Realignment talk not going away

[CustersDoctor 584]

15 minutes ago, BluTechsan said:

Yup. If there were a 60/40 deal on the table it would have already been signed sealed and delivered. 

As I said, "Nobody signs until everybody signs". None of the 4 corners are going to sign away their GOR right now. Then a month from now OUW take off for the BIG.

[BluTechsan 393]

4 hours ago, CustersDoctor said:

As I said, "Nobody signs until everybody signs". None of the 4 corners are going to sign away their GOR right now. Then a month from now OUW take off for the BIG.

 

That may be true but I was alluding to there not being an offer anywhere close to 60% linear. The latest from Apple (if true) was 80% streaming and 20% linear.

[Hurtlocker 2,213]

The most difficult part of this isn't even getting the deal, its that each round of realignment makes conferences ante up the damages to leaving more and more.   If you're not Oregon and Washington, you want like a 20 year GoR, if you're Oregon and Washington, you want just the next media deal.   No one is ever going to feel secure or happy from now on.

 

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

 

[LTbear 4,171]

1 hour ago, Jabberwocky said:

 

Interesante 

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

 

[billfromlaketravis 11,527]

4 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

 

If they're going to take that commuter school in Orlando, the Big 12 might as well take SDSU. The entire conference is desperate for new recruiting grounds, and values hoops. Plus the Padres are the only competition in town. 

[Satchel 6,949]

2 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

If they're going to take that commuter school in Orlando, the Big 12 might as well take SDSU. The entire conference is desperate for new recruiting grounds, and values hoops. Plus the Padres are the only competition in town. 

From a branding perspective, I don’t the B12 wants to be a conglomeration of schools named after cities.

[Trojan Man 429]

18 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

The most difficult part of this isn't even getting the deal, its that each round of realignment makes conferences ante up the damages to leaving more and more.   If you're not Oregon and Washington, you want like a 20 year GoR, if you're Oregon and Washington, you want just the next media deal.   No one is ever going to feel secure or happy from now on.

 

It's a major problem for the ACC and the Pac 12, not so much for the Big 12.  Ironically, getting picked apart and left for dead multiple times before the ACC and the Pac 12 were ever touched ended up helping the Big 12 quite a bit.  The Big 12 was able to go through their existential crises while there was still enough money and TV windows for 5 power conferences.  The ACC and the Pac 12 are going through it while the sport is whittling down to 2, maybe 2.5, power conferences.  What you said about no one feeling secure or happy only applies if your conference relies on schools that are P2 flight risks or has middling members deluded enough to think they'll get a P2 golden ticket eventually.  Combine them with the schools that know they are never getting a P2 invite and you have three competing factions with very different agendas and goals in the ACC and the Pac 12.

Meanwhile, the Big 12 already worked through the drama of the stages of grief and made it to acceptance.  ACC and Pac 12 schools are all fluctuating between the first 4 stages of grief.  Big 12 schools are aware they are all stuck on the same boat so they might as well row in the same direction and work together.  I wonder if anyone would believe you if you traveled back in time to 2011 and called in to a sports talk station claiming that in a little more than a decade the Big 12 would lose Texas and Oklahoma yet be positioned to poach from the Pac 12 and the ACC to become the #3 conference.

[billfromlaketravis 11,527]

14 minutes ago, Satchel said:

From a branding perspective, I don’t the B12 wants to be a conglomeration of schools named after cities.

Tech guy(? It’s hard to keep track) gets high and mighty on SDSU. Greater San Diego has population of 3.3 million and 1 pro baseball team. The Big 12 should lay down in traffic for access to that market. 

[CustersDoctor 584]

6 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

 

If the Pac12 gets a good enough deal and OUW do NOT get a BIG invite, then they will NOT expand! Such a TV deal would have to be a 6 year 1.8 billion dollar contract. Which is 30mi a year per school, but only if they stay at 10 schools. So if they stay together they add nobody. Adding SDSU or Fresno or SMU dilutes the pay out and increases the infighting over the limited available linear exposure. 

