Realignment talk not going away

[hook me 2092]

13 minutes ago, Zhorn96 said:

Why is Stanford more valuable than Cal?  Worse attendance, smaller or similar ratings on TV, etc.  They're the same.  And both are more valuable than SMU

Because they may or may not help to keep/get ND & have shown enough juice in football for the last 15 years to make it worth a gamble on a 1/2 share. If they don't pull ND then the next TV deal isn't going to keep FSU or Clemson & the ACC likely crumbles anyways.

[gatormarc 911]

1 hour ago, Jasper_Jester said:

Cal and Stanford being football only members in the ACC could help them. They should have the luxury of being able to build a structure that allows them to join a more local conference for the Olympic sports.

Stanford already competes in a lot of sports outside of the Pac12. I guess those would stay Independent or in the MPSF or other oddball conference.

Taking a quick glance at sports that would need to change.

Men's Fencing, Women's Fencing, Women's Field Hockey - those were not PAC sports but are ACC sports so Stanford would move those sports to their new conference

Men's Rowing, Women's Beach Volleyball - those were PAC sports but not ACC; Probably EARC for Rowing, CCSA for Beach Volleyball

[statsman 5457]

Are they all getting a full share from the B12? Or just from ESPN?

Edited August 9, 2023 by statsman

[notre dame joe 187]

5 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Why in the flying fuck would anyone take SMU?  They're not good at anything and they barely move the needle even in the DFW market.

 

3 hours ago, statsman said:

Why wouldn’t this comment also apply to UH?

The same reason that SMU, TCU, Rice, UH, USF, the other USF, UCF, Florida-Something, Pacific University were available for 50 or so years.  "Media market" seems to be more a justification than a cause.

 

2 hours ago, Jasper_Jester said:

Cal and Stanford being football only members in the ACC could help them. They should have the luxury of being able to build a structure that allows them to join a more local conference for the Olympic sports.

I guess I'm not sure how the ACC is made better by that deal. But, I don't see how the Big 12 benefitted at all from adding Arizona et.al. so maybe I'm missing the master strategy of this.

That's the opposite of why a conference would want Stanford though.  They have not been an easy win in football for the last decade; it was somewhat fitting that Shaw went out with another nailbiter win over ND.  But they do have a book of gold medalists and championships in sports that we only see in James Bond flics.

[TrashMaster G 17551]

4 hours ago, Trey3216 said:

ankles firmly tucked behind their head 

Like an SMU sorority chick.

[Jasper_Jester 356]

I thought the Big 12 was trying to break up the Pac to get Oregon and Washington because they assumed they wouldn't get invited to the Big10. 

33 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

 

That's the opposite of why a conference would want Stanford though.  They have not been an easy win in football for the last decade; it was somewhat fitting that Shaw went out with another nailbiter win over ND.  But they do have a book of gold medalists and championships in sports that we only see in James Bond flics.

Agree, I'm struggling to find the mutual win in Cal and Stanford to ACC. Stanford was talking about dropping sports during COVID and didn't due to pushback. I don't see how the finances work better to fly athletes in all those sports to the East Coast.

Stanford Athletics varsity sport reductions: FAQ | Stanford News

[Lymanward 55]

46 minutes ago, notre dame joe said:

 

The same reason that SMU, TCU, Rice, UH, USF, the other USF, UCF, Florida-Something, Pacific University were available for 50 or so years.  "Media market" seems to be more a justification than a cause.

 

That's the opposite of why a conference would want Stanford though.  They have not been an easy win in football for the last decade; it was somewhat fitting that Shaw went out with another nailbiter win over ND.  But they do have a book of gold medalists and championships in sports that we only see in James Bond flics.

Don’t disagree with much of what you say and no love lost for TCU, but they have been major conference affiliated for 83 of the last 95 years more or less. Hell, they have the same number of top 25 finishes (12) as ND since 2000 and are 3-0 versus Stanford since 2007. Hard to lump them in with those others over the last 25 years. 

[mdmost 43001]

16 minutes ago, Jasper_Jester said:

I thought the Big 12 was trying to break up the Pac to get Oregon and Washington because they assumed they wouldn't get invited to the Big10. 

