Realignment talk not going away

[Uncle Nate 2097]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Which puts the Arizona guy in a pickle due to how he has been adamant about april 15 as a significant date.

Yeah, it makes me think he reached out to Dodds to do this story precisely because he now realizes April 15 ain't happening, and he wanted to get out of his pickle as soon as he could.

[BurntOrange&White 41646]

2 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

Yeah, it makes me think he reached out to Dodds to do this story precisely because he now realizes April 15 ain't happening, and he wanted to get out of his pickle as soon as he could.

You think it's more of a dill or maybe a bread n butter?

Edited March 30, 2023 by BurntOrange&White

[Magus Ossis 2996]

10 minutes ago, Laxtonto said:

That was a complete nothing piece with the biggest thing of value is now knowing that there won’t be a real offer by the April 15th date…

So once again, what is the real drop dead date, not for the PAC 12 l, but for acceptance into the Big 12? Is it June 1st to set up a full one year as a lame duck school? Is it later than that? I always thought the April 1st date as essentially there to help calm nerves before the last couple of BOT meetings of the academic to keep someone from going rouge during the summer. If that isn’t going to happen, then what does that signal to everyone?

[Uncle Nate 2097]

15 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

You think it's more of a dill or maybe a bread n butter?

Spicy Reaper...

[Hurtlocker 2219]

21 hours ago, Laxtonto said:

That was a complete nothing piece with the biggest thing of value is now knowing that there won’t be a real offer by the April 15th date…

So once again, what is the real drop dead date, not for the PAC 12 l, but for acceptance into the Big 12? Is it June 1st to set up a full one year as a lame duck school? Is it later than that? I always thought the April 1st date as essentially there to help calm nerves before the last couple of BOT meetings of the academic to keep someone from going rouge during the summer. If that isn’t going to happen, then what does that signal to everyone?

Clearly sooner is better than later, but my guess is before July31st, since August first is the start of their new year.   Most conferences have at least a one-year notice clause and you can't move on a dime and get on other schedules.   If schools want to get on the Big Ten or Big 12's 2024 schedule, they need to have it worked out that they're moving before the end of July.  

Also on mouthpieces:  Dodds has been a Big 12 mouthpiece through all this.   He's a Mizzou grad and KC dude.   It seems every time the Pac team of Mandel and Canzano drop news, someone floats Dodds a counter.   And with CBS being the bigger media player and national, he's getting the most buzz.

The difference here is this is an AZ hit piece on the Pac, so they're clearly not getting their message out via the Pac channels.    The dude says they can drive to Lubbock and have options, then says they have time and the deal is mostly linear and no one would go for mostly streaming.  He's painting them in a corner and feels very similar to your woman saying:

It's not.

[BurntOrange&White 41646]

I think the Arizona dude reaching out to Dodds is the biggest key to take away from this as you have noted that Dodds isn't a mouth piece for the PAC. Him going to Dodds to do this interview doesn't look great at all as he could have went through multiple other mouth pieces of his conference.

 

 

It's not only Dodds that has refuted some of the stuff Canzano among others has said. There are other members of the media who have also supported stuff Dodds has said regarding the PAC. The only true mouth pieces in this whole thing from where I sit are the PAC 12 homers like Wilkins, Canzano, and Mandel. 

 

[flatdawgs 1337]

On 3/29/2023 at 8:49 PM, Trojan Man said:

It's not much longer to go to the B1G West schools from LA than it is to go to the Washington schools or Colorado. 

This is a stretch. The closest B1G school to the West Coast - Nebraska - is a third again farther from both LA and Seattle than they are from each other. (LA and Seattle are basically equidistant to most of the B1G schools; Seattle is actually closer to several). Most of the B1G West is 150%+ the distance between LA and Seattle; the B1G East is 2 to 2.5 times farther away.

I know we were told there would be no math, but....

[thunderlounge 8318]

7 hours ago, flatdawgs said:

This is a stretch. The closest B1G school to the West Coast - Nebraska - is a third again farther from both LA and Seattle than they are from each other. (LA and Seattle are basically equidistant to most of the B1G schools; Seattle is actually closer to several). Most of the B1G West is 150%+ the distance between LA and Seattle; the B1G East is 2 to 2.5 times farther away.

I know we were told there would be no math, but....

 

 

[USC Traveler 488]

I've been in Surly retirement for a few years (life happens fast), but there is just too much interesting stuff going on to not to carve out some time to post.