Does that mean SDSU is off to the Big12? Not if the PAC collapses. If OUW get their wedding invitation then they are gone. Or if the best new deal is lousy then there may 6 PAC schools in line to come to the BIG12. So SDSU's only route to the BIG12 is if the PAC stays together. 

So if the Pac collapses the BIG12  ends up with 4-6 PAC schools then SDSU gets in to some third rate version of the PAC12 with OST, WST, CAL, STAN, FresnoSt and 4 to 6 more schools wanting to make what is now a vertical move.

So the SDSU AD is correct. They either end up as the 13th team in the BIG12 or as a team the PAC12. A sad third rate version of what they have now. Such a revamped version of the PAC12 would be as big of a ratings blunder as putting Conan Obrien on the Tonight Show.

[Satchel 6,949]

3 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Tech guy(? It’s hard to keep track) gets high and mighty on SDSU. Greater San Diego has population of 3.3 million and 1 pro baseball team. The Big 12 should lay down in traffic for access to that market. 

If SDSU was all that they’d already be in a P5. Houston, Cincinnati, San Diego…who’s next? Memphis? 

[TKthunder2 4,997]

The Big 12 is not adding SDSU as the 13th team. They are sending out feelers but ESPN is only going to pay an increase for P5 expansion, and FOX may not even do that. They’ll keep communication open with them so maybe they decide to expand prior to their next media deal, but there is virtually no chance they do it now.

For the Big 12 it’s Arizona/Colorado and other P12 schools or stand pat.

SDSU wants both conferences to believe they are a hot commodity and for donors to give money to improve facilities to get to a P5 level, but their only realistic option at this point is joining a weaker PAC12 with Stanford/Cal post Big 12 raids.

If the PAC stays together they’ll simply remain in the MAC.

[bullet 1,599]

5 hours ago, CustersDoctor said:

If the Pac12 gets a good enough deal and OUW do NOT get a BIG invite, then they will NOT expand! Such a TV deal would have to be a 6 year 1.8 billion dollar contract. Which is 30mi a year per school, but only if they stay at 10 schools. So if they stay together they add nobody. Adding SDSU or Fresno or SMU dilutes the pay out and increases the infighting over the limited available linear exposure. 

Does that mean SDSU is off to the Big12? Not if the PAC collapses. If OUW get their wedding invitation then they are gone. Or if the best new deal is lousy then there may 6 PAC schools in line to come to the BIG12. So SDSU's only route to the BIG12 is if the PAC stays together. 

So if the Pac collapses the BIG12  ends up with 4-6 PAC schools then SDSU gets in to some third rate version of the PAC12 with OST, WST, CAL, STAN, FresnoSt and 4 to 6 more schools wanting to make what is now a vertical move.

So the SDSU AD is correct. They either end up as the 13th team in the BIG12 or as a team the PAC12. A sad third rate version of what they have now. Such a revamped version of the PAC12 would be as big of a ratings blunder as putting Conan Obrien on the Tonight Show.

SDSU wasn't in the top 4 left out last time in the Big 12.  They are probably #3 in TV value in the MWC.  The only way they get in the Big 12 is in the Big 12 picks off 3 Pac schools.  They really need the networks to demand 12 in the Pac or they will be window Aztecs.  Then they will get in the Pac because of their location.

[BurntOrange&White 40,039]

On 4/29/2023 at 2:41 PM, billfromlaketravis said:

If they're going to take that commuter school in Orlando, the Big 12 might as well take SDSU. The entire conference is desperate for new recruiting grounds, and values hoops. Plus the Padres are the only competition in town. 

I think it's hilarious that Big 12 could take the one school that the PAC was heavily relying on to fill a void. If you can get them + Arizona that would be glorious.

Edited May 1, 2023 by BurntOrange&White

[BurntOrange&White 40,039]

On 4/29/2023 at 10:20 PM, TKthunder2 said:

The Big 12 is not adding SDSU as the 13th team. They are sending out feelers but ESPN is only going to pay an increase for P5 expansion, and FOX may not even do that. They’ll keep communication open with them so maybe they decide to expand prior to their next media deal, but there is virtually no chance they do it now.

For the Big 12 it’s Arizona/Colorado and other P12 schools or stand pat.