Agree, I'm struggling to find the mutual win in Cal and Stanford to ACC. Stanford was talking about dropping sports during COVID and didn't due to pushback. I don't see how the finances work better to fly athletes in all those sports to the East Coast.

Stanford Athletics varsity sport reductions: FAQ | Stanford News

I think Stanford and Cal should only do the ACC for football, baseball, and basketball. All the rest, go regional. 

[CustersDoctor 584]

2 hours ago, Jasper_Jester said:

But, I don't see how the Big 12 benefitted at all from adding Arizona et.al. so maybe I'm missing the master strategy of this.

The most important thing to B.Y. was to have 14 teams by the fall of 2024. He worked very hard with the Linear providers for the conference to have slots for 14 teams in the fall of 2023. The Big12 will certainly lose some of those slots for the fall of 2024 since they are losing OUT, but they certainly couldn't retain those slots without the teams to fill them. So the Big12 had to add two to get back to 14. Adding two more, above that, to get to 16 was OK with Fox & ESPN. Plus it is now clear that the Big12 is the #3 football conference and pretty much the #1 basketball conference. It's really hard to argue that the Big12 hasn't navigated the last year and a half to near perfection.

Except for adding Houston.

[USC_TMB 405]

Personally, I don’t get all this hand-wringing over cal & Stanford needing to be in a major conference because “Olympic/non-football-basketball sports”. Stanford has had success in football (I don’t follow basketball, so no clue there), so have the go B1G (or wherever) in those sports, sort of like Notre Dame. Cal… meh, let the go MWC or independent if that’s beneath them.

Realistically, this realignment fiasco has to do with football and basketball. At least until football goes minor-league pro model. The same for basketball, since it’s basically a one-and-done deal with a few exceptions.  As far as the Olympic sports go, create an organization to cover those sports. It is going to come down to the big boys who are serious about football & basketball, and everyone else. Why waste money and brain cells on how to make the “non-elites” happy?  But what do I know?

[CustersDoctor 584]

WSU Presiden Kirk Schulz interview with ESPN. Good read from their perspective.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/38162254/wsu-president-preparing-realignment-moves-bad-spot

[Royale with cheese 1466]

3 hours ago, ABSR said:

So now Big 10 has an entirely new meaning.

My gal don't go for smokin'
And liquor just makes her flinch
Seems she just goes for nothin'
Except my big ten inch

Record of a band that plays the blues
Well, the band that play the blues
She just love my big ten inch
Record of her favorite blues

--For you newbies, the original is Bull Moose Jackson; Aerosmith covered it word-for-word. 

[oSuJeff97 3435]

45 minutes ago, CustersDoctor said:

The most important thing to B.Y. was to have 14 teams by the fall of 2024. He worked very hard with the Linear providers for the conference to have slots for 14 teams in the fall of 2023. The Big12 will certainly lose some of those slots for the fall of 2024 since they are losing OUT, but they certainly couldn't retain those slots without the teams to fill them. So the Big12 had to add two to get back to 14. Adding two more, above that, to get to 16 was OK with Fox & ESPN. Plus it is now clear that the Big12 is the #3 football conference and pretty much the #1 basketball conference. It's really hard to argue that the Big12 hasn't navigated the last year and a half to near perfection.

Except for adding Houston.

Spot on.

I'm not super thrilled about Houston but I get it. The Big 12 lost the flagship school of Texas. 

And given that Texas remains the most important state in the Big 12 footprint, it made some sense to add another Texas school just to reinforce the conference's presence there and Houston makes the most sense in that regard.  Adding SMU was pointless since we already have a small private school in the DFW metro, so adding a large school in the state's largest city (yes I know UH doesn't "own" Houston, but they are still at least physically there) was really the best option.

 

[Texas Wahoo 3393]

8 hours ago, DFW Horn said:

 

The speculation that what changed Oregon and Washington’s minds was the promise that they will get a full share in the next tv deal makes a lot of sense to me. Joining the Big Ten makes sense if they get a full share eventually, probably no matter how long it takes. 
 

This is probably the same calculus for SMU, only more so. They are willing to take nothing for as long as it takes, as long as they eventually get an equal share. 

