Realignment talk not going away

[Uncle Nate 2097]

11 minutes ago, mdmost said:

These lawmakers don't get how the landscape of college football has changed. If Washington is stuck with State and Oregon is stuck with State, they are both getting drug down into obscurity. The Titanic is sinking. Either you get a boat or you're dead.

 

You would think with all of the populations shifts to Arizona and Colorado we keep hearing about that they would be bringing more media value to the table.  

['stache 21778]

1 minute ago, Sandbagging Steve said:

You're definitely in if it is 48 teams. I am also hoping OSU gets in, but these aren't true measuring sticks.  Oklahoma State is on its biggest run in the school's history, all under one coach in roughly a decade and a half period of time. They also get to play in better television slots and against bigger teams than many of those other schools in the PAC and ACC. That is factored in. Just using Texas as an example: The fact that we are still top 10 while enduring the worst run in school history, and playing many smaller schools than the SEC programs, just shows the value of the fanbase. Texas is definitely #1 or #2 on the list.

OSU is definitely behind FSU, Oregon and Washington. FSU is down and plays a crappy schedule. Oregon and Washington play a crappy schedule and in bad time slots. There's no comparison. But OSU is most definitely a top 40 program. The biggest thing holding you back is you're in a crowded field running neck-and-neck and you're in a small state with OU. I know markets don't matter as much but the overall footprint does still matter some. You want as much fan engagement as possible around the country. If 48 teams make it in, you're definitely one of the teams.

I think there will be one or two major megaconferences and one piecemeal conference spread from coast to coast that will still have vetted interest in the overall scheme of things. Regardless, I don't think OSU needs to panic. Just ride it out and everything will workout in the end.

That's exactly the point. We've proven that people care, especially when we play brand name opponents. These ratings are with only two marque games a year against OU and Texas. Add in LSU, Arky, aggy, and others, we'll do great in the ratings. Even with other opponents we do well when both teams are playing well. See below. 2.8 mil v ISU, almost 2 mil v KSU, 2 mil plus v Tech, almost 1.5 v. WVU. 

We've been good for over 20 straight years now with only one losing season in Gundy's first year and a few mediocre ones here and there but still over .500. We've renovated or rebuilt pretty much every facility since then. When Gundy took over only he could have accomplished this with where we started. If we are comfortably in the SEC with our current facilities there's no reason to expect we wouldn't do fine with coaching hires. If fucking baylor can do it so can we.

 

[TXRed 3188]

 

[Ignatius 4007]

28 minutes ago, Steelers Roll Left said:

Honestly, I’m a little surprised we haven’t heard these kind of stories more since realignment picked up steam again last year.  The ghost of Ann Richards performs a silent clap

No CR, but lawmakers on opposite sides of the room won’t work together now like they did 30 years ago…

Edited July 1, 2022 by Ignatius

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

19 minutes ago, Sandbagging Steve said:

You're definitely in if it is 48 teams. I am also hoping OSU gets in, but these aren't true measuring sticks.  Oklahoma State is on its biggest run in the school's history, all under one coach in roughly a decade and a half period of time. They also get to play in better television slots and against bigger teams than many of those other schools in the PAC and ACC. That is factored in. Just using Texas as an example: The fact that we are still top 10 while enduring the worst run in school history, and playing many smaller schools than the SEC programs, just shows the value of the fanbase. Texas is definitely #1 or #2 on the list.

OSU is definitely behind FSU, Oregon and Washington. FSU is down and plays a crappy schedule. Oregon and Washington play a crappy schedule and in bad time slots. There's no comparison. But OSU is most definitely a top 40 program. The biggest thing holding you back is you're in a crowded field running neck-and-neck and you're in a small state with OU. I know markets don't matter as much but the overall footprint does still matter some. You want as much fan engagement as possible around the country. If 48 teams make it in, you're definitely one of the teams.

I think there will be one or two major megaconferences and one piecemeal conference spread from coast to coast that will still have vetted interest in the overall scheme of things. Regardless, I don't think OSU needs to panic. Just ride it out and everything will workout in the end.