SDSU wants both conferences to believe they are a hot commodity and for donors to give money to improve facilities to get to a P5 level, but their only realistic option at this point is joining a weaker PAC12 with Stanford/Cal post Big 12 raids.

If the PAC stays together they’ll simply remain in the MAC.

If Big 12 wants to crush PAC it doesn't have to be Colorado at all. PAC is banking on SDSU as their ace in the hole for a network deal, especially if the 10 team numbers come back lower than their egos think it will be. 

 

Taking SDSU while also taking an Arizona will be chefs kiss for PAc.

[camel at sea 589]

So if the PAC gets raided heavily, but still hangs on to SDSU, what does that look like?  SDSU, Stanford, Cal, Oregon St, Washington St., Utah

That's a viable P5 division, but it's not an entire conference.  I think they could build an eastern division from G5 schools.  Wyoming, Colorado St, SMU, Rice, Tulane, and maybe New Mexico?  Two state flagships, a state ag school, and three elite private schools.  The TV markets are good, too. 

If the Big 12 added an odd number of PAC schools and missed out on SDSU, I bet they'd invite Boise.    

 

[TKthunder2 4,997]

3 hours ago, camel at sea said:

So if the PAC gets raided heavily, but still hangs on to SDSU, what does that look like?  SDSU, Stanford, Cal, Oregon St, Washington St., Utah

That's a viable P5 division, but it's not an entire conference.  I think they could build an eastern division from G5 schools.  Wyoming, Colorado St, SMU, Rice, Tulane, and maybe New Mexico?  Two state flagships, a state ag school, and three elite private schools.  The TV markets are good, too. 

If the Big 12 added an odd number of PAC schools and missed out on SDSU, I bet they'd invite Boise.    

 

The leftover PAC10 plus some combo of the best of the MWC (SDSU, Fresno, Boise, Colorado St, UNLV) and the best of the Western American schools (SMU, Tulane, Memphis, Rice) would still work but they would clearly be the lowest of the P5.

[Hagbard Celine 10,934]

On 4/28/2023 at 3:13 PM, John80 said:

Bobby Bowden openly said he didn't want the SEC schedule and it's not surprising Clemson feels the same way. 

wilkommen j80

[Hagbard Celine 10,934]

On 4/29/2023 at 10:33 AM, Jabberwocky said:

 

every quote or soundbite from any principal is unintelligible without the inside knowledge of what they know or don't know

at this point i have started skipping over quotes from any principal or insider

the clock is ticking to july 2nd

[LTbear 4,171]

 

 

Edited May 2, 2023 by LTbear

[Guest]

ASU is just gonna sit down there and rot, or what?

[Al_4_ISU 12,496]

Why are you guys acting like a Greg Swaim tweet indicates something?

[BurntOrange&White 40,039]

4 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Why are you guys acting like a Greg Swaim tweet indicates something?

I enjoy anything that shows the PAC's downfall.

[Al_4_ISU 12,496]

34 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I enjoy anything that shows the PAC's downfall.

It’s Greg Swaim.  It’s meaningless.

[BurntOrange&White 40,039]

Just now, Al_4_ISU said:

It’s Greg Swaim.  It’s meaningless.

It still fuels the fire of realignment discussion on the Twitter. Therefore that ensues PAC suffering.

[Josef Pwag 1,741]

33 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

It still fuels the fire of realignment discussion on the Twitter.  

...not for anyone that is intelligent.

[BurntOrange&White 40,039]

Just now, Josef Pwag said:

...not for anyone that is intelligent.

That's literaly why I said Twitter,, comment section is entertaining.

[Steamboat1874 4,085]

Just because SDSU is in a large TV market does not mean the people in that market will watch them play.

[LTbear 4,171]

Who knew a little Swaim tweet would get some of y'all so rustled 

[DFW Horn 6,221]

2 hours ago, LTbear said:

 

 

The Runnin' Rebels are back, baby!

Big 16 !!!

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

 

[hook me 2,103]

7 hours ago, LTbear said:

 

 

Big 12 fans wouldn't really want SDSU & UNLV would they? I mean, I understand the road trips would be fun, but they are a giant shart in terms of everything else. Pray for UO/UW or hold your water for the ACC meltdown before adding more G5 schools.