[USC_TMB 405]

31 minutes ago, CustersDoctor said:

WSU Presiden Kirk Schulz interview with ESPN. Good read from their perspective.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/38162254/wsu-president-preparing-realignment-moves-bad-spot

Take the offer from the MWC and run. I commend him for sounding like a stand-up guy, but “think long, think wrong”. Especially hitching your wagon to Cal & Stanford’s decision. Even if they decide to expand the PAC, they will declare themselves the Big Dogs and OSU & Wazzu wind up in the same situation as they were in.

[The Tres Leches 58]

56 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

The speculation that what changed Oregon and Washington’s minds was the promise that they will get a full share in the next tv deal makes a lot of sense to me. Joining the Big Ten makes sense if they get a full share eventually, probably no matter how long it takes. 
 

From what I've read, Oregon and Washington will initially get in the mid-30 million dollars each year.  They will get an additional $1 million each year for the remainder of the current contract.  They will get full shares with the next TV contract.

[Zhorn96 1773]

what the shit  haha

[Alien Octopus 516]

On 8/7/2023 at 8:39 PM, bullet said:

Some Cal people are still complaining about Mack Brown.

Got into it with Silverman on comment section then dm way back when. 

[bullet 1596]

1 hour ago, oSuJeff97 said:

Spot on.

I'm not super thrilled about Houston but I get it. The Big 12 lost the flagship school of Texas. 

And given that Texas remains the most important state in the Big 12 footprint, it made some sense to add another Texas school just to reinforce the conference's presence there and Houston makes the most sense in that regard.  Adding SMU was pointless since we already have a small private school in the DFW metro, so adding a large school in the state's largest city (yes I know UH doesn't "own" Houston, but they are still at least physically there) was really the best option.

 

TCU, Tech and Baylor might as well be in Colorado as far as publicity in Houston.  They needed UofH.  They were completely out of Houston.

[bullet 1596]

10 hours ago, DFW Horn said:

 

Still in denial.  SDSU was an upgrade over CU?  Big 12 was better only because of numbers (BYU,UC,UCF,UH had comparable TV ratings to Pac other than UW/Oregon and better than some)?  And I don't believe for a minute Arizona was going to take that awful Apple deal.  Maybe the ASU president was dumb enough.  But Washington and Oregon certainly weren't.  Arizona had already been accepted by the Big 12.

[Sbbruin 21843]

2 hours ago, mdmost said:

I think Stanford and Cal should only do the ACC for football, baseball, and basketball. All the rest, go regional. 

I think that's the direction they are leaning.

['stache 21802]

28 minutes ago, bullet said:

TCU, Tech and Baylor might as well be in Colorado as far as publicity in Houston.  They needed UofH.  They were completely out of Houston.

TCU, Tech, and Baylor, and several other Big XII schools like OSU, KSU, etc., have lots of alumni living in Houston. I don't think it's about UH itself bringing attention, it's having a presence in a massive market within the footprint with a heavy presence of Big XII graduates. It makes sense considering what the conference was facing this time last year. Even if we knew then what we know now, I think UH would have gotten an invite. UCF and Cincy probably would not have received an invite. No idea if BYU would have gotten an invite. They are a strong enough program, even paired with Utah, but if the conference only wanted one presence from Utah, it would have been UU without question. 

Edited August 9, 2023 by 'stache

[CustersDoctor 584]

1 hour ago, oSuJeff97 said:

Spot on.

I'm not super thrilled about Houston but I get it. The Big 12 lost the flagship school of Texas. 

And given that Texas remains the most important state in the Big 12 footprint, it made some sense to add another Texas school just to reinforce the conference's presence there and Houston makes the most sense in that regard.  Adding SMU was pointless since we already have a small private school in the DFW metro, so adding a large school in the state's largest city (yes I know UH doesn't "own" Houston, but they are still at least physically there) was really the best option.

 

I'm actually fine with the UH addition. I just can't resist the opportunity to throw some shade at Coug High.  The remaining 8 couldn't have done better than the four additions that they made and the national perception of adding BYU, UH, UCF & CINCY was very positive. It didn't just save the Big12, it positioned them to bat cleanup after the PAC cratered.

