USC Traveler

The "greatest hits" of the PAC Presidents, Tennis Larry and Klownkoff rivals "Hot Rocks", "Legend", and "ELV1S" for top greatest hits collection: Starting a conference network without ESPN or Fox as a partner. Rejecting LHN and therefore blowing up PAC16- they were never going to get an equivalent chance to expand with two Blue Bloods. Rejecting OU and OSU a year or two later. Focus on Olympic sports in all media and programming on PACNet to the detriment of football. Scott trying to create parity through brutal scheduling for the PAC's best teams. Welcome to the playoff drought. Klownkoff failing to realize that USC had been unhappy for more than a decade, and was seriously looking at the BIG. Klownkoff's delusions: $40m per team because the BIG's media deal increased the PAC's value. It actually did the opposite by eliminating buyers. Klownkoff being in no hurry to get a deal done and allowing B12 to jump the line and soak up most of the remaining $$$ and tv slots. // I could go on and on, but just that list is a stunning amount of complete fails. So glad to be leaving this clown conference behind and going to a conference that is actually well-run and cares about football.

Thank you sir. It's been way too long. Great to be back. I've enjoyed your work, as always, while lurking for about the last year or so. Should have jumped back on at that time, but better late than never. The BIG/SEC endgame, B12 as clear #3 and WAC10 death spiral are all too good not to spend a little time speculating and theorizing. With GOT long gone, realignment is the next best thing.

😂 Perfect on so many levels.

The BIG folks I've talked to are glad he's gone. According to them: 1. Warren isn't 1/100th as sharp as Delaney, and he never got his credibility back after the debacle in 2020. 2. Warren was a figurehead- Gene Smith (OSU) and Ward Manuel (UM) are the real power players- the ones who drove the USC and UCLA addition. 3. Warren started pushing for expansion beyond USC and UCLA after he got so much positive press when they were announced. The BIG schools don't want further expansion until the ACC schools become available- unless it's ND. 4. Because of all of the above, he didn't have any base of support, which is why he left to go back to the NFL.

You're nailing an issue that most people don't think about- opportunity cost of expansion for the BIG/SEC and the networks. The networks want annual rotating games between the big brands. That's what they're paying for, and why the BIG/SEC are moving to 3-6-6. UT, with OU, aggy and arky as their 3 permanent rivals, will get something like Bama, LSU, Auburn one year, and UGA, UF, Vols the next year. At 18 teams, you can still have that rotation with a 3-7-7 schedule, and teams can have 7 home games, which schools want for revenue. 20 is more problematic. The same rotation is possible with a 3-8-8, but schools won't get 7 home games every year with only one OOC game. So the SEC/BIG are going to be extremely selective with who they add to get to 18, and the bar to go to 20 or more will be very high. // That, along with recruiting, is why I keep thinking there's a very real chance the SEC doesn't add FSU and Miami. With the SEC already firmly entrenched in FL, those schools don't bring anywhere near the return to the SEC that they would to the BIG (huge new state for BTN and recruiting). And I don't think SEC fans would be all that excited to add those schools into their schedule. They won't be excited about VA and NC schools either, but the money will make it worth it for the conference and ESPN. For the BIG, adding the FL schools as part of a bigger package of ACC schools to get into VA, NC, GA and FL would be worth changing their rotation to every three years instead of every two. For example, USC would get OSU and PSU year 1, UM and MSU year 2, then FSU and Miami in year 3. For the SEC, they only get the benefits of new markets by adding VA and NC schools, so they could easily stop at 18 with a 3-7-7 schedule and be done. And the SEC has options- if UNC and UVA got BIG, they'll just add VT and NC State, which are more like SEC schools than UNC and UVA anyway. The conventional wisdom in the media is that the SEC and BIG will always want to match each other with the same number of teams, but the conventional wisdom in the media also held that UT wasn't going SEC and USC wasn't going BIG. The SEC and BIG will both do what makes them the most money. Their plans are already diverging when it comes to geographic continuity. The SEC isn't going to add schools that are dilutive just to have the same number of schools as the BIG. The people pushing that are the same people who predicted we'd have four superconferences with 16 teams each. We could easily see a 24 team BIG and an 18 team SEC, as schools like FSU, Miami and GT bring so much more value to the BIG than they do to the SEC.