The problem they have is that the best 48 can't get in. Rutgers, Maryland, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Missouri, Kentucky, Mississippi State, and Minnesota are already there. So it's the best 37. And the B1G seems to be sticking to AAU status being a requirement, even though Nebraska got kicked out.

Edited July 1, 2022 by The Hot Dog Buffet

[Zhorn96 1772]

2 hours ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

I look forward to observing Stanford and Cal as San Diego State seeks membership.

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

Back when it looked like we were moving to four 16 school conferences, I thought OSU was a shoe-in. I just don't see it if there are only two.

[LTbear 4161]

2 minutes ago, Zhorn96 said:

Nightmare fuel

[BigHornedLurker 1897]

The mental image of Miami being left out of the picture gives me an unreasonable amount of lulz 

 

we'll need a replacement to the coug staring through the window for that one 

[Zhorn96 1772]

Would be interested in @Sbbruin's thoughts on the UC regents and if they let UCLA go without Cal.  Cal's athletic department owes about $400M for the stadium reno and if football dies in Berkeley and they default (which seems possible if their shit TV money goes down and what fan interest they have evaporates), UC regents are on the hook.  Since there is no way the regents have reviewed or approved this yet, I've seen some thoughts that the regents might torpedo UCLA's ride unless Cal gets included.  Total speculation, obvs, but its an angle that most people havent considered

[LTbear 4161]

Just now, Zhorn96 said:

Would be interested in @Sbbruin's thoughts on the UC regents and if they let UCLA go without Cal.  Cal's athletic department owes about $400M for the stadium reno and if football dies in Berkeley and they default (which seems possible if their shit TV money goes down and what fan interest they have evaporates), UC regents are on the hook.  Since there is no way the regents have reviewed or approved this yet, I've seen some thoughts that the regents might torpedo UCLA's ride unless Cal gets included.  Total speculation, obvs, but its an angle that most people havent considered

Regents will absolutely let UCLA go. Their options may well be to let one UC system school hit the big payday, or let 0. 

[Sandbagging Steve 982]

42 minutes ago, 'stache said:

This wouldn't be the worst thing if necessary.

There will be some ACC schools and probably a few other programs that deserve in (Boise, Memphis, SDSU). If those teams played a 11 or 12 team league schedule and held a playoff, it would be a fun league. If the winner of that league (and playoff) had a good enough record, I don't see why they shouldn't be considered for the 12-team national championship playoff. Start the season a week or two earlier and only take one week off per year. You could be done with your season at the same time as the megaconferences and ready for a possible playoff bid. I think it's much better than the current formula right now. Much more competitive and exciting. I would tune in. I bet that formula would grow and add more fans than currently watch most of those games right now. Fun, competitive, live matchups are worth a fortune.

[Zhorn96 1772]

2 minutes ago, LTbear said:

Regents will absolutely let UCLA go. Their options may well be to let one UC system school hit the big payday, or let 0. 

Cal is definitely a make weight, thats for sure

['stache 21778]

10 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

Back when it looked like we were moving to four 16 school conferences, I thought OSU was a shoe-in. I just don't see it if there are only two.

They're not stopping at 16. Big 10 is now at 16 and pressing Notre Dame hard. The second Notre Dame says yes, it's at least 20 for Big 10 and probably SEC, and maybe up to 24 each. Maybe a third coast-to-coast conference of 16-24 that is part of the big boy leagues but paid much less.

[DanTheHorn 4902]

Quote

Per ESPN's David M. Hale, there is a television contract in place through 2036 that requires Notre Dame to play in the ACC if the football program decides to join a conference.

Should Notre Dame try to play elsewhere, it would face financial penalties worth $150 million or more.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10040714-report-big-ten-waiting-on-notre-dame-decision-standing-pat-on-oregon-washington

Well based on this article Notre Dame has to play in the ACC or be independent.