I will be watching UH's attendance numbers this fall. Obviously they'll have the sellout on Oct 21st. OkieLite & TCU will bring a lot of fans. But what kind of crowd will they have for Cincy, UCF & WVU. If UH isn't playing somebody who will bring a lot of fans, will they have more that 30,000 fans at a game?

[ousux 5597]

Do we now live in a world where the MWC could be seriously mulling over picking up the scraps of the Pac12 and not the other way round? What a bungled mess out west lol.

[oSuJeff97 3435]

 

7 minutes ago, CustersDoctor said:

I will be watching UH's attendance numbers this fall. Obviously they'll have the sellout on Oct 21st. OkieLite & TCU will bring a lot of fans. But what kind of crowd will they have for Cincy, UCF & WVU. If UH isn't playing somebody who will bring a lot of fans, will they have more that 30,000 fans at a game?

I suspect it will build over a period of years like TCU did.

If I recall, TCU had some pretty sparse crowds their first few years in non-marquee games, but that has improved over the years because getting the promotion to P5 (and winning) will naturally increase interest and build the fan base, IMO.

So of course, they'll also need to perform for that to happen. So getting some early success will be crucial for them. We'll see how it goes...

[John80 157]

Why would anyone in the ACC care about playing Cal and Stanford in football? You are flying across the country to play a bad football team for a crowd of ten people.

[Pasken 1309]

I think UH sells out every game THIS year. Maybe next year but the charm will run out and they'll be back to a fair weather program.

[Hook1997 5354]

13 minutes ago, Pasken said:

I think UH sells out every game THIS year. Maybe next year but the charm will run out and they'll be back to a fair weather program.

I highly doubt it considering they haven’t hit 30k fans since 2018 and 40k since 2016 and they won’t win many games this year at all.  They are an underdog to UTSA week one.  

[Pasken 1309]

7 minutes ago, Hook1997 said:

I highly doubt it considering they haven’t hit 30k fans since 2018 and 40k since 2016 and they won’t win many games this year at all.  They are an underdog to UTSA week one.  

Maybe you're right but I just assume there would be enough enthusiasm since they've been so desperate for the big 12 for so long.

[Zhorn96 1773]

This seems like bullshit...

weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[Hurtlocker 2212]

43 minutes ago, ousux said:

Do we now live in a world where the MWC could be seriously mulling over picking up the scraps of the Pac12 and not the other way round? What a bungled mess out west lol.

The Pac fucked themselves royally.   They have no buyouts and all the other conferences around them do.   

Its like they learned nothing from the Big East, ACC and Big 12 over the past 20 years, while the MWC and AAC did.

[Sbbruin 21843]

4 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

The Pac fucked themselves royally.   They have no buyouts and all the other conferences around them do.   

Its like they learned nothing from the Big East, ACC and Big 12 over the past 20 years, while the MWC and AAC did.

Well their media contract, and GOR, was up.  That would be the same anywhere.  But waiting so long to get a media deal doomed them.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

9 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

Well their media contract, and GOR, was up.  That would be the same anywhere.  But waiting so long to get a media deal doomed them.

Definitely, but on top of those two things the B12, MWC, ACC, and AAC have buyouts that run far longer than any media deal.   The B12's is a 99 year agreement.   It costs $100m to leave the B12, $120m to leave the ACC, and $17-$34m to leave the MWC and AAC.   The Pac had none.   So its cheaper for Stanford to move to another conference and way more expensive to backfill the Pac.  

That's why the Pac brand will disappear fully.   If they had a buyout, I doubt anyone would have left after USC/UCLA.   They could have added SDSU/SMU and made less, but the math to jump to the B1G at reduced rates or Colorado/AZ to the B12 would have been far less friendly.

[FartingDreamer 138]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

TCU, Tech, and Baylor, and several other Big XII schools like OSU, KSU, etc., have lots of alumni living in Houston. I don't think it's about UH itself bringing attention, it's having a presence in a massive market within the footprint with a heavy presence of Big XII graduates. It makes sense considering what the conference was facing this time last year. Even if we knew then what we know now, I think UH would have gotten an invite. UCF and Cincy probably would not have received an invite. No idea if BYU would have gotten an invite. They are a strong enough program, even paired with Utah, but if the conference only wanted one presence from Utah, it would have been UU without question. 