Outstanding! Like any classic work, it just gets better with time.

With BYU joining the B12, has anyone updated the iconic "Cougar Stuck Outside the Window" image from Shaggy yet ? I'd think one of the BYU fans would have created something ITT with the cougar breaking through the window by now.

I agree that it will be a battle royale between the SEC and BIG for UVA and UNC, and they will likely be the first dominoes. They're academically elite flagships of the two biggest states that have neither a BIG nor SEC school. Both conferences want both schools, which is why I think they'll be able to bring Duke along with them, as they'll have leverage, and those three schools are tied together very closely. My gut is that they will go BIG b/c of academics, cultural similarities between Charlottesville and Chapel Hill with places like Madison, Columbus and Ann Arbor, and the fact that neither emphasizes football. // I also agree that the SEC office and ESPN will want FSU and Miami in the SEC. But Sankey ultimately works for the Presidents of the 15 schools that don't have jizz jars. (He clearly doesn't give two shits about aggy.😂) And if you're an SEC school, it will be a lot easier to recruit against FSU if they're in the BIG than if they're in the SEC. They don't need FSU to get access to FL- they already have it. If FSU is in the SEC, they become much more formidable to recruit against. Same goes for Miami. And the SECNet is already in FL at in-market rates b/c of UF, so there's not anywhere near as much of a revenue increase for the SEC as the BIG would get from adding those schools. The sole reason for adding them (besides increased inventory) would be to keep the BIG out of FL. But I keep going back to the coaches and ADs, who would prefer to recruit against them as BIG members than SEC members. It will be really interesting to see who wins that battle in the SEC- the conference office/ESPN or the schools. // If the SEC is wants them, no doubt FSU will say yes. Miami is more interesting. Miami admin, student base, donors, etc (and Miami/Dade county in general) are more aligned culturally to the BIG than the SEC. If I'm the BIG, I offer UVA, UNC, Duke, GT, FSU and Miami as a package deal. They like playing each other. Guarantee that they will all be together in a new division in the BIG (or that all will be matched up against each other in a 3-7-7-7 format). Bringing them in as a package would give the BIG a great chance of landing all of them. I'd favor the BIG to get all of them but FSU in that scenario, even if the SEC is offering all of those schools also (which they wouldn't, as GT offers them no value.) And of course, if ND has not already joined the BIG by then, this would force ND's hand. Add Stanford as ND's partner, and that would be a wrap at 24 teams (if the FL schools joined). // If they can't get the FL schools, I could see the BIG stopping at 20 with ND, Stanford, UVA and UNC- if they could get them and only them. But I do think UNC and UVA will use their leverage to bring along Duke, and probably GT also. That would leave the BIG at 22. If they can't get FSU but can add Miami, that would be 23. TCU becomes interesting for #24 in that scenario. DFW is the #5 US tv market. BIG is in the top four already. Assuming Stanford has been added, BIG would be in 8 of the top 10 tv markets if they added TCU. Houston (7) and Boston (9) being the only exceptions.

USC (under the old incompetent leadership) shoulders part of the blame for not forcing the PAC16 to happen with LHN and all schools keeping T3 rights, but working to kill expansion in '21 was the first smart thing USC has done in the boardroom in a longtime (new leadership in place). They were already talking to the BIG and probably knew where this would all end up. If they had voted to expand, then there is going to be a new media deal and a need for a GOR. Nuking expansion gave them another 10-11 months to get everything finalized with the BIG in secrecy. It fucked over the PAC, but the PAC had been fucking USC over for two decades, so that's payback. No one at USC gives a fuck about the PAC. They're getting what they deserve. Killing expansion was the first Tywin Lannister-style move USC made this century. About damn time.