['stache 21778]

Just now, DanTheHorn said:

Well based on this article Notre Dame has to play in the ACC or be independent.

Basic contract law, if liquidated damages are outrageous without any bearing to reality, it's likely unenforceable. I can't imagine the ACC could establish $150 million as a legitimate estimate of actual damages. And yes, the same applies to UT and OU but first, the buyout numbers are far less than this, and two negotiations are going to continue for an early exit at a reduced number. That's how it works.

[Surly Bevo 24729]

Notre Dame should join the LIV tour and pay off the GOR.

[Sandbagging Steve 982]

14 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

The problem they have is that the best 48 can't get in. Rutgers, Maryland, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Missouri, Kentucky, Mississippi State, and Minnesota are already there. So it's the best 37. And the B1G seems to be sticking to AAU status being a requirement, even though Nebraska got kicked out.

Believe it or not, Minnesota, Kentucky and Missouri would make a top 48 list. Maryland and Rutgers probably make the top 48 list as well. They bring a new footprint and very good recruiting territory to the table while their overall numbers are about as bad as the other options at the bottom. Sit down and look at the teams. A combo of academics, TV viewership, attendance, recruiting, perception AND footprint. The bottom 15 teams out of the top 66 are pretty bad. That's what is holding the money train down right now.

I think, down the road, there will have to be a purge of some of the teams within the 2 big conferences. These big schools aren't going to keep sharing $150,000,000++ per school with teams that bring absolutely nothing to the table. If Notre Dame joins the B1G, that's 3 teams in the state of Indiana. At some point, things are going to boil over. It's nothing new. All these conferences have had purges throughout history. It's just been a while. I could see 2 to 4 of Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Mississippi State and Vanderbilt being demoted in football within the next 15 to 20 years. I wouldn't be surprised if Vanderbilt bows out first. And that one could happen sooner rather than later.

OSU's biggest problem is footprint. Although markets mean less, overall footprint still matters. A conference may prefer a Rutgers or Maryland in order to play games in that region than a second school in Oklahoma. That's really what it boils down to. It will be interesting. I do agree that Oklahoma State is on the bubble for the reasons we discuss here. They shouldn't be, but that's the way it works. I don't think it matters though. They are going to be just fine. All the current P5 programs are going to be okay. It's just arranged differently, and if done right, it will be much more exciting for the sport.

[Sandbagging Steve 982]

1 hour ago, chemHORN said:

USC and UCLA to the Big 10 doesn't make a lot of sense to me.  No rivalries, nothing regional.  Seems kind of crazy.  

What did they really have in the PAC? They've been trying to find a better home for like 70 years. It finally boiled over, like pretty much everything is in college football. They will get ND, UO and Washington soon. All this is just a thinning of the herd. A slow, with-the-least-lawsuits-as-possible, elimination of 15 to 20 schools from the megaconferences (64 down to 48/40, maybe 32). The other teams will still have a spot in some capacity, just not playing within the megaconference on a weekly basis.

[Royale with cheese 1462]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

We're top 25 in TV ratings, below Clemson, but above FSU and Miami and everyone else in the ACC. Even above USC and UCLA. If the magic number is 20 I think we have a good shot. If its 24 we're a shoo in. Notre Dame needs to get off the fucking pot first though.

 

https://medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach/which-college-football-programs-were-the-most-watched-in-2021-49ef4f315858

I really, truly hope you guys come out OK in all this. But can you rely on past eyeball statistics that include y'all playing us and blOw-U every year? Because that won't be the case going forward and even those Madison Avenue pricks can figure that out . . .

[TKthunder2 4981]

2 hours ago, camel at sea said:

There's a difference between "looks like" and "is."  You've included a lot of absolute dead weight in this group.  WSU is a MWC who has been cashing P5 paychecks for decades.  Oregon State is only slightly better than that  Cal and Stanford have good names and no fan support.  Those Big 12 schools have more valuable peers where they are (outside of UW and Oregon) and as was mentioned, both of those two want to leave very badly.    