Shout out to the OGs from the Shaggy Realignment thread that are still killing it in here- Bullet, Camel, TK Thunder, Gaffords, Hurtlocker, Hagbard, MDMost.

Props to those of you (Camel, Gaffords, Most and TK off the top of my head) who were calling USC to the BIG about this time last year.  I was saying the same thing on my USC board.  The money difference was too great not to make the jump, and by bringing UCLA along, we kept the only PAC team that we truly care about playing.  (I do think Stanford will join as a partner for ND in the next 2-12 years, which will be nice to have a guaranteed road game in CA every year).  

Kudos to Trojan Man for doing good work in here as well.

//

I would have loved the PAC16.  Playing UT, OU and the rest of the gang on the regular would have been a blast, and I was bummed when it all fizzled.  But having UT plus OU in the SEC, and USC in the BIG is a great outcome.  Will be fun to see UT-Arky and UT-Aggy again, along with new matchups vs old line SEC teams.

Growing up in the '70's, I saw some epic USC vs OSU/UM Rose Bowls, and have been to a couple of USC-OSU games over the decades that were top shelf events.  Most of my friends and I feel like we're joining a conference where we'll finally be with our historic rivals and peers.  

//

It's crazy to think how much things have changed since 2010.

The PAC Presidents, Commisar Scott and Klownkoff couldn't have screwed their situation up any worse if they tried.  Arrogance and incompetence.

1. Starting a conference network without ESPN or Fox as a partner, and expecting they'd get strong distribution.  Laughable.

2. If they had allowed schools to keep T3 rights, the PAC 16 would have been a legit 3rd superconference.  UT, OU, USC, etc would have made a little more money than other schools, but the vast majority of the money would have been equal, and would be exponentially larger than what the WAC10 is looking at now.

3. Adding OU and OSU would have also been a game-changer.  Not at the PAC16 level, but it would be a huge difference vs where they are now.

4. Klownkoff was so busy puffing himself up on his media tour to celebrate his one year anniversary of doing nothing, he failed to realize that job 1 was keeping USC happy.  Mike Bohn had publicly stated twice that "All options are on the table" regarding conference affiliation.  One week before USC and UCLA announced for the BIG, Klownkoff was telling reporters "No school is leaving the PAC12."  

You literally can't make this stuff up.

//

I'm glad to see that it's going to be the PAC that dies, and not the B12.  The schools in the B12 actually care about football, whereas the WAC10 Presidents have proved over and over that they don't.  Looks like the B12 will be the top non-P2 conference when all the dust settles and the BIG/SEC have raided the ACC.

B12 will offer a fun, coast to coast league with a lot of competitive teams, with the top tier being playoff worthy.

[USC Traveler 488]

On 4/1/2023 at 1:11 AM, flatdawgs said:

This is a stretch. The closest B1G school to the West Coast - Nebraska - is a third again farther from both LA and Seattle than they are from each other. (LA and Seattle are basically equidistant to most of the B1G schools; Seattle is actually closer to several). Most of the B1G West is 150%+ the distance between LA and Seattle; the B1G East is 2 to 2.5 times farther away.

I know we were told there would be no math, but....

The problem is that there are media types and twitter randos who keep talking about the PNW schools as travel partners for USC and UCLA.

They're not- they're too far away.  They're 30-60 minutes closer by charter than most of the BIG, but that's not actually close.

Stanford would be a travel partner. So would Cal.  Same with the AZ schools, but they're not getting in.  Cal probably not either.

All of those schools are about 1/3 the distance that Seattle is from LA.

There's a reason USC and UCLA play the Bay Area schools every year in the PAC, but play the PNW schools in alternate years.

//

Also- Feldman and the LATimes both reported that USC and UCLA didn't want any other West Coast schools added as part of their negotiations with the BIG.  So if the LA schools aren't pushing for West Coast schools who in the existing BIG would be pushing for it ?

 

 

 

[USC Traveler 488]

Following up on the above, I don’t think there is any legit smoke around PNW schools going to the BIG.

When the BIG added NE, RU, MD, USC and UCLA, there was no smoke whatsoever in mainstream media circles. The BIG moved in complete silence.

But as soon as they added USC and UCLA, all of a sudden the BIG has leaks everywhere ? Why would that have happened in a matter of weeks and months? Logic would dictate that nothing has changed, and that the “smoke” is disinformation coming from other sources.