[KaiserSoze 998]

49 minutes ago, hook me said:

Big 12 fans wouldn't really want SDSU & UNLV would they?

Nope. I give zero fucks about either of those schools and I don't know anybody who does beyond the 2-3 posters here who consistently mention them. I've never heard anyone I know IRL being them up.

Edited May 2, 2023 by KaiserSoze

[LTbear 4,171]

52 minutes ago, hook me said:

Big 12 fans wouldn't really want SDSU & UNLV would they?

I don't think many would, but what Big XII fans want doesn't matter to the process.

And also, it is Swaim - just internet chatter fodder, likely nothing more. If I went full conspiracy mode you could imagine that CU and Arizona are schools the Big XII thinks they can get, and mentioning UNLV or SDSU is just a way of making ASU and/ or Utah jump. 

[TKthunder2 4,997]

24 minutes ago, hook me said:

Big 12 fans wouldn't really want SDSU & UNLV would they? I mean, I understand the road trips would be fun, but they are a giant shart in terms of everything else. Pray for UO/UW or hold your water for the ACC meltdown before adding more G5 schools.

Correct. Plus ESPN/FOX aren’t going to pay for them either.

[Gidnik 3,285]

1 hour ago, Jabberwocky said:

 

For those of us not a Bloomberg subscriber?

[Jabberwocky 1,666]

21 minutes ago, Gidnik said:

For those of us not a Bloomberg subscriber?

Spoiler

Bloomberg

ESPN’s Jimmy Pitaro Will Decide the Fate of Cable Television
Trying to forecast when ESPN will go entirely online is one of the great guessing games of the media industry

ESPN The Party - Inside
Photographer: Mike Windle/Getty Images

ByGerry Smith+Follow
May 1, 2023 at 6:00 AM CDT

Ever since Bob Iger returned to lead the Walt Disney Co. in November, he’s spoken almost every day with one of his key deputies, ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro. Iger is an avid sports fan with a deep knowledge of history. “He has forgotten more about sports than I’ll ever know,” Pitaro said.

But these days, the two executives don’t focus much on the past. Many of their conversations, Pitaro said in a recent interview, concern ESPN’s future — specifically, its streaming service, ESPN+, and deciding the right moment to someday offer the full channel to the growing legions of cable cord-cutters.

“We’re going to get to a point where we take our entire network, our flagship programming, and make it available direct to consumer,” Pitaro said. “That’s a ‘when,’ not an ‘if’….We’re only going to do it when it makes sense for our business and for our bottom line.”

For now, ESPN operates two largely distinct businesses. It shows the biggest sports matchups almost exclusively on traditional TV channels — and for good reason. Last year, TV viewers generated $28 billion in revenue for Disney, the most of any big media company. At the same time, it’s airing more live sports on ESPN+, a $10-a-month streaming service that launched five years ago.

The network’s streaming ambitions keep growing. As part of ongoing negotiations with the NBA over a new contract that will take effect in 2025, ESPN executives want to acquire the rights to put pro basketball games on ESPN+. “I’m confident we’re going to see eye-to-eye on how to prioritize streaming,” Pitaro said of talks with the league.

With ESPN’s streaming subscribers growing and its cable subscribers shrinking, the two businesses are starting to converge. Trying to forecast exactly when ESPN’s TV slate will go online has become one of the great guessing games of the media industry. Inside ESPN, executives have long wrestled with the math, studying data and graphs, and calculating how many subscribers they’d need to attract and at what price for a streaming version of ESPN to replace the money they now get from pay-TV distributors.

At a recent investor conference, Iger called the move “inevitable,” but didn’t offer a timeline. The eventual repercussions would be widespread. Many industry executives see ESPN as vital to maintaining the already dwindling number of cable TV subscribers and fear that when Disney starts selling the network’s whole lineup online, the change could further accelerate cord cutting and the demise of other channels.

“It’s not a small decision,” Wells Fargo analyst Steven Cahall said. “Disney is constantly weighing the risk of not doing it versus the risk of doing it too early.”