Yeah- aggy never realized that they were simply a pawn in the SEC's game. They were a means to an end to get the real prize in TX. Hope they enjoyed their glory days in the SEC the last decade. How may SEC titles have they won again ? I've lost count.😂 // As to the SEC vs BIG recruiting pitch, totally agree, and I think that's the same thing the existing SEC schools want to be able to say when recruiting against FSU and Miami in the future. The conventional wisdom is that FSU and Miami are SEC bound. But if you're Bama, UGA, UF, Vols, etc, why would you want to elevate FSU and Miami with an SEC badge ? That would make them much, much harder to recruit against. SECNet won't make any additional money in FL with those teams, and they're not game-changers like UT or USC joining a conference. I think there's a very good chance those teams end up in the BIG, which would benefit greatly from a FL presence. Preventing them from joining the BIG might be something the SEC office would want, but I could see the old-line SEC power schools nuking that. What do you think ? 50/50 on FSU and Miami SEC/BIG ?

I agree that it would have been fun, but I don't think it would have lasted for more than a decade or two probably, because aggy was always going to end up in the SEC. They'd been thinking about it for years. They would have eventually left the PAC16 for the same reasons they left the B12- butthurt little brother complex. And Slive/Sankey/whoever would have always been ready to take them as a way to get into TX. And once aggy was in the SEC, things would have played out the same way most likely, with UT making the move to protect recruiting and keep aggy in their place.

Agreed that the SEC/BIG will be getting 3 bids each the vast majority of the time. BIG/SEC- 6 bids ACC, B12, PAC, G5 champs- 4 bids 2 bids left. I could see a lot of years where the BIG/SEC get 7, and the second place B12 team gets the other slot. There will be a fair number of years where one of the BIG/SEC will have all their top teams with one or two losses due to the schedule breaking favorably and the top teams evenly distributing the losses. I'm sure Sankey will try to set the schedules up in this way, even with a 3-6-6. The BIG will try as well. Overly-simplistic example: UT beats LSU but loses once (to the Vols), and doesn't have Bama or UGA on their schedule. The Vols lose to Bama, but win their other games. Bama loses to LSU, but beats everyone else. UGA loses only to Bama. All four have 1 loss. None are getting left out for the 2nd place ACC team. Overly simplified, but it makes the point. Most years, one or two of two of these teams will have two losses, but they still get in over the 2nd place team from the ACC and PAC. Ultimately, this is a tv product that will be controlled by ESPN and FOX/CBS/NBC. Which teams will they want to see make the cut for the last couple of spots ?

Agreed. PAC 16 would have been a great conference for a number of years, but in the long, long run, consolidation was inevitable. It has been ever since the 80’s, when UGA and OU beat the NZAA in court to get control of their tv rights. We’ve seen it over and over- the most successful conferences picking off quality programs and/or markets, generating more money, and making themselves even more attractive for their next expansion targets- all the while weakening the other conferences. There has been a steady trend for 30 years of bigger conferences with more brands, and fewer conferences that matter. The SEC/BIG finally got so strong that the revenue, exposure and recruiting advantages made it impossible for schools like UT and USC to stay in the B12 and PAC. UT, OU and USC ended up in the conference that best fit each school. Like Thanos, this was inevitable.

Agree 100%. But none of that had anything to do with ESPN and Fox. Self-inflicted wounds by the PAC- including USC for agreeing to it due to incompetence and weakness of Haden and Nikias.

Fair enough. I think there's a value in certainty, given "never say never" in realignment, so I'd be willing to do it, but I get where you're coming from. If you allow WSU and OSU to come along, you ensure all of it happening, so that if the 4C schools are on the fence, you get everyone to come over together. But I agree that the B12 holds the leverage, and if the 4C schools make the jump, UW and UO probably follow anyway.

Hopefully those lower tier games end up on a streamer instead.

True, but by mid-January Wilner was saying that the PAC needs a deal by March.