 

Who would benefit from this besides the media members getting clicks ?

The B12 is the biggest beneficiary of these leaks, because it helps keep the Four Corners schools nervous, and for good reason. Everyone in this thread knows that you can’t trust anyone in realignment, and that statements of conference unity are completely worthless. If a school can go BIG or SEC they will do so at the first opportunity.

Keeping that in the forefront of the minds of leaders at the 4C schools is smart strategy by the B12. If the B12 can get two to leave, they will get the rest of the PAC to follow, with WSU and OSU left behind.

There has also been some fake “smoke” coming from Eugene to help keep them afloat in recruiting, as their coaches have been telling recruits for the last nine months that they’re going to the BIG. They are another party that benefits from keeping this narrative going.

I just don’t buy that the BIG went from completely leakproof to frequent and regular leaks overnight.

//

I keep going back to three things:

1. The BIG’s main target is ND, as it should be. No one else comes close to bringing the value ND would bring, and no one else makes sense to bring in before ND- unless that would directly lead to ND going BIG.

The BIG has historically never been in a hurry on expansion. They will take their time, with their efforts focused on ND. 

ND doesn’t have any relationships with the PNW schools, so taking them doesn’t help get ND.  BIG will want to keep all options open to take as many ACC teams as they can.

How does the BIG win vs the SEC ? Being able to bring in all of UNC, UVA, Duke, GT, FSU and Miami, while still having room for ND and a partner of ND’s choice, may be enough to get the ACC schools to move as a block when the GOR is close to expiring.

And that’s assuming that the SEC wants FSU and Miami, which is an open question.

 

2. The BIG could have added the PNW schools at any time in the last nine months. If they wanted those schools, they’d already be in.

3. Thamel has reported that the existing power programs in the BIG (OSU, UM, PSU) don't want revenue dilution that would come with adding PNW schools, while the lower and mid-tier BIG programs don't want to see their games shoved onto streaming if more teams are added, in addition to not wanting revenue reduced.

So which schools in the BIG are voting to add the PNW schools ? And why are they doing so ?

I literally can’t come up with a single school that would vote yes.

If the BIG completely strikes out on ACC schools 10 years or so from now, then the equation could look a lot different, but I think the BIG will get their fair share of ACC schools- UNC, UVA, Duke and GT as a package deal seems like a slam dunk to the BIG. Those schools will want to stay together if possible.

SEC won’t want GT or Duke, but the BTN would make enough off those markets to make it worth it, along with the recruiting access and alum engagement in those areas.

Clemson will be all SEC, and the SEC will want them.

FSU and Miami tbd- making them SEC members makes them much tougher to recruit against.  Lots of SEC programs would probably prefer to be able to tell FL recruits "Why do you want to play for FSU in the snow at Minnesota when you can stay in the SEC ?"

[Hagbard Celine 11157]

welcome back traveler .... fyi please select the "post as plaintext" option - a bunch of us run in dark mode which renders your last 2 posts invisible

reposting for you

7 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

The problem is that there are media types and twitter randos who keep talking about the PNW schools as travel partners for USC and UCLA.

They're not- they're too far away.  They're 30-60 minutes closer by charter than most of the BIG, but that's not actually close.

Stanford would be a travel partner. So would Cal.  Same with the AZ schools, but they're not getting in.  Cal probably not either.

All of those schools are about 1/3 the distance that Seattle is from LA.

There's a reason USC and UCLA play the Bay Area schools every year in the PAC, but play the PNW schools in alternate years.

Also- Feldman and the LATimes both reported that USC and UCLA didn't want any other West Coast schools added as part of their negotiations with the BIG.  So if the LA schools aren't pushing for West Coast schools who in the existing BIG would be pushing for it ?

plaintext

[Hagbard Celine 11157]

plaintext of traveler:

Following up on the above, I don’t think there is any legit smoke around PNW schools going to the BIG.

When the BIG added NE, RU, MD, USC and UCLA, there was no smoke whatsoever in mainstream media circles. The BIG moved in complete silence.

But as soon as they added USC and UCLA, all of a sudden the BIG has leaks everywhere ? Why would that have happened in a matter of weeks and months? Logic would dictate that nothing has changed, and that the “smoke” is disinformation coming from other sources.

 

Who would benefit from this besides the media members getting clicks ?