The pressure on ESPN to shake up its business model is mounting. The network currently has 74 million subscribers, down 25 million from about a decade ago. During the last fiscal year, ESPN+ lost about $400 million, according to an estimate by Cahall. 

In the coming year, Disney will begin reporting separate financials for ESPN for the first time, casting a brighter spotlight on the sports media giant under the intent gaze of investors. Many Disney watchers see the move as a prelude to a potential spinoff of the business, though Iger has said that’s not immediately in his plans. Meanwhile, the company will continue tinkering with how to best divvy up its programming between traditional TV and streaming.

“We’re proud of the fact that we’ve been able to create this must-have product that is still very much complementary to what we have on linear television,” Pitaro said.

Cable and Streaming Subscribers Converge

Source: Company reports

ESPN subscribers based on September of each year. ESPN+ subscribers based on February.

When ESPN+ launched on April 12, 2018, it did so with a modest programming lineup, offering portions of a PGA Tour tournament, a hockey-focused studio show called In the Crease and a series featuring NBA analysis from Kobe Bryant. An early breakthrough came in January 2019 with the airing of an Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) event that pulled in 568,000 new subscribers.

Since then, the amount of sports on ESPN+ has grown dramatically. Last year, it aired 27,000 live events, including soccer, football, hockey, baseball, college sports, golf and tennis. It also airs UFC pay-per-view events, the full library of 30 for 30 documentaries and alternate telecasts, such as a recent animated NHL game in the style of a popular Disney cartoon series.

At the same time, ESPN is wrestling to control costs, a dynamic playing out across much of the media landscape. In late April, ESPN laid off dozens of employees, mostly those who worked behind the scenes, and the network plans to make cuts to its roster of on-air talent by the middle of this year. The layoffs — which included Russell Wolff who served as general manager of ESPN+ for over four years — are part of Iger’s overall push to reduce spending at Disney by $5.5 billion. ESPN also plans to be more selective about acquiring sports rights.

“In this environment where we’re identifying savings and efficiencies and very much focused on our bottom line, of course there are deals that are going to get a heightened amount of scrutiny,” Pitaro said.

Viewership on ESPN+ has been growing. Total ESPN+ viewing last year was up 53% from the year before. Viewing of women’s sports has more than doubled. Through March, the PGA Tour audience is up 75%. College football viewership last season rose 40%. ESPN+ has also benefited from cross-promotions with other Disney properties. ESPN+ has aired episodes of Welcome to Wrexham, a show on Hulu about a Welsh soccer club narrated by the team’s celebrity owners, Ryan Reynolds and Rob McElhenney.

“When ESPN+ launched, the focus out of the gate was on niche content,” Pitaro said. “Fast forward to today, it’s well beyond that.”

In five years, ESPN+ has signed up about 25 million subscribers. So far, however, the business of streaming sports has proven to be far less lucrative than the traditional model it is rapidly replacing. Within the legacy cable and satellite TV bundle, ESPN is able to charge pay-TV providers more than $9 a month per subscriber. ESPN+ costs $10 a month. But that retail figure can be misleading. In reality, ESPN+ generates an average monthly revenue per subscriber of $5.53, according to Disney’s most recent earnings report, in part, because many subscribers get a discount by bundling the service with Disney+ and Hulu.

About 61% of ESPN+ subscribers get it through the Disney bundle, while 39% subscribe to ESPN+ on a standalone basis, according to estimates from Antenna, which measures sign-ups online and on streaming platforms. In theory, the packaging of ESPN+ with the other services makes it less likely that a consumer will cancel all three. Last year, when ESPN+ raised its price 43%, the bundle price remained the same — making it a comparatively attractive option. The strategy of having three separate apps “gives fans and viewers flexibility and choice, with the bundle being the best value,” said Wolff, who will remain in his role until July.

For now, as Disney executives weigh the pros and cons of selling ESPN outside the cable bundle, ESPN+ has become a training ground for developing streaming technology and business expertise for when that day finally arrives. Already, the staff behind ESPN+ is deeply integrated with the rest of the company. Disney employees in Connecticut, New York, California, North Carolina and Texas all work on ESPN+.

