Posted by ButterBall Devil on November 28, 18 at 10:01:34:
In Reply to: Larry Scott article - good read posted by CuriousDevil on November 27, 18 at 21:04:03:
Reading the first AND second installments of the article (and it looks like tomorrow will be #3 in the series), I would assert that the "PAC 12 CEO Group" is overwhelmed. That includes Crow.
This scenario is a classic - "non profit (including government) mind set trying to operate in a competitive, for profit environment". It just can't be done. The culture, perspective, decision protocols, etc., are just too contrasting.
The Big10 and SEC have decided that they don't know enough about broadcasting or media, to try to run their own operations. They have partnered with ESPN, to outsource this function, and the resulting revenues, speak for themselves.
The PAC 12 has decided it can develop the requisite expertise, and run its own media network. So the rationale for Scott to make so much $ in compensation and perks, is in recognition of his oversight on the PAC 12 Network, in addition to serving as conf. commissioner.
I "get" this.
However, the results are so disappointing, and compared to the "peer" conferences, are becoming increasingly divergent. Apparently, we are to conclude, there is no accountability nor performance based review.
For M. Crow and others - who have their hands full in running multi faceted non-profit, academic enterprises - to also be (effectively) the Board of Directors for a sports network, is a fatal mistake.
I could care less if Scott is a nice guy, who may or may not care about subordinates, or if he is a first class ass. Without results, he should be both fired and embarrassed. But his response is - the PAC 12 is well positioned to negotiate the distribution contracts when they come up for renewal in 2024 - so off base, to be insulting.
For the PAC 12 CEO Group (and note the irony, in the name with Crow and his cohorts in all likelihood very pleased with this title, and self reference as "CEO's") to allow this situation to continue, is appalling.
Bottom line - I don't think this is the best that can be done with the PAC 12 broadcast rights, and the failure to achieve parity (forget trying to surpass peer group performance), should be grounds for a complete housecleaning.
Finally, a couple of easy ideas -
1. the "Board" which oversees the PAC 12 should be each of the member school AD's. Having the respective chancellors, deans, etc., is a terrible idea.
2. get the deal done with Direct TV - even if the conf. has to discount existing arrangements (due to MFN provisions), PROVIDED, a reasonable estimation concludes that the enhanced revenues justifies. Every day that goes by where a significant segment of the market CAN'T EVEN OBTAIN THE BROADCAST, means that this segment will move to permanently lose interest.
3. Change Scott's compensation package to be incentive based, tied to the "desirable" outcomes. (firing him likely costs too much, and would further reduce the distributions to the member schools.)
4. schedule the games for the prime time - sure, the SEC will have better ratings, for head to head scheduling, but if you don't develop a loyal fan base, your ratings will never improve. (I believe when Alabama is up - 35 to 3, over Vanderbilt, before the half, viewers will dial in to what is going on with the air raid in Pullman, or the Herm train in Tempe.) No more 9pm start times. You are just "giving up" when you do this, and implicitly declaring "we are a second class product".
Post a Followup