The B12 is the biggest beneficiary of these leaks, because it helps keep the Four Corners schools nervous, and for good reason. Everyone in this thread knows that you can’t trust anyone in realignment, and that statements of conference unity are completely worthless. If a school can go BIG or SEC they will do so at the first opportunity.

Keeping that in the forefront of the minds of leaders at the 4C schools is smart strategy by the B12. If the B12 can get two to leave, they will get the rest of the PAC to follow, with WSU and OSU left behind.

There has also been some fake “smoke” coming from Eugene to help keep them afloat in recruiting, as their coaches have been telling recruits for the last nine months that they’re going to the BIG. They are another party that benefits from keeping this narrative going.

I just don’t buy that the BIG went from completely leakproof to frequent and regular leaks overnight.

//

I keep going back to three things:

1. The BIG’s main target is ND, as it should be. No one else comes close to bringing the value ND would bring, and no one else makes sense to bring in before ND- unless that would directly lead to ND going BIG.

The BIG has historically never been in a hurry on expansion. They will take their time, with their efforts focused on ND. 

ND doesn’t have any relationships with the PNW schools, so taking them doesn’t help get ND.  BIG will want to keep all options open to take as many ACC teams as they can.

How does the BIG win vs the SEC ? Being able to bring in all of UNC, UVA, Duke, GT, FSU and Miami, while still having room for ND and a partner of ND’s choice, may be enough to get the ACC schools to move as a block when the GOR is close to expiring.

And that’s assuming that the SEC wants FSU and Miami, which is an open question.

 

2. The BIG could have added the PNW schools at any time in the last nine months. If they wanted those schools, they’d already be in.

3. Thamel has reported that the existing power programs in the BIG (OSU, UM, PSU) don't want revenue dilution that would come with adding PNW schools, while the lower and mid-tier BIG programs don't want to see their games shoved onto streaming if more teams are added, in addition to not wanting revenue reduced.

So which schools in the BIG are voting to add the PNW schools ? And why are they doing so ?

I literally can’t come up with a single school that would vote yes.

If the BIG completely strikes out on ACC schools 10 years or so from now, then the equation could look a lot different, but I think the BIG will get their fair share of ACC schools- UNC, UVA, Duke and GT as a package deal seems like a slam dunk to the BIG. Those schools will want to stay together if possible.

SEC won’t want GT or Duke, but the BTN would make enough off those markets to make it worth it, along with the recruiting access and alum engagement in those areas.

Clemson will be all SEC, and the SEC will want them.

FSU and Miami tbd- making them SEC members makes them much tougher to recruit against.  Lots of SEC programs would probably prefer to be able to tell FL recruits "Why do you want to play for FSU in the snow at Minnesota when you can stay in the SEC ?"

[USC Traveler 488]

43 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

welcome back traveler .... fyi please select the "post as plaintext" option - a bunch of us run in dark mode which renders your last 2 posts invisible

reposting for you

plaintext

Thank you sir- for the welcome, the heads up and the repost.🤙

I've been trying to find the plaintext option, but have been failing.  

Looked on the post screen and under my settings, but striking out so far.  Is there a separate button somewhere ?

Apologies for being in the Guttenberg Bible era still.  Any help you can provide is greatly appreciated.  

 

Thanks Hag.

Edited April 2, 2023 by USC Traveler
added question

[USC Traveler 488]

Figured it out, but not soon enough for another edit.

Plaintext option pops up when you paste something in.

Thanks Hag!

[notre dame joe 202]

2 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

Also- Feldman and the LATimes both reported that USC and UCLA didn't want any other West Coast schools added as part of their negotiations with the BIG.  So if the LA schools aren't pushing for West Coast schools who in the existing BIG would be pushing for it ?

WAC10  I love it. 

 

As to the above, A&M did not want any more Texas schools following them to the SEC.  Their want was drowned by what the tv networks wanted. 

 

It has been clear since UGA board of Regents v. NCAA that college football is marching towards an NFL model where the biggest programs will be in a tiny number of 'conferences.'   UW and UO are just big enough that they must be included in whatever NFL we end up with. 

 

ND has bungled every decision for the last 10 years so I assume we will stumble into the BUG with our best buddy Stanford. 

[billfromlaketravis 11784]

On 3/30/2023 at 10:51 AM, Texas Wahoo said:

 

 

Given the "time frame" Apple is the last bidder standing. Man, all games on streaming would be a bold move. 