“There’s not a corner office somewhere with a bunch of folks who are just working on ESPN+,” said John Lasker, ESPN’s vice president of digital media programming and acquisitions. “ESPN+ is part of everybody’s job.”

Sorry for the formatting. I am not an expert on copy and pasting articles.

[DFW Horn 6,221]

3 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

 

See?

Those of you bangin' on the PAC for going 60%+ streaming don't realize or understand Kliavkoff is really a visionary. 😰 

[camel at sea 589]

7 hours ago, LTbear said:

I don't think many would, but what Big XII fans want doesn't matter to the process.

And also, it is Swaim - just internet chatter fodder, likely nothing more. If I went full conspiracy mode you could imagine that CU and Arizona are schools the Big XII thinks they can get, and mentioning UNLV or SDSU is just a way of making ASU and/ or Utah jump. 

ESPN might get on board with SDSU.  They've been competitive in both revenue sports, they're in a great TV/recruiting market, and (most importantly) they'd play in the late night window.  If the PAC is serious about going all-in with Apple, or signing on with someone like the CW for linear, then the Big 12 will be the fallback for ESPN's late night TV window.  Boise seems more likely to me as a second G5 option than UNLV.  

Between SDSU, Arizona, BYU, Boise, and Colorado, I think ESPN could work out a relatively good "Big 12 After Dark" slate.    

But... yeah, given that this is the case, it puts a ton of pressure on ASU and Utah to make the move to the Big 12.

[Royale with cheese 1,467]

14 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

It’s Greg Swaim.  It’s meaningless.

It's moo.

[KaiserSoze 998]

2 hours ago, camel at sea said:

ESPN might get on board with SDSU. 

Jesus Christ just shut the fuck up already about SDSU. Beyond you and 1 other poster nobody in the entire fucking world fucking cares about them.

Edited May 3, 2023 by KaiserSoze

[TKthunder2 4,997]

2 hours ago, camel at sea said:

ESPN might get on board with SDSU.  They've been competitive in both revenue sports, they're in a great TV/recruiting market, and (most importantly) they'd play in the late night window.  If the PAC is serious about going all-in with Apple, or signing on with someone like the CW for linear, then the Big 12 will be the fallback for ESPN's late night TV window.  Boise seems more likely to me as a second G5 option than UNLV.  

Between SDSU, Arizona, BYU, Boise, and Colorado, I think ESPN could work out a relatively good "Big 12 After Dark" slate.    

But... yeah, given that this is the case, it puts a ton of pressure on ASU and Utah to make the move to the Big 12.

I see no scenario where SDSU is pulled into the Big 12.

If the B12 can’t peel away anyone from the P12, despite the feelers and misinformation, they’ll stand pat. ESPN and FOX aren’t paying more for non P5 teams. Even if SDSU was “worth it” (and that’s being highly optimistic) they’d need at least one more team who likely is ‘not’ which means diluting B12 income or ESPN/FOX deliberately overpaying, neither of which are likely to happen.

If the B12 can only get a single P12 school, say Arizona, and they somehow worked it in secret to get SDSU as #14, we all know SDSU wants the PAC12 validation of teaming up with Cal/Stanford. Between that and the politics of their state I just don’t see that highly unlikely scenario occurring because as soon as SDSU is told the Big 12 is expanding with a P12 members they know they’ll get the first call from the P12 and have an invite in hand before the end of the week. Still this is their best chance for joining a strong B12 or a still somewhat respectable P12.

If the Big 12 can peel away 2 or 4 members SDSU is not needed, and if they can only get 3 (AZ, ASU, CU) then why rush? Wait a few years and either Utah will come to their senses or further realignment (P12 schools getting B1G invites) or lack of realignment (think Oregon NOT getting a B1G invite around their next TV deal) could make that final spot in the B12 extremely valuable.

Right now the B12 has the perfect attitude. We wanting to entertain and make money, and we are placing high value on Western members. But if they expand with SDSU, Fresno, UNLV, and Boise you immediately lower you brand, money, and make yourself less desirable to the schools that are your actual targets.