I’m not arguing.  But long term, how tied in is West Virginia, Cincy, or UCF if the ACC comes calling after Florida St/Clemson/UNC leave?  How many reasonable expansion options are there in the region…Memphis, Tulane and…? Moving West with the gutted PAC10 (even if Oregon/UW end up leaving) strategically open more doors long term than try to complete with the remainder of the ACC.

If the ACC loses 6 schools they can quickly add West Virginia, Cincinnati, UCF, USF, UConn, Army, Navy, Temple, and any number of 3rd rate Carolina schools and all of those would leave the Big 12 immediately if the ACC sent invites.

Meanwhile if they join the PAC12-2 they’d secure their spot as a second tier conference below the SEC/B1G but equal with the ACC and above any of the other smaller conferences with plenty of expansion options between the MWC and a few in the Central time zone.  Basically geography would most like (never say never) protect the PAC/ACC from each other.

The best move would be to go West. Then even if you get poached some they’d have logical/reasonable candidates to expand with and these schools would secure their spot in a 2nd tier league at worst.  Ride and die with the new Big 12 and the ACC could absolutely pass them by relegating them to 3rd tier status.

[billfromlaketravis 11367]

I hope the SEC stays at 16. With a 9 game conference schedule, Texas could every team in the conference every other year. 

VA Tech, NC State, FSU, and Miami don't do shit for me. It would water down the SEC. 

[Sbbruin 21784]

I look forward to the Bruins coming to Piscataway in the future. Hopefully Chip is still there by the time that happens.

One thing I do know is that Martin Jarmond just put Chip on notice. Get busy recruiting like a real program, or we will terminate you stat, since money won't be an issue. And now being with the big boys, it would be an attractive job that'll pay well.

[bullet 1596]

6 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

One last tweet from the Minnesota guy I didn't post upthread.

 

 

Flugaur is simply a twitter user with a fictional source he calls "Big Ten Man."  He seems to have fun making stuff up and trolling the Dude of West Virginia, who does at least seem to talk to real people for his information.

[DanTheHorn 4902]

From a year ago when Texas and OU to SEC news broke. Finebaum said PAC 12 was history and Heather said she was told by folks that PAC 12 was history. She said it would be 3 super conferences since the ACC would survive.

 

[George Clooney 378]

7 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

One thing I do know is that Martin Jarmond just put Chip on notice. Get busy recruiting like a real program, or we will terminate you stat, since money won't be an issue. And now being with the big boys, it would be an attractive job that'll pay well.

I've always loved that Chip is just himself for better or for worse. He's true to his personality, and it's made him one of the most innovative and schematically-curious coaches we've ever seen. Idk much about UCLA's recruiting, but I hope he does well going forward.

[bullet 1596]

2 hours ago, camel at sea said:

I don't think OSU gets left out of the eventual breakaway from the NCAA.  The brand/facilities/recent success/fan support justify inclusion.  At some point in the future, I think all of college football's top level will be under one governing umbrella, cashing similarly sized media rights checks, and the constant conference shuffling will stop.

But if we get a decade of an interim period, with a couple of super conferences, and a couple of "middle class" conferences, then OSU might be on the outside for a while.  Hopefully if that happens, the interim period includes an expanded playoff.  

OSU I believe is #5 in all time NCAA championships.  Texas just passed them this year.

[Scooter Monzingo 820]

The question I have as I am not a lawyer. Does the Sherman Act play into this? And could we see Congress get involved?

 

[utee94 15747]

2 hours ago, clapclapclap said:

SEC would be acquiring the FSU brand (and probably monopolizing the 3rd biggest state).  For the B1G, FSU academically is a very, very tough sell, similar to an OU.  But if they do take FSU, there is zero need for Miami.  Too many better choices for a valuable slot.

 

SEC doesn't need the FSU brand and already dominates the state of Florida.  That's the point.  FSU would be much more valuable to the B1G than it would be for the SEC.