Edited April 3, 2023 by billfromlaketravis

[billfromlaketravis 11784]

5 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

plaintext of traveler:

Following up on the above, I don’t think there is any legit smoke around PNW schools going to the BIG.

When the BIG added NE, RU, MD, USC and UCLA, there was no smoke whatsoever in mainstream media circles. The BIG moved in complete silence.

But as soon as they added USC and UCLA, all of a sudden the BIG has leaks everywhere ? Why would that have happened in a matter of weeks and months? Logic would dictate that nothing has changed, and that the “smoke” is disinformation coming from other sources.

 

Who would benefit from this besides the media members getting clicks ?

The B12 is the biggest beneficiary of these leaks, because it helps keep the Four Corners schools nervous, and for good reason. Everyone in this thread knows that you can’t trust anyone in realignment, and that statements of conference unity are completely worthless. If a school can go BIG or SEC they will do so at the first opportunity.

Keeping that in the forefront of the minds of leaders at the 4C schools is smart strategy by the B12. If the B12 can get two to leave, they will get the rest of the PAC to follow, with WSU and OSU left behind.

There has also been some fake “smoke” coming from Eugene to help keep them afloat in recruiting, as their coaches have been telling recruits for the last nine months that they’re going to the BIG. They are another party that benefits from keeping this narrative going.

I just don’t buy that the BIG went from completely leakproof to frequent and regular leaks overnight.

//

I keep going back to three things:

1. The BIG’s main target is ND, as it should be. No one else comes close to bringing the value ND would bring, and no one else makes sense to bring in before ND- unless that would directly lead to ND going BIG.

The BIG has historically never been in a hurry on expansion. They will take their time, with their efforts focused on ND. 

ND doesn’t have any relationships with the PNW schools, so taking them doesn’t help get ND.  BIG will want to keep all options open to take as many ACC teams as they can.

How does the BIG win vs the SEC ? Being able to bring in all of UNC, UVA, Duke, GT, FSU and Miami, while still having room for ND and a partner of ND’s choice, may be enough to get the ACC schools to move as a block when the GOR is close to expiring.

And that’s assuming that the SEC wants FSU and Miami, which is an open question.

 

2. The BIG could have added the PNW schools at any time in the last nine months. If they wanted those schools, they’d already be in.

3. Thamel has reported that the existing power programs in the BIG (OSU, UM, PSU) don't want revenue dilution that would come with adding PNW schools, while the lower and mid-tier BIG programs don't want to see their games shoved onto streaming if more teams are added, in addition to not wanting revenue reduced.

So which schools in the BIG are voting to add the PNW schools ? And why are they doing so ?

I literally can’t come up with a single school that would vote yes.

If the BIG completely strikes out on ACC schools 10 years or so from now, then the equation could look a lot different, but I think the BIG will get their fair share of ACC schools- UNC, UVA, Duke and GT as a package deal seems like a slam dunk to the BIG. Those schools will want to stay together if possible.

SEC won’t want GT or Duke, but the BTN would make enough off those markets to make it worth it, along with the recruiting access and alum engagement in those areas.

Clemson will be all SEC, and the SEC will want them.

FSU and Miami tbd- making them SEC members makes them much tougher to recruit against.  Lots of SEC programs would probably prefer to be able to tell FL recruits "Why do you want to play for FSU in the snow at Minnesota when you can stay in the SEC ?"

So Oregon/Knight is f***ed. Delicious. 

[TrashMaster G 18029]

45 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Given the "time frame" Apple is the last bidder standing. Man, all games on streaming would be stupid. 

Fify 

[billfromlaketravis 11784]

So the degenerate football junkies, what would a fully AppleTV+ PAC look like? I'm not paying $100 to watch college football late at night. 

[Vertigo 20461]

54 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Given the "time frame" Apple is the last bidder standing. Man, all games on streaming would be a bold move. 

Nick Khan knows his shit. Tomorrow it will be announced that the wwe is selling to Endeavor, parent company of UfC for 9 Billion. Him saying they are fucked is not a great sign for the P12 honks.

Edited April 3, 2023 by Vertigo

[billfromlaketravis 11784]

Just now, Vertigo said:

Nick Kahn knows his shit. Tomorrow the wwe is selling to Endeavor, parent company of UfC for 9 Billion. Him saying they are fucked is not a great sign for the P12 honks.