I’d wager a mortgage payment that SDSU will not get a Big 12 invite in the next 4 years (around when the next round of negotiations are about to begin). If the PAC12 holds strong at 10, and doesn’t look to be breaking then maybe I could see the B12 taking a chance on SDSU at that time (though I still think it would be unlikely).

[DFW Horn 6,221]

11 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

I see no scenario where SDSU is pulled into the Big 12.

If the B12 can’t peel away anyone from the P12, despite the feelers and misinformation, they’ll stand pat. ESPN and FOX aren’t paying more for non P5 teams. Even if SDSU was “worth it” (and that’s being highly optimistic) they’d need at least one more team who likely is ‘not’ which means diluting B12 income or ESPN/FOX deliberately overpaying, neither of which are likely to happen.

If the B12 can only get a single P12 school, say Arizona, and they somehow worked it in secret to get SDSU as #14, we all know SDSU wants the PAC12 validation of teaming up with Cal/Stanford. Between that and the politics of their state I just don’t see that highly unlikely scenario occurring because as soon as SDSU is told the Big 12 is expanding with a P12 members they know they’ll get the first call from the P12 and have an invite in hand before the end of the week. Still this is their best chance for joining a strong B12 or a still somewhat respectable P12.

If the Big 12 can peel away 2 or 4 members SDSU is not needed, and if they can only get 3 (AZ, ASU, CU) then why rush? Wait a few years and either Utah will come to their senses or further realignment (P12 schools getting B1G invites) or lack of realignment (think Oregon NOT getting a B1G invite around their next TV deal) could make that final spot in the B12 extremely valuable.

Right now the B12 has the perfect attitude. We wanting to entertain and make money, and we are placing high value on Western members. But if they expand with SDSU, Fresno, UNLV, and Boise you immediately lower you brand, money, and make yourself less desirable to the schools that are your actual targets.

I’d wager a mortgage payment that SDSU will not get a Big 12 invite in the next 4 years (around when the next round of negotiations are about to begin). If the PAC12 holds strong at 10, and doesn’t look to be breaking then maybe I could see the B12 taking a chance on SDSU at that time (though I still think it would be unlikely).

By what metrics are UH and Cincy appreciably better than SDSU?

Are their TV ratings that much higher? Now factor in their opponents. You don't think Big 12 membership will raise SDSU's profile and fan engagement?

I'm not necessarily arguing for SDSU, but I can see the Big 12 taking them if they can only lure 2-3 PAC teams. 

[BurntOrange&White 40,039]

16 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

By what metrics are UH and Cincy appreciably better than SDSU?

Are their TV ratings that much higher? Now factor in their opponents. You don't think Big 12 membership will raise SDSU's profile and fan engagement?

I'm not necessarily arguing for SDSU, but I can see the Big 12 taking them if they can only lure 2-3 PAC teams. 

I concur. Also SDSU more attractive than schools not named Arizona or Colorado.  I think if you can pull SDSU, the PAC's last glimmer of hope, plus Arizona it opens the door for other PAC schools and the big 12 to have a kill shot. Some people I think are way overthinking that SDSU potential addition. 

 

 

Also I can't see a world where ESPN goes majority streaming for their live broadcast. At least for the next 5-10 years. I think that will be interesting to see come 2030-2036.

[hook me 2,103]

1 hour ago, DFW Horn said:

By what metrics are UH and Cincy appreciably better than SDSU?

Are their TV ratings that much higher? Now factor in their opponents. You don't think Big 12 membership will raise SDSU's profile and fan engagement?

I'm not necessarily arguing for SDSU, but I can see the Big 12 taking them if they can only lure 2-3 PAC teams. 

Cincy & UH made much more sense for the Big 12 at the time, & even now, than SDSU. Even if you were to argue they're similar or even equals, UH & Cincy were added at a time when the Big 12 was falling to pieces. The stability they brought (along with BYU & UCF) allowed the conference to stick together & negotiate another TV deal. By the time that new TV deal was struck the Big 12 had solidified itself as the #3 P5 conference in terms of TV revenue thanks to the USCLA exit & the century-long ACC TV deal. There's no need for SDSU, their TV market means jack shit since there's no Big 12 network, the state of CA has shown time & time again how little it cares about college athletics outside of a good USC football team, they offer nothing in terms of intriguing matchups, they would dilute the TV revenue for each Big 12 school since there's no pro rata clause for G5 schools that I'm aware of, & UA, CU, & ASU (if they all come) + BYU would be plenty of members to have a late window game each week for ESPN if they require it (which I'm sure they will).