 

[Francisco 2.0 32347]

2 hours ago, BigHornedLurker said:

we'll need a replacement to the coug staring through the window for that one 

 

 

[Biggus Duckus 79]

I imagine USC-UCLA did this to spur change, but with the expectation that the other Pac schools (or at least a majority of them) would get swept up by the B1G as well.  But... what if they didn't?  Would USC-UCLA actually be happy with their decision if they were the only B1G schools on the west coast? 

I'm thinking the LA fans, which are notoriously fickle, would not be happy about that result at all, even though the schools may be swimming like Scrooge McDuck through their riches.

[utee94 15747]

43 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

From a year ago when Texas and OU to SEC news broke. Finebaum said PAC 12 was history and Heather said she was told by folks that PAC 12 was history. She said it would be 3 super conferences since the ACC would survive.

 

Except the ACC isn't anywhere close to a super-conference.  It's the least competitive and least interesting football conference of all 5, even after the TX/OU and USC/UCLA moves.  If it weren't for Clemson the past several years, they'd be G5-bad.  Their football is unwatchable. 

 

 

[utee94 15747]

2 hours ago, DanTheHorn said:

Well based on this article Notre Dame has to play in the ACC or be independent.

 

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

Basic contract law, if liquidated damages are outrageous without any bearing to reality, it's likely unenforceable. I can't imagine the ACC could establish $150 million as a legitimate estimate of actual damages. And yes, the same applies to UT and OU but first, the buyout numbers are far less than this, and two negotiations are going to continue for an early exit at a reduced number. That's how it works.

Right.  It's really no different than all of the "official" sources that keep saying Texas and OU are in the B12 until 2025.  There's zero chance of that happening, they just have to say that, because that's what the contract language says.  Until all negotiations are final, that's the current plan of record.

 

[billfromlaketravis 11367]

52 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

From a year ago when Texas and OU to SEC news broke. Finebaum said PAC 12 was history and Heather said she was told by folks that PAC 12 was history. She said it would be 3 super conferences since the ACC would survive.

 

PAWL has a soft spot for the ACC. I believe he offices/lives in Charlotte. 

Also ESPN owns all of the ACC TV  rights. He's going to support his employer and hometown. 

ESPN negotiated a very favorable contract with the ACC. They'll fight to keep it. 

The Big 12 should tell the new 4 to screw, take the financial hit, merge with the Pac 12, beat down Big Tech's doors until they give the conference a nice streaming contract. = Profit. 

[Murfdogg21 4412]

2 hours ago, TXRed said:

 

Is Nate Heupel the inbred love child of Nate Hybl and Josh Heupel?

[TKthunder2 4981]

11 minutes ago, utee94 said:

SEC doesn't need the FSU brand and already dominates the state of Florida.  That's the point.  FSU would be much more valuable to the B1G than it would be for the SEC.

In a bubble you are 100% correct.  However keeping the Big Ten out of their backyard is pretty valuable.

[utee94 15747]

3 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

In a bubble you are 100% correct.  However keeping the Big Ten out of their backyard is pretty valuable.

Perhaps.  There are all sort of blocking moves the SEC could make.  But really, the SEC can afford to stand pat and simply not dilute its brand or revenue any further.

The only piece on the table worth working to acquire, is Notre Dame, and the SEC bagging that school is just really unlikely.

Edited July 1, 2022 by utee94

[Hurtlocker 2208]

10 hours ago, LTbear said:

The B1G voted in Nebraska knowing full damn well they were about to lose that status. 

Also they voted them in and THEN voted for them to lose their status.

[Sbbruin 21784]

1 hour ago, George Clooney said:

I've always loved that Chip is just himself for better or for worse. He's true to his personality, and it's made him one of the most innovative and schematically-curious coaches we've ever seen. Idk much about UCLA's recruiting, but I hope he does well going forward.