Yeah, it feels like the big dogs want to be in the NFL business. Given all the shit going on at ESPN, probably not a wise decision for the SEC to enter into exclusive negotiations with them. I think the money will be OK, but ESPN to trying to claw back their shitty media rights deal. 

 

[Laxtonto 13013]

As this drags on, at what point do think the ESPN offer is not viable? I get that the lowball is there as a way      to provide themselves a “fuck it at this price why not” out, but we are approaching the need to potentially have to fully rethink the value of live sports in general. What segments and matchups are going to continue to have value and more interesting how do you leverage that value as we see a shift in how media ad revenue is generated.

 

Does the WAC10 have value to ESPN that is greater than cementing the final iteration of the near term outlook of what CFB is going to be? 5 years from now is there going to be enough value there to offset the risk of the current big 3 walking away and forming their own division at the cost of potentially both the B12 and WAC10.

I ask this because at some point a split is coming in CFB and when that happens the more conferences are willing to play ball with the networks on how the leftovers are treated, ie are they completely ignored like DivII, relegated to a limited cutoff like the FCS or treated as a token player like the G5. The value of those games in the mid and longterm is going to hinge not on the NCAA but the power 3 or 4 that split off. 
 

At what point by keeping the lowball offer on the table does ESPN risk the potential value of both the B12 and WAC10. If the WAC10 gets to hang out in zombie mode, does the B12 without Texas and OU get to split off with the other 3? Is it worth it to add the B12 and the flyover territory to the pool vs the expected payout? 
 

By not finishing one of them off both are likely at risk, and how does that risk transfer over to ESPN. This is also why I think there might be some truth to a back door FOX deal just to potentially screw ESPN by leaving them with a huge inventory of brands that all of a sudden lose a ton of value if the B12 and WAC10 get left behind.

[BurntOrange&White 41646]

19 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

So the degenerate football junkies, what would a fully AppleTV+ PAC look like? I'm not paying $100 to watch college football late at night. 

 

Closest representation I could find.

[Jabberwocky 1666]

 

[BurntOrange&White 41646]

4 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

 

Bro is acting like SDSU does anything.

[DFW Horn 6637]

1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Bro is acting like SDSU does anything.

Adding SDSU and SMU further divides the PAC's disappointing media pie. All these markets do is expand their footprint into good recruiting grounds. Otherwise, invitations would've been sent yesterday.

[BurntOrange&White 41646]

16 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

Adding SDSU and SMU further divides the PAC's disappointing media pie. All these markets do is expand their footprint into good recruiting grounds. Otherwise, invitations would've been sent yesterday.

Wilkins has been pumping SDSU and PAC ever since they made the final 4 and just a bit before, it's like his last remaining talking point because everything else has not gone well for him.

Edited April 4, 2023 by BurntOrange&White

[DFW Horn 6637]

1 hour ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Wilkins has been pumping SDSU and PAC ever since they made the final 4 and just a bit before, it's like his last remaining talking point because everything else has not gone well for him.

Wilkins is full of shit.

I almost feel sorry for Kliavkoff bc you know it's probably Cal and Stanford fucking up everything at this point. But, he probably sold his "connections" to media partners when interviewing for the job. He's over-promised and under-delivered.

But, fuck the PAC. I'm just glad UT isn't associated with those clowns.

[Left Coast 879]

10 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

 

If basketball mattered at all to the networks, UConn would be in a much better conference.

[Josef Pwag 1883]

On 4/2/2023 at 5:37 PM, notre dame joe said:

As to the above, A&M did not want any more Texas schools following them to the SEC.  Their want was drowned by what the tv networks wanted. 

 

 

[bullet 1626]

On 3/31/2023 at 12:14 PM, BurntOrange&White said:

I think the Arizona dude reaching out to Dodds is the biggest key to take away from this as you have noted that Dodds isn't a mouth piece for the PAC. Him going to Dodds to do this interview doesn't look great at all as he could have went through multiple other mouth pieces of his conference.

 

 

It's not only Dodds that has refuted some of the stuff Canzano among others has said. There are other members of the media who have also supported stuff Dodds has said regarding the PAC. The only true mouth pieces in this whole thing from where I sit are the PAC 12 homers like Wilkins, Canzano, and Mandel. 

 

And Dodds has historically done his best to troll and dump on the