SDSU, Fresno St., Boise St., UNLV are prime for Pac membership if the other rats start jumping ship but that's about it.

[Satchel 6,949]

53 minutes ago, hook me said:

Cincy & UH made much more sense for the Big 12 at the time, & even now, than SDSU. Even if you were to argue they're similar or even equals, UH & Cincy were added at a time when the Big 12 was falling to pieces. The stability they brought (along with BYU & UCF) allowed the conference to stick together & negotiate another TV deal. By the time that new TV deal was struck the Big 12 had solidified itself as the #3 P5 conference in terms of TV revenue thanks to the USCLA exit & the century-long ACC TV deal. There's no need for SDSU, their TV market means jack shit since there's no Big 12 network, the state of CA has shown time & time again how little it cares about college athletics outside of a good USC football team, they offer nothing in terms of intriguing matchups, they would dilute the TV revenue for each Big 12 school since there's no pro rata clause for G5 schools that I'm aware of, & UA, CU, & ASU (if they all come) + BYU would be plenty of members to have a late window game each week for ESPN if they require it (which I'm sure they will).

SDSU, Fresno St., Boise St., UNLV are prime for Pac membership if the other rats start jumping ship but that's about it.

The City School Conference has an appealing euphony.

['stache 21,887]

2 minutes ago, Satchel said:

The City School Conference has an appealing euphony.

Simpson’s did it…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_Conference
 

We aren’t Big 1O or SEC. It’s fine to add city schools. And those conferences do have schools located in major urban areas, although they are mostly large state schools or private schools with long histories (NW, Vandy), and only UCLA has the city in the name. But like I said, we’re different, just the way it is. I think SDSU would be fine if we get CU, UA, and ASU, and if Utah really thinks they are peers with Stanford and Cal and are willing to blow up their athletics department with the WAC 10 begging for a BIG invite that will never come.

[CustersDoctor 584]

2 hours ago, DFW Horn said:

By what metrics are UH and Cincy appreciably better than SDSU?

Are their TV ratings that much higher? Now factor in their opponents. You don't think Big 12 membership will raise SDSU's profile and fan engagement?

I'm not necessarily arguing for SDSU, but I can see the Big 12 taking them if they can only lure 2-3 PAC teams. 

When the Big12 added Cincy, UCF, BYU & UH the national perception is they were really good additions for the BIG12. Cincy had recently been in the playoffs, UCF had that undefeated season a while back, BYU is the best all white team around and the average Joe in America thinks that UH delivers the CFB market in Houston. (The average Joe doesn't know that UH is the #4 CFB team in Houston) So what is the national perception of SDSU? Does the average Joe know their stadium only seats 33,000 and would be the smallest in the Big12 by 7,000? Does SDSU get a bump for their recent deep March Madness success? Is the only SDSU football player you can name Marshall Faulk circa 1993? Does the average American know that San Diego is a city and not a state?

If the PAC10 doesn't lose any more schools, then is the New12 better off with its current membership? Yormark, who is the best commissioner in the CFB wants PTZ teams in the conference and if we can't steal any PAC schools I think he will go for SDSU and Fresno.

[DFW Horn 6,221]

1 hour ago, CustersDoctor said:

Is the only SDSU football player you can name Marshall Faulk circa 1993? 

If the PAC10 doesn't lose any more schools, then is the New12 better off with its current membership? Yormark, who is the best commissioner in the CFB wants PTZ teams in the conference and if we can't steal any PAC schools I think he will go for SDSU and Fresno.

Mark McGuire's little brother, Dan, played QB for them years ago.

I'd think UNLV would be more attractive bc it's a major metro that's still growing and has more upside potential than Fresno. I'll LMAO if both ASU and Utah balk and get left behind bc "academic prestige".