It’s his biggest shortcoming.  Not only does he not put in the relentless effort needed in recruiting, but he thinks he’s so shrewd at identifying diamonds in the rough that he can mold and shape into great players.  That’s wishful thinking.  I agree there are highly rated recruits that you want to pass on for culture/fit (and in our case academics which is out of the coach’s control), but generally speaking you need the horses.  Mora in his first few years was relentless, then his personal life went to shit and recruiting suffered and voilà, we started to suck.  He needs to step his shit up.  He’s a brilliant coach, but thinks his football acumen will cover for any other shortcomings.  Note to Chip: it will not.

[maninblack 7974]

[oSuJeff97 3435]

2 hours ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

The problem they have is that the best 48 can't get in. Rutgers, Maryland, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Missouri, Kentucky, Mississippi State, and Minnesota are already there. So it's the best 37. And the B1G seems to be sticking to AAU status being a requirement, even though Nebraska got kicked out.

Yes but the other side of the coin is that lots of the top 37 are “already in.” We’re not competing with those schools - we’re competing with who is also on the outside looking in.

So the real question is how many spots are left and what are the schools that are there to fill them?

If the B1G and SEC include 32 known schools in their future state, then the question is - what are the next best 16 schools that would get the total number in Prestige Worldwide to 48?

I’m pretty confident that OSU would be in that group, given all of the factors previously pointed out.

[camel at sea 589]

1 hour ago, TKthunder2 said:

I’m not arguing.  But long term, how tied in is West Virginia, Cincy, or UCF if the ACC comes calling after Florida St/Clemson/UNC leave?  How many reasonable expansion options are there in the region…Memphis, Tulane and…? Moving West with the gutted PAC10 (even if Oregon/UW end up leaving) strategically open more doors long term than try to complete with the remainder of the ACC.

If the ACC loses 6 schools they can quickly add West Virginia, Cincinnati, UCF, USF, UConn, Army, Navy, Temple, and any number of 3rd rate Carolina schools and all of those would leave the Big 12 immediately if the ACC sent invites.

Meanwhile if they join the PAC12-2 they’d secure their spot as a second tier conference below the SEC/B1G but equal with the ACC and above any of the other smaller conferences with plenty of expansion options between the MWC and a few in the Central time zone.  Basically geography would most like (never say never) protect the PAC/ACC from each other.

The best move would be to go West. Then even if you get poached some they’d have logical/reasonable candidates to expand with and these schools would secure their spot in a 2nd tier league at worst.  Ride and die with the new Big 12 and the ACC could absolutely pass them by relegating them to 3rd tier status.

It doesn't make any sense to jump into a worse situation (Big 12 to vulnerable PAC 10) because your own league *might* lose its eastern flank... someday. 

And even if the new Big 12 loses its eastern flank to a gutted ACC, that means that it lost 2 of its 3 weakest members with respect to value and it also lost its travel headaches. So... it's still a 2nd tier league (well above the G5) and in just as good a spot as the refurbished ACC and the PAC.  The Big 12 could add one and keep rolling along at ten teams.  Who would the one be? Memphis has good athletics value.  They could look west at Boise if they're still available.  Maybe they pick up Air Force (which has a relatively good national fanbase) as #10.  No reason to panic. 

The more likely scenario if the ACC gets gutted, though, is that Louisville probably becomes available to plug into the Big 12's eastern wing.  If the Big 12 is lucky, then maybe the Canes do too. 

[Sbbruin 21784]

Fresno and SDSU have competitive teams, and it would give them both a recruiting boost, but they don’t fit academically.  And the conference is basically a Group of 5 plus league

[maninblack 7974]

Dumb. The P12 needs to kill the B12. The 4 remaining join together in a breakaway from the NCAA. Reorganize after that. 

Adding poors just complicates things.

[SimonBolivar 10949]

Just now, maninblack said:

The P12 needs to kill the B12. 

Don't have the $$$ to do it.

[Francisco 2.0 32347]

Arrogance.  Wait until they figure out Purdue, Illinois, Indiana, etc all get the same amount of TV money, with their cost of living and tax situations.

https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-pac-12-trying-to-hold-itself

Quote

What the Pac-12 didn’t do, per the USC source, is ask how the Los Angeles-based schools felt about how the conference’s revenue is divided. All the Pac-12 universities currently receive equal shares. 

