Given that he doesn’t start until July 1, what would be your recommendations to new commissioner George Kliavkoff to immediately improve the Pac-12 Networks for football viewing fans this fall? @BruinSharman
A: Terrific question, largely because the focus is specific to football programming and production. (Distribution is another matter entirely and cannot immediately be solved.)
And it just so happens that the Hotline has some ideas, although with one giant assumption: That Kliavkoff is willing to spend a little money.
The budget is understandably tight on 3rd Street, especially on the Pac-12 Networks side of the operation. Subscriptions are evaporating — a secular issue in the cable TV industry — and as a result, revenue is declining.
Yet the Pac-12 Networks are obligated to produce 850 live events each year and meet their financial commitments to the schools, which at this point require an annual surplus of at least $36 million.
So we’re hardly certain that Kliavkoff will approve any increase in expenditures, much less enough to materially change the Pac-12 football viewing experience.
But if he does bump up the budget, we’d recommend the following (in no particular order except for the first one, which is No. 1):
Bring back ‘Inside Pac-12 Football’. The weekly studio show provided valuable analysis and storytelling. (Without ‘Inside’ anchoring the coverage, the networks have a massive hole in their lineup.) And make sure to produce the show 10 months a year. It’s not like there’s a paucity of news from January through May.
Rebuild the networks’ social and digital teams. It’s clear that all the cost-cutting in the past year has severely damaged the Pac-12’s presence on various social channels. That’s a bad position for any media entity, much less one with such limited linear visibility.
Building on that topic: Increase the storytelling component, which would not only add compelling content for fans but also allow the athletes to build their brands — thus helping recruiting efforts in the era of name, image and likeness. After all, the networks were created to market the schools, coaches and athletes.
Bring back the traveling pre-game show. Staging the broadcast on a different campus each week, with a host and two or three analysts, added energy to the overall Saturday programming lineup and helped fans connect with their schools.
Rehire Mike Yam. (No explanation needed.)
Broadcast each head coach’s weekly press conference live on the relevant regional network, then replay them all on the national network.
Make more use of Yogi Roth. We’d love to see a 30-minute film room show in which Roth breaks down the top plays each week, perhaps even with insight from the relevant head coach or coordinator.
Use the Pac-12 Networks as the prime driver of conference news with the release of the football schedule and the postseason awards. Heck, the weekly in-season awards should be announced live on the networks.
Rehire Curtis Conway. Ideally, the networks would lean on the following four analysts to carry the weekly studio and pre- and post-game programming: Nick Aliotti, Nigel Burton, Evan Moore and Conway.
Create a segment called ‘Ask Coach Pete’ in which fans could submit football and life questions to former Washington coach … eh, forget it. He’d never agree.
Does the new commissioner have to wait till the media contract ends in order to make adjustments to the Pac-12 Networks? @2021SportsGuy
A: I assume you’re referring to the business structure and/or distribution model and not to programming, which we covered above.
And if that’s the case, there are two options:
1. Hold tight until the winter of 2022-23 and then begin negotiating new deals for all the content current shown by the Pac-12 Networks and the Tier 1 partners, ESPN and Fox.
The benefit to this approach is as simple as supply and demand: Waiting for the current rights cycle to end in the summer of 2024 would allow the conference to hit the open market — any interested media company could bid on the content.
2. Ask the Pac-12 Networks distribution partners (Comcast, DISH, etc) to rip up the current deals now, which would make sense only if the Pac-12 does the same with its Tier 1 partners.
There is no reason to change the Pac-12 Networks distribution deals and not the Tier 1 agreements, as well.
If the conference decides changes are necessary sooner than later, it would be best served by a complete distribution overhaul in which ESPN (or Fox) buys all the football and basketball inventory and the Pac-12 Networks remain as a digital outlet for the Olympic sports.
The limiting factor with renegotiating early is that you can only deal with existing partners, thereby limiting competition.
My hunch is the Pac-12 will hunker down and wait to hit the open market.
Should the No. 1 goal of the new commissioner be the state of USC football? To secure a premium TV deal, the Pac-12 needs a premium football product with a strong USC. A rising tide lifts all boats and Pac-12 football is in the dumps. George Kliavkoff needs a meeting with Mike Bohn. @JacksonSF
A: There is no question … none, zero, zip … that the Pac-12 needs USC to thrive in order for the overall football product to reach its economic potential.
It’s no different than the Big Ten needing Ohio State to perform like a blue blood.
That said, there is only so much the commissioner — any commissioner — can do.
Kliavkoff isn’t evaluating recruits, hiring the assistants, calling the plays or doing something about all those drive-killing, momentum-shifting penalties … Sorry, we digressed.
The conference office exists to support the schools with every possible resource and with smart policy decisions. And if Kliavkoff accomplishes both, the Trojans absolutely would benefit. But so would every other team.
There’s nothing he can do specifically for USC, aside from not scheduling any Friday night games in Pullman.
The 10:30 pm EST kickoffs were obviously bad for Pac-12 viewership nationally. Do you see Commissioner Kliavkoff addressing this, and having some success, in his first year? Are more afternoon games coming to the Pac-12? @RonHoonFox10
A: The structure of the football schedule isn’t changing in 2021 — everything is locked in contractually. We’ll see just as many 10:30 p.m. Eastern kickoffs as in the pre-pandemic seasons.
Nor will that change in ’22 or ’23, unless the contracts with ESPN and Fox change.
What has been is what will be for three more years, barring a return to the negotiating table. But I would push back a bit on the statement that night games are “obviously bad for Pac-12 viewership nationally.” Simultaneous night games aren’t good for viewership; nor are night games on the Pac-12 Networks or FS1. But a single, high-quality game on ESPN each Saturday night is a smart play for the Pac-12 and, in my opinion, should be a part of the next media rights package.
Combine the lack of competition at 10:30 p.m. Eastern with ESPN’s reach and marketing power, and that broadcast window has value in the college sports media landscape.
With all of the playoff expansion talk, what do you think is the ideal playoff size for the Pac-12? @Adam_Bradford
A: The Pac-12 needs the College Football Playoff to expand to at least eight teams. Anything less is of little value and unrealistic.
The SEC won’t agree to a six-team event in which each Power Five champion receives an automatic bid because the at-large slots would vanish the moment the Group of Five takes the CFP to court to gain access.
The event must go to at least eight and perhaps 12 teams to serve all stakeholders.
In either case, the Pac-12 champion would have an automatic bid, with the at-large route available in years when the conference produces a second elite team.
Whether Kliavkoff pushes for eight or 12 is to be determined. My guess is that he’ll consult with the athletic directors before formalizing the conference’s preference.
Whether that preference matters or not, I’m not sure.
