Pac 10 Goes Hollywood, Hires Agent
Q: What do Brad Pitt, Steve Spielberg, Oprah Winfrey, George Clooney and the Pacific 10 Conference have in common?
A: They are all represented by Creative Artists Agency, the prominent Los Angeles-based entertainment and sports agency.
According to The Sporting News:
The Pac-10 has hired Creative Artists Agency (CAA) to explore expansion opportunities and advise the conference on its next media rights deal.
The Hollywood-based firm also will help the conference reposition its brand to highlight its nexus to the entertainment (Los Angeles) and technology (Silicon Valley) markets of the U.S.
The three mandates are interrelated and increase the likelihood that the Pac-10 will launch its own cable channel when its current media deals expire after the 2011-12 school year.
If you want to get technical, CAA is not "Hollywood-based." CAA is located in Century City. Not that it matters exactly, the company has its tentacles wrapped around all aspects of the sports and entertainment space on a global level.
But what exactly does this mean for the conference?
The Pac-10 has defined itself as an athletically successful conference, having won more NCAA national titles than any other conference. But Scott, who took over as commissioner last spring, wants the Pac-10 brand to be more contemporary and reflect the influential markets in which it has schools.
CAA also will help stage some of the conference's events. Scott expects some of CAA's celebrity clients to be part of events such as football media day. The agency also will bring an entertainment element to an event like the Pac-10 basketball tournament.
Part of CAA's mandate will be to identify schools and markets where the conference could expand, and any Pac-10 expansion will include bigger media markets that could help give a conference-owned cable channel a bigger base, Scott said.
CAA is developing a business plan for such a channel. The agency also is advising the conference on strategies should it decide against launching its own channel. The conference's current deal, with ESPN and Fox, expires after the 2011-12 school year.
"If I didn't believe a channel was a viable option, I wouldn't have made it part of CAA's mandate," Scott said.
From where I sit, all this is not necessarily a bad thing. CAA has a proven track record for successfully marketing and branding its clients and I do agree that the conference is in need of a re-imaging. I've been critical of UCLA for a certain type of inbreeding, whereby they only hire from within or ex-Bruins and thus create an insular world view. Bringing in an independent company like CAA to help define the brand then market the brand makes sense.
But the article created -- at least for me -- the image of a split-personality within the conference.
Six of the conference teams can claim that they are located in a major metropolis, while four of the schools are located in what I'll euphemistically call "college towns. UCLA and USC are in Los Angeles, Stanford and Cal are technically in separate cities, but Berkeley and Palo Alto are (as we know) part of a cluster of cities that include San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose and none of the Bay Area fits the description of a "college town. Washington is in Seattle and ASU is in Phoenix. The other four schools, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington State and Arizona are located in Eugene, Corvallis, Pullman and Tucson respectively. (I'm not exactly sure if Tucson is considered a college town, but it isn't a major city either. I mean no disrespect when I say that -- it's just a fact.)
So, when Commissioner Scott says "We want to position ourselves as cutting edge. "We're a modern collegiate conference," I'm wondering if he seems the same divide that I see. It's not that the college towns are backwaters -- it's just that there is a difference between the Silicon Valley and Corvallis, there is a difference between L.A. and Pullman. What I mean is, the major cities of the Pac 10 set it apart from the other conferences -- name another conference with so many cities housing the teams. But the college towns in the Pac 10 are no different than the college towns in every other conference. Also, I wonder how focusing on L.A. and the Bay Area serve the conference as a whole.
That said, I see no harm at all in bringing CAA in and believe that there are real possibilities for good to come out of the relationship.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
19 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Its definitely a very interesting move
I am not completely sold on Larry Scott but I like the early signs I am seeing.
What's really interesting ...
is how when you cut and paste from the Sporting News, you get all those Bing links.
Bill Gates is everywhere ….
I agree about Scott. I’m so used to criticizing everything the powers that be do I was ready to not like this move. But I don’t see a downside at this moment to using CAA.
It will be interesting what CAA does
I am all for improving the branding of this conference and its programs using strategies that have worked in the entertainment world. That said it has to be done tastefully and in a way that fits with the existing traditions of the teams in the conference. I still cringe when thinking about the marketing effort around this conference we have seen on FSN. Simply terrible. They have no where to go but up. Guess we will see what happens.
I hope they don't screw everything up
The PAC-10 has a good mix I think and 10 is a very good number of teams for a conference, you don’t get a confernece champion with more schools unless you play more games and that just isn’t going to happen.
If they expand for the sole purpose of adding another TV market, that’s bad. I would rather expand to a school that has competitive sports programs than lots of TV viewers but I would rather just not expand.
What a good agent can do for the PAC-10 is negotiate better contracts in the media and if there is a PAC-10 cable channel, they can make sure it is done right for the right price. That’s what I would like to see them do.