GTFOOH with that bullshit.  They would have taken BYU because we own the Utah market and have a larger presence outside of the state.  Simply put, BYU is clearly the more valuable and bigger brand.  

19 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

Definitely, but on top of those two things the B12, MWC, ACC, and AAC have buyouts that run far longer than any media deal.   The B12's is a 99 year agreement.   It costs $100m to leave the B12, $120m to leave the ACC, and $17-$34m to leave the MWC and AAC.   The Pac had none.   So its cheaper for Stanford to move to another conference and way more expensive to backfill the Pac.  

That's why the Pac brand will disappear fully.   If they had a buyout, I doubt anyone would have left after USC/UCLA.   They could have added SDSU/SMU and made less, but the math to jump to the B1G at reduced rates or Colorado/AZ to the B12 would have been far less friendly.

It's already pretty much disappeared.  It's beyond salvageable.  

[Laxtonto 12080]

How much of this  CalFord to the ACC talk is being driven by ND knowing that there won’t be the votes to get them added? CalFord threatens to blow up their annual rivalry if they don’t help them so ND “tries” knowing that there are at least 5 “no’s” right now and most likely it will never happen. They can say they tried and move on while not really having to commit to anything and make it look like they tried to help the ACC payout all at the same time.

 

I just don’t see how adding any of the Pac4 makes any sense to the ACC and feels like a half assed attempt to placate a nagging gf to get her off your ass…

[USC Traveler 488]

4 hours ago, CustersDoctor said:

WSU Presiden Kirk Schulz interview with ESPN. Good read from their perspective.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/38162254/wsu-president-preparing-realignment-moves-bad-spot

From the article: 

Quote

Schulz said that Oregon and Washington essentially ended the call before it began, revealing their intentions to finalize a deal with the Big Ten.

Schulz texted veteran athletic director Pat Chun: "We've got to roll up our sleeves and get to work."

NOW you're going to roll up your sleeves and get to work ?  A year after USC and UCLA left ?  After a year of not getting any concrete media deal ?  On the day UW, UO, and the others leave, NOW you're going to get to work ? 🤣🤣🤣    Sounds like he had no idea this was coming.  

Anyone in this thread could have told him where this was going.  He fits perfectly in the PAC- completely clueless.

We all knew he was one of Clownzano's sources, but he really believed all the rainbows and unicorns BS Klownkoff was spouting.  Amazing.

//

Wazzu's AD back in 2010 was Bill Moos, who, along with their President at the time (pre-Schulz), led the charge for equal revenue sharing in the PAC, including Tier 3.  Champagne Larry was also pushing for it, as he wanted to get paid to run a media network (which was the justification for him making more money than Slive or Delaney), so he needed all Tier 3 content pooled into the PACNet to justify his salary.  That's why they killed the PAC16 deal over LHN .  

WSU, Cal, and Larry Scott were the tip of the spear.  Talk about penny-wise, pound foolish/ unintended consequences.

Champagne Larry will go down in infamy, but he's laughing from a beach somewhere.  Hope Wazzu and Cal enjoyed their 12 years of subsidies.

Cal is fucked, and Wazzu is going where they always belonged- the MWC.  They've been the lowest-resourced P5 for years (even below Wake). 

They'll actually have the nicest facilities (along with the Beavs) in the MWC.  They'll both have a better shot at the playoffs in the MWC than they would if the PAC had stayed together.  They won't win any playoff games, but getting in will give their fans something to cheer for.

['stache 21802]

1 hour ago, FartingDreamer said:

GTFOOH with that bullshit.  They would have taken BYU because we own the Utah market and have a larger presence outside of the state.  Simply put, BYU is clearly the more valuable and bigger brand.  

It's already pretty much disappeared.  It's beyond salvageable.  

JFC. Shut. The. Fuck. Up!

Seriously, nobody cares how much you fucking hate Utah. I was invited to join a new Big XII fan Facebook group, and seriously, all it was for a week straight was BYU fans crying about fucking Utah. I had to leave.

Again, nobody cares.

SHUT. The. Fuck. Up!

