[Mick]

It will be interesting to see what happens in the next contract negotiations. Sure, the flexibility is better to set-up the best tv matchup and the networks will pay more for that flexibility, but what is the cost of that? If the Pac12 asked the networks to pitch on two scenarios, one with less night and less scheduling flexibility (i.e. most games locked in advance) and one with current flexibility, what would be the difference in contracts?  I imagine the flexibility generates more than $1 million extra per year per team but less than $2 million per team.  (i.e. $12 to $24 million annual higher contract). I bet if Stanford votes, they would choose the scenario that treats its fans better and generates $2 million less per year.  The Pac12 would still get a decent contract with less flexible game times.

Ehhhh, I wouldn't bet The Farm on that...

[Mick]

It will be interesting to see what happens in the next contract negotiations. Sure, the flexibility is better to set-up the best tv matchup and the networks will pay more for that flexibility, but what is the cost of that? If the Pac12 asked the networks to pitch on two scenarios, one with less night and less scheduling flexibility (i.e. most games locked in advance) and one with current flexibility, what would be the difference in contracts?  I imagine the flexibility generates more than $1 million extra per year per team but less than $2 million per team.  (i.e. $12 to $24 million annual higher contract). I bet if Stanford votes, they would choose the scenario that treats its fans better and generates $2 million less per year.  The Pac12 would still get a decent contract with less flexible game times.

Ehhhh, I wouldn't bet The Farm on that...