There was more to it than that, though. The PAC Presidents and Commisar Scott were so intent on handicapping USC and boosting their own programs through equal revenue sharing that they couldn't see past that to realize they were signing the PAC's death warrant by not allowing UT to have the LHN in the PAC. If they had allowed schools to keep T3 rights, the PAC 16 would have become a reality. UT, OU, USC, etc would have made a little more money than other schools, but the vast majority of the money would have been equal, and would be exponentially larger than what the PAC is looking at now. Scott and the PAC Presidents' arrogance, envy and incompetence had as much or more to do with where things ended up than the networks. // And I'm fine with where things ended up. UT in the SEC is going to be great to watch, and I love USC in the BIG. We've got a lot more in common with OSU, UM, Wiscy and other schools that care about football than we do with most of the schools in the PAC, who don't invest in football and don't care about it.

Can't wait to hear Wilner and Clownzano try to spin this as a positive. As an example of how much Wilner keeps moving the goalposts on the WAC10's timeline for their deal, this is from mid-December. He was saying this would get done early in the new year.

That makes a lot more sense, and lines up with what their old AD (Chris Hill) said on Wilner's podcast a few weeks back. I should have phrased my op differently to make it clear that was the sentiment from their fans and supposed "insiders". LOL

I'd rather watch the reruns than most of the lower tier PAC games. The Johnny Cash Show was awesome. Incredible guests, and he would play a song or two with them.

In a vacuum, I'd agree, but I don't think UW and the Zeros are ever going to get into the BIG, so it would be worth it to set the B12 up as the clear 3rd strongest conference. If the B12 doesn't kill the PAC off outright, there's a chance ESPN decides to merge the ACC leftovers with the PAC when the ACC comes apart in 10-12 years to be able to use the ACC/PAC leftovers as negotiating leverage against the B12 to keep costs down. If the B12 absorbs the PAC, there would be no legit competition presented by the ACC leftovers, so the B12 would be in a strong negotiating position, and would have its pick of whoever the BIG and SEC don't take. At that point, the B12 would be truly coast to coast, in a tier of their own in the CFB world- not making BIG/SEC money, but in an unassailable position as the next best conference/league. In the meantime, having all 10 remaining PAC schools in the B12 would enable both Friday and Saturday 7/7:30 PT kicks throughout the season, so they might come close to paying for themselves playing in a conference with teams from Texas, OK and other places that care about football.

That’s what Utah people keep saying. That their association with Stanford and Cal helped get them into AAU a few years ago and has boosted their research money substantially. I think a lot of Utah fans are delusional, but I can see where building relationships throughout a conference could help them get the votes to be accepted. Good old fashioned politics.

It's counterintuitive, but SDSU is the least likely school of the five to go B12. They really want to get more connected to Cal and the UC system, and wouldn't mind at all being associated with Stanford, so they're looking at PAC membership as the way to do it. Even if the 4C, UW and the Zeros from Eugene Community College went B12, SDSU would be ecstatic to be in a conference with Cal, Stanford and other CA schools (SJ State, Fresno), if for some reason the Bay Area schools didn't also join the B12. I would peg Utah as a close second for least likely to leave, for the same reasons. They want to stay associated with the Bay Area schools. Utah is AAU now thanks to joining the PAC. They want to keep improving their academics and research, while maintaining a solid football program- all with an eye on becoming a realistic option for the BIG in the 2030's. CU (former B12 school, better recent history recruiting TX than CA) and UA (bball focused and closest distance to B12 schools from the old PAC10) are by far the most likely. They also have the least margin for error. If they don't secure seats at the table now, they could be left out in the cold later. All of that being said, I think CU and UA go to the B12, and when they do, it sets off a chain reaction. ASU follows, at which point the PNW schools also join the exodus. Do they use their leverage to bring the Beavs and Wazzu along ? It would be well worth taking all four PNW schools to kill off the PAC once and for all. The Bay Area schools would have to swallow their pride and join at that point. If I were Yormark (he may have already done this), I would have offered UW, the Zeros and the Bay Area schools a deal where there was no exit fee and and easy out from the GOR if they get an invite from the P2. Same with the Four Corners. Reality is that most will never get the call, and while Stanford probably ends up in the BIG eventually as ND's partner, that could be 12 more years. If any of them did leave, it wouldn't be a huge hit to the B12, and it would enable the B12 to clearly establish itself as the last man standing once the ACC gets picked apart.

Klownkoff playing Candyland sounds about right. He clearly lives in Fantasyland.