Edited August 10, 2023 by 'stache

[statsman 5457]

5 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

The speculation that what changed Oregon and Washington’s minds was the promise that they will get a full share in the next tv deal makes a lot of sense to me. Joining the Big Ten makes sense if they get a full share eventually, probably no matter how long it takes. 
 

This is probably the same calculus for SMU, only more so. They are willing to take nothing for as long as it takes, as long as they eventually get an equal share. 

No. SMU wants to go big on NIL. They don’t care if they lose money; they want to be big time again, they know how and it’s legal now. They need to be in a major conference and they will do anything to get there. Except try to appeal to the masses  

[Al_4_ISU 12458]

2 minutes ago, statsman said:

No. SMU wants to go big on NIL. They don’t care if they lose money; they want to be big time again, they know how and it’s legal now. They need to be in a major conference and they will do anything to get there. Except try to appeal to the masses  

I bet the average actual attendance of a Cal, Stanford, and SMU game combined might hit 25K

[camel at sea 589]

1 hour ago, Zhorn96 said:

This seems like bullshit...

weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

I remember a couple years ago, there were rumors that TCU was getting a look from the Big Ten because ND allegedly wanted its home conference to have a presence in CA, TX, and FL.  This rumor seems like a rehash of that one.  The travel logistics of SMU, Cal, and Stanford in the ACC - even if it's just football only - are ridiculous.  I could be talked into the idea of Cal and Stanford getting a scheduling agreement for football with the ACC, maybe even with stipulations that they both get annual games with the Irish, but I can't see how full membership would be viable without adding more western schools, too, and I don't know which schools that could be or how they'd justify their invites financially.  Just for fun, though:

Northeast:  BC, Cuse, Pitt, L-Ville, ND
MidAtl:  UVA, VT, UNC, NC St, Duke
SE:  Wake, GT, Clemson, FSU, Miami
West:  Stanford, Cal, SMU, Rice, Tulane
      

You wouldn't actually have divisions (though you probably would have a geography-based scheduling model) but I grouped it this way to visualize it better.  The western additions are largely garbage so you'd have to get some kind of serious proof of commitment from Stanford and Cal, to actually try hard at football, before you brought them on.

 

[mdmost 43001]

It's not happening, Cal, Stanford and SMU

 

[Texas Wahoo 3393]

16 minutes ago, statsman said:

No. SMU wants to go big on NIL. They don’t care if they lose money; they want to be big time again, they know how and it’s legal now. They need to be in a major conference and they will do anything to get there. Except try to appeal to the masses  

If they don’t care about ever getting any conference money, my guess is they would be admitted immediately if they agree to taking 0 conference pay for eternity. My guess is they eventually want a cut of the money, but are willing to wait for it. 

[Zhorn96 1773]

Rumors are flying on the Cal side.  UVA, Va Tech and NC State are the swing votes and ND is pushing hard for Cal and Furd to be added at a 70% share so the thought is is if ESPN, who won’t have any west coast inventory, will pay some travel costs, it might get done.  SMU for free would give $2-3m per team each, ACC can distribute the Cal/Furd discount however they want so that might shut up FSU and Clemson if they get $8-10m each.  ND wants the Bay Area for an annual California trip and leverage against the Big18 trying to box them in… allegedly.
 

One person claims the Big18 is back in for $20m per team with a full share in 6 years.  Taking that with way more skepticism… 

All rumors so take it for what it’s worth…

[Welshy 907]

35 minutes ago, 'stache said:

JFC. Shut. The. Fuck. Up!

Seriously, nobody cares how much you fucking hate Utah. I was invited to join a new Big XII fan Facebook group, and seriously, all it was for a week straight was BYU fans crying about fucking Utah. I had to leave.

Again, nobody cares.

SHUT. The. Fuck. Up!

I bet farting dreamer hands out more neg rep per capita than anyone else on Surly.

BYU is like an angry gnat with a fatwa against everyone who doesn't soak their soakables. 

[FartingDreamer 138]

36 minutes ago, 'stache said:

JFC. Shut. The. Fuck. Up!

Seriously, nobody cares how much you fucking hate Utah. I was invited to join a new Big XII fan Facebook group, and seriously, all it was for a week straight was BYU fans crying about fucking Utah. I had to leave.

Again, nobody cares.

SHUT. The. Fuck. Up!

