coast people from watching them. Sometimes I’ll be lucky to catch an Oregon game on an obscure channel and then I have to stay up until 2 to watch it.
by westspec on Mar 26, 2009 6:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1 and if you happened to use the small, mom and pop internet service providers, you get left out of the ESPN360 love
--Dominic
Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.
by dvieira on Mar 26, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I voted for the Pac-10 Network
Here’s how they could do it: Their first priority is to get the games on the big networks like ESPN, ESPN2, FSN, ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, and Versus. After you have made deals with ALL of those networks, then you can start adding the games to the Pac-10 Network. When there is not a game showing you could do pregame or postgame shows or replays. Also this last part may bother some people and I may sound like an ass, but the network should be for Football, Basketball, and Baseball only.
by ConnorOSU on Mar 25, 2009 1:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you in regards to the exclusivity on “real” sports, but not because I’m a chauvinist, but because it’s more valuable. That said, good luck trying to convince the current chairman of the WOMEN’S TENNIS ASSOCIATION of that. Not gonna happen.
Hi, I'm Paul Thompson, and I'm a quack-aholic.
by PaulSF on Mar 25, 2009 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm torn.
I think the big business of TV and multi-media exposure has to be priority one. That said, there is no bigger national eye-sore for the Pac-10 than the running joke that is the conference’s football officiating. There has to be a plan to deal with that, and Scott would benefit from addressing it publicly rather than pretend it doesn’t exist.
A few of us started an agenda for upcoming Pac-10 Refereeing 101 classes, which you might enjoy in this thread.
You cannot hide from our weapons of Masoli destruction.
by JConant on Mar 25, 2009 2:47 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
All of the above?
I won’t try to compare him with President Obama (OK, well, I just did) — but there is one similarity. Scott is widely thought of as the One to lead us out of the wilderness. The job is going to be wide, deep, and complex. Three of the poll options — officiating, TV, and bowls — are all #1 priorities. None can be fixed overnight — but ALL need attention and need them NOW. On the outside, we can’t know exactly how much influence the presidents had on Hansen — but nevertheless, Scott has a big job to do, and he needs to start on it today.
by mkwing on Mar 25, 2009 3:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I voted for "other"
The football situation is stupid, I know. But I think those improvements are further down the line and better exposure will come with more consistent success of the conference as a whole.
What I would like to see should (but I’m no commissioner) be easy for Larry Scott to arrange and it takes care of all of us actually in Pac 10 country:
Rotate the Pac 10 Tournament.
Is there any good excuse to keep it in LA? Why not move between Seattle, Portland, Oakland, Phoenix, and LA?
by jessenumber1 on Mar 25, 2009 4:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I like this idea. Probably not priority one, but it seems feasible. There are excellent venues and large fan bases in every region of the Pac-10.
You cannot hide from our weapons of Masoli destruction.
by JConant on Mar 25, 2009 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Totally Agree
I like the Seattle, Portland, Oakland, Phoenix, and LA option but you could also throw in Honolulu and Las Vegas for neutral sites. I’m sure fans would go to those cities.
by ConnorOSU on Mar 25, 2009 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But I think those improvements are further down the line and better exposure will come with more consistent success of the conference as a whole.
I don’t agree with this. While I don’t think it’s a Pac-10 vs. East Coast Bias, the Pac-10 has had plenty of success – it just hasn’t surpassed the USC line of success. In a 10 team conference, round robin schedule, the Pac-10 is going to beat itself up year-after-year. If you measure by non conference success, the Pac-10 is extremely successful, even if you exclude USC from the equation.
As far as the Pac-10 Tournament – I still don’t know why it exists.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-T-E-D".
by JShufelt on Mar 25, 2009 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The excuse is that the conference gets a lot more money in LA
FSN is headquartered in LA, they operate the tournament and pay the conference for the rights to the tournament. If the conference were to move the conference tournament then they’d have to give up some revenue.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Mar 25, 2009 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
love this
Every pair of schools has a nearby NBA team, well arena sorry Sonics fans, why not move it around. Get more fans involved and create more college basketball fans on the west cost. More fans more money.
Ducks Go!
Already miss you MB
by trumpetduck on Mar 26, 2009 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Make Oregon Sports Network national.
do it
by DUCKinNY on Mar 25, 2009 6:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, then everyone around the US can bask in Joe Giansante.
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Dear Joevan, Develop motor skills. Love, ATQ.
by qrsouther on Mar 25, 2009 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I said the Pac 10 Network
because it could be a boon for the conference. From exposure to revenue, the network could change the fortunes of the conference. I also said it because while the other TV contracts are important, they don’t expire until after the 2011-2012 school year so Scott won’t be able to begin work on those quite yet. He can set the table for the Pac 10 Network now to go live in 2012 and work the national TV contracts (FSN, CBS, ESPN, ABC) around the new channel when the time comes.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Mar 26, 2009 12:33 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It is an interesting thing about the Pac-10 Network. If you talk to Joe Giansante about 2 years ago, he would have told you that the entire Pac-10 would be on Comcast Sportsnet by now. There was a lot of talk in the Duck program that other teams would be jumping on the bandwagon of OSN and it would become exactly what you describe. It hasn’t happened….at least not yet
--Dominic
Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.
by dvieira on Mar 26, 2009 2:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pac-10 Championship Game
I think the addition of a Pac-10 Championship Game would also be beneficial. Snag two more teams and model after the SEC or Big 12. I hate ties and it will help Pac-10 teams in BCS rankings.
by westspec on Mar 26, 2009 6:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yup...
Fres.st and BSu? Pac-10 North w/ UW,WSU, UO,osu,BSU and CAL: Pac10 South w/ USC,UCLA,STAN,Fres.St,ASU and UA.
by frozenfowl74 on Mar 26, 2009 7:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The only thing that Tom Hansen was any good at was stopping expansion of the Pac-10. It may be inevitable, but I hope that the conference doesn’t expand anytime soon. As far as possible teams for expansion, this has been addressed before, but I think it’d have to be Utah and BYU. BSU is only good at football, and NOTHING else, same with Fresno State. Those are not good schools, which the Pac-10 will definitely want.
Also, Dave addressed this topic, along with playoffs a couple years ago, but it’s still relevant.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Mar 26, 2009 7:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ugh...
BYU? Think I would rather stay the Pac-10….See your point on FresSt. & BSu though.
by frozenfowl74 on Mar 26, 2009 8:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
BCS?
What, if any, impact can Mr. Scott have on the BCS and a move to a plus one playoff? As I understand the Rose Bowl, in part, has stood in the way of any progress on this subject.
by frozenfowl74 on Mar 26, 2009 6:58 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The biggest people standing in the way of a plus one...
have been Tom Hansen and Jim Delany, of the Big 10. With Hansen gone…it could really open things up, if it’s something the new commish is willing to consider. Considering he once tried to combine men’s and women’s tennis, I think he’s up for crazy ideas.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Mar 26, 2009 7:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whatever happened to the +2?
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Dear Joevan, Develop motor skills. Love, ATQ.
by qrsouther on Mar 26, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would be okay to expanding to 12 teams, if it gave us a full playoff system. Not a plus one but, a real playoff system.
If not, I’d like to keep my round robin, thank you very much.
It’s spelled "S-H-U-F-T-E-D".
by JShufelt on Mar 26, 2009 8:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
ummmmm
Round Robin.
Ducks Go!
Already miss you MB
by trumpetduck on Mar 26, 2009 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Since the Ducks are increasingly dependent on national recruiting...
… I voted for rework media contracts.
by ursula on Mar 26, 2009 5:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