“No one ever had a conversation with us about how we felt about the revenue share,” the source said. “Nobody asked, ‘Are you OK with it? Would we like to see something different next contract?’ Not one conversation with LA schools, that was a mistake. We could’ve ended up leaving for the Big Ten regardless, but you have to have the conversation when we have higher cost of living in LA, higher tax, and 60-70 percent of the Pac-12’s TV market.”

 

 

Here's the entire article:

 

Spoiler

USC and UCLA first held discussions about ditching the Pac-12 Conference and defecting to the Big Ten last summer, I’m told.

“We’ve been on this for a year,” a high-ranking athletic department staffer at USC shared on Friday morning. “It lost steam, then it picked up two months ago and was a slow build leading up to yesterday.”

So much for the so-called “alliance.”

The Big Ten raided the Pac-12 on Thursday, stabbing it between the shoulder blades and snatching the Los Angeles television market. The move blew up more than 100 years of Pac-12 history, torched the Rose Bowl, and turned the “Power Five” into the “Super Two” (SEC and Big Ten).

USC and UCLA will begin play in the Big Ten in 2024 and share in that conference’s $1-billion-a-year FOX television windfall. Meanwhile, the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors scheduled an emergency virtual meeting with commissioner George Kliavkoff.

Oregon athletic director Rob Mullens wasn’t aware that USC and UCLA were leaving until he saw the news break on Thursday. Same goes for Oregon State AD Scott Barnes. They were blindsided like the rest of the conference. And Kliavkoff was at a family vacation home in Montana when day No. 365 on the job kicked like a mule.

Will the Big Ten try to poach Oregon and Washington, too? Would it covet the Bay Area television market and chase Stanford and Cal? And what happens to Oregon State if the Pac-12 further disintegrates around it?

In the hours after the news broke, Oregon got busy sifting through its options. Mullens closed ranks, and instructed his staff not to make public comment. UO President, Michael Schill, communicated with Kliavkoff and several fellow Pac-12 presidents and chancellors.

Said one long-time UO administrator: “It’s not what Phil Knight had in mind 20 years ago — to end up in the minor leagues.”

The prevailing theory is that Oregon and Washington would love to tailgate the Los Angeles schools and follow them into the Big Ten. But I’m not convinced either university brings enough value to make splitting the FOX television revenue with two additional partners a no-brainer.

Be sure, the end of the Pac-12 as we know it is about television money. FOX coveted the Los Angeles television market and aimed to buy it by preying on the biggest vulnerability of the Pac-12 — its lousy TV deal.

The Pac-12’s woeful media rights deal, negotiated by former commissioner Larry Scott, continues to haunt the conference. In the last fiscal year, every Pac-12 member received $21 million less in distributions than Big Ten universities did. That difference will swell to more than $50 million a year, per university, by 2024. 

Said the USC staff member, “Every AD in the Pac-12 would’ve made this move if they’re honest with you. It wasn’t personal, just business.”

The Pac-12 has been immersed for months in strategy sessions and discussions about the conference’s next media rights deal. Kliavkoff told me two weeks ago, “Every single decision is viewed through the filter of what this would do to the value of media rights long term.”

What the Pac-12 didn’t do, per the USC source, is ask how the Los Angeles-based schools felt about how the conference’s revenue is divided. All the Pac-12 universities currently receive equal shares. 

“No one ever had a conversation with us about how we felt about the revenue share,” the source said. “Nobody asked, ‘Are you OK with it? Would we like to see something different next contract?’ Not one conversation with LA schools, that was a mistake. We could’ve ended up leaving for the Big Ten regardless, but you have to have the conversation when we have higher cost of living in LA, higher tax, and 60-70 percent of the Pac-12’s TV market.”

I doubt it would have mattered. 