You do apparently.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

23 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

 They've been the lowest-resourced P5 for years (even below Wake). 

This is another one of the Pac's numerous failings.   In the 2010s, when Texas stayed in the first realignment, the "have nots" of the conference invested the media revenue wisely in sports infrastructure and in methods to increase fan engagement and revenue.    While they won't catch Texas, they transformed the conference.   Iowa State brought in around $45m back then, they've more than doubled that in a decade to $112m.   Kansas State doubled theirs in that time and most others jumped from the $60s into the $100ms.   Matter a fact, all of the Irate 8 have increased their AD budgets over $100m, which is sort of the line in the sand for the top 50 schools.   Granted, they all need to bump that up into the $150s in the next 5 years, but their books are healthy.

This is not the case with the Pac.   Their haves continued to have, but the have nots didn't keep up in the same fashion.  Most all of the schools use an unhealthy amount of school funds to subsidize the athletic departments and they've been the most financially weak of the P5 conferences for a while, but the OSU/WSU are special.

Oregon State and Iowa State, who had the smallest AD budget in the Big 12 a decade ago, were pretty similar in 2013, today Iowa State brings in $23m more per year.   And it does that without taking any school funds (outside charging the students ticket fees in tuition).   Oregon State got to its number with $8.5m in school funds, meaning the clones make $30+m more per year than the Beavers with a similar media deal.

Washington State is even worse and, to your point, they are the lowest revenue generator in the Power Five.  It takes $14m in school funds, meaning its true revenue is only $69m - and 65% of that is rights and licensing!   For comparison, Central Florida made $89m in that same year, but without a power five media deal.   

Oregon State and Washington State, regardless of history or success, just don't operate like a power five athletic department and are far closer to Air Force, SDSU, and UNLV.

 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

20 minutes ago, Zhorn96 said:

Rumors are flying on the Cal side.  UVA, Va Tech and NC State are the swing votes and ND is pushing hard for Cal and Furd to be added at a 70% share so the thought is is if ESPN, who won’t have any west coast inventory, will pay some travel costs, it might get done.  SMU for free would give $2-3m per team each, ACC can distribute the Cal/Furd discount however they want so that might shut up FSU and Clemson if they get $8-10m each.  ND wants the Bay Area for an annual California trip and leverage against the Big18 trying to box them in… allegedly.
 

One person claims the Big18 is back in for $20m per team with a full share in 6 years.  Taking that with way more skepticism… 

All rumors so take it for what it’s worth…

ESPN should just give them the BYU deal of like $10-15m a year to go indy, then have the B12 schedule them OOC.   That way they have all the games and don't have to pay.

Either that, or add them and start a new conference network off the old PacNet infrastructure to pay for the adds.  

Edit:  I went to look and the old B12 had 7.9m dma households, which is not enough for a conference network, nor did they have the inventory to fill one.

The current B16 swells that number to 18m homes, which definitely supports a conference network and, at sixteen, provides the inventory to fill it up.   Adding Stanford/Cal bumps that up to 20.5m homes.   That's enough to generate $250-400m in yearly revenue off back end rights.

Edited August 10, 2023 by Hurtlocker

[Welshy 907]

6 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

ESPN should just give them the BYU deal of like $10-15m a year to go indy, then have the B12 schedule them OOC.   That way they have all the games and don't have to pay.

Either that, or add them and start a new conference network off the old PacNet infrastructure to pay for the adds.  

Farting dreamer neg incoming. Prepare your...something. 

[royiv 9288]

52 minutes ago, 'stache said:

JFC. Shut. The. Fuck. Up!

Seriously, nobody cares how much you fucking hate Utah. I was invited to join a new Big XII fan Facebook group, and seriously, all it was for a week straight was BYU fans crying about fucking Utah. I had to leave.

Again, nobody cares.

SHUT. The. Fuck. Up!

I tried telling posters on here and in the Big XII leftovers thread how insufferable BYU fans are. This guy is the embodiment of the typical BYU fan that has an inflated sense of their place in the college sports landscape. Utah has spent the last two bowl seasons in Pasadena while BYU has had the opportunity to holiday in Shreveport and Albuquerque.

[CustersDoctor 584]