Improve the marketing, don’t “improve” the product.
I think expansion is an inevitability.
Despite the conventional wisdom of Colorado and Utah, I think BYU and Utah make the best additions.
Gazing into my crystal ball, I foresee the Big 10 expanding to 12 teams which causes a chain reaction. At this point, the Pac 10 will have to add 2 teams leaving the Big East as the only automatic bid conference not to have 12 teams and a conference championship. At this point the writing on the wall will be clear. There has to be a Championship Saturday for BSPN to hype up in lieu of a playoff system. The Big East merges with Conference USA creating another super conference with a Championship game. Not long after, the remains of the Mountain West Conference combines with the Western Athletic Conference in return for an automatic bid. And BINGO! You have a national Conference Championship weekend to feed the bowl system with out the need of a playoff system.
That’s how I see it unfolding.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
No kidding ... but even more importantly
Adding Utah does nothing in terms of TV revenues. Why even bother.
Which huge TV market could be added?
Is Colorado a big market? I flew through Denver once, that’s all I know about the state.
I just don’t want the PAC-10 doing something stupid just to fuel someones idea to force a college football championship tournament.
As much as the BCS is flawed, it’s pretty good considering the limited amount of data available.
Denver is definitely a major market
And it will continue to get bigger. Colorado is an AWESOME state for roadies.
Everyone I know who went there when we played them
has nothing but great things to say about everything off the field. Some of them have been on every major roadtrip UCLA has taken in the last 20 years (so that includes so awesome places) and rank the trip to Denver/Boulder as one of the best out there.
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on May 13, 2010 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions
And not just football
There is just so much to do out in CO. I am sure gbruin, BruininDenver can spend two weeks just blogging about it.
Colorado/Texas would be the ultimate dream for me (I love Austin). I think CO/CSU makes sense because as I said it would make all Pac-10 rivalries “symmetric.” But if we get CU/Utah I won’t complain too much. We have to have Colorado though otherwise not sure if I will be too excited about expansion.
The Pac-10 is so symmetrical right now and CU
would be good but we should leave CSU out of the discussion. They are an awful sports program that is barely Div-1 level.
"I can't believe I ate the whole thing" Homer Simpson
Wake up and smell the $$$
Denver – media market #16
Salt Lake City – media market #31
BYU football yes, BB maybe, other sports PULEZEEE
Utah and Colorado make most sense, travel there isn’t as bad as Wash or Wash State having to go to AZ or AZ St.
by C.T. in Boston on May 13, 2010 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Pullman is literrally in the middle of NOWHERE
Unless it’s Hawaii, the location argument is pretty small
RESCUING DANCE MUSIC FROM THE BLAHS
On the PMS show yesterday
they were talking about how this upcoming season (2010-2011) would probably be the last to occur before the landscape of college sports changes as we know it. I’m not sure/don’t recall what their sources were but they were talking about how the Pac-10/Big 10 and the SEC/ACC were pretty much allied and that rather soon we’re going to end up with 4 major super conferences.
They were talking about how they believed the Big12 and Big East would basically be divied amongst these other conferences and that uncertain times are coming for programs in these conferences that are not currently major players in both football and basketball (ie half the big east gets screwed) along with other programs, the only one named that comes to mind is Baylor.
Their theories seemed a little too perfect, with the end result being four superconferences of 16 teams each, each with a conference championship football game (yeah, it’s all about the $). I guess the cool part would be that it easily lends itself to a “College Football Final Four”.
I don't think the move to CAA is that big of a deal.
This article plays up the “Hollywood” aspect of CAA, but in fact, most majors, other than Wasserman, represent both athletes and actors. I think that more than going after a new, Hollywood brand for the Pac-10, this represents the conferences displeasure with the TV contracts WMG had advised on and negotiated for them.
It is encouraging, though, to hear that Scott is going to be proactive about branding the Pac-10, though I think that is more of a function of the commissioner himself, than of the firm it hires as a consultant. I think that playing up the glamour of the West Coast will help the entire conference recruit nationally, and help in locking down the LA market (though we haven’t seen too many big name players leave the area since Rick’s joined the party).
We're havin' too much fun today. We ain't thinkin' 'bout tomorrow.
CAA
Just spoke with a friend who works for CAA and she was not surprised by the partnership. In fact she said CAA handles many athletes, whether that means they will be able to handle an entire athletic conference is another story but I do not think it is an issue at all. In fact, if this were to happen during football season I assume it wouldnt get much play on BN, but since there is not much besides baseball to hash out right now, its all we got. CAA will do a fine job representing the PAC X, there is absolutley nothing to worry about since like others have said before, it cant get much worse than it is now.
'bout time!
For a conference that has three of the top five schools that have won national championships across the board, it’s about time the rest of the nation realizes the potency of PAC-10 sports!

by 



