I also don’t think the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors would have gone for a revenue-sharing model that wasn’t equitable. As a result, USC and UCLA turned its back on the Pac-12 on Thursday. They now face two awkward years of competition in the conference they destroyed. The rest of the involved parties need to now do what’s best for themselves.

For Oregon… 

Phil Knight is 84. He’s not involved in the day-to-day operations at Nike and has been busy making legacy moves. His $2 billion-plus written offer to purchase the Trail Blazers last month wasn’t a portfolio play. It was a move designed to keep the NBA team in Portland, the city he was born in. I expect his alma mater, Oregon, will go to the mattresses and explore whether joining the Big Ten (or SEC) is feasible. If it falls short on that front, UO will have no choice but to position itself as a well-funded Pac-12 outlier, like Clemson in the otherwise underwhelming ACC.

For Oregon State… 

The Beavers are in a difficult spot. They aren’t located in a major television market and don’t add tangible value to potential suitors. OSU has to hope that the Pac-12 holds itself together without further defections. If Oregon and Washington bolt to the Big Ten or Arizona/ASU and Colorado/Utah leave for the Big 12, the Beavers will be left behind. 

Best-case scenario, OSU stays put in a Pac-12 alongside the other current leftover members. Worst case? OSU wakes up a few years from now in beautiful, newly renovated Reser Stadium but… alongside Boise State, Fresno State and San Jose State in a newfangled conference that doesn’t factor nationally. 

For the Pac-12… 

In the next 72 hours, the primary focus of the Pac-12 has to be retaining Oregon/Washington and keeping the Big 12 from poaching Utah/Colorado and ASU/Arizona. 

Beyond that, it must get proactive. Would ESPN — or another media partner — swoop in with a lucrative media deal aimed at holding what’s left of the Pac-12 together? ESPN needs programming in the western part of the country. The Pac-12 needs an immediate infusion of cash to sell its current members on sticking around. 

Along those lines, I wonder if some sort of Pac-12/Big-12 merger might materialize, creating a third super conference with 20+ teams and multiple time zones for ESPN. It feels like the most viable path to relevancy. 

 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by Francisco 2.0

[notre dame joe 173]

2 hours ago, bullet said:

Flugaur is simply a twitter user with a fictional source he calls "Big Ten Man."  He seems to have fun making stuff up and trolling the Dude of West Virginia, who does at least seem to talk to real people for his information.

My last ray of hope is that he will tweet that ND is signed, sealed, delivered, to the BUG10.

[Sbbruin 21784]

3 hours ago, Zhorn96 said:

Would be interested in @Sbbruin's thoughts on the UC regents and if they let UCLA go without Cal.  Cal's athletic department owes about $400M for the stadium reno and if football dies in Berkeley and they default (which seems possible if their shit TV money goes down and what fan interest they have evaporates), UC regents are on the hook.  Since there is no way the regents have reviewed or approved this yet, I've seen some thoughts that the regents might torpedo UCLA's ride unless Cal gets included.  Total speculation, obvs, but its an angle that most people havent considered

Chancellor Block deftly navigated this one.  He apparently went direct to the UC President Drake, and Chair Rich Leib, sold them both on the benefits to UCLA who is looking at a roughly $100 million pandemic and shitty football deficit and we’re shown that UCLA is no longer a liability to the Regents, but an asset.  You can argue whether Cal or UCLA are the true flagship, but both are top top national public universities, and getting even more pub and exposure to one of them is a good thing.  
 

Cal’s stadium boondoggle is their win cross to bear.  I’ve been there post renovations and still no one shows up.  

[Sbbruin 21784]

14 minutes ago, maninblack said:

Dumb. The P12 needs to kill the B12. The 4 remaining join together in a breakaway from the NCAA. Reorganize after that. 

Adding poors just complicates things.

I agree.  Only one of the PAC and B12 can survive.  Have a tournament and the bottom 8 teams are relegated to purgatory 

[maninblack 7974]

25 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

Don't have the $$$ to do it.

But you think the B12 has the money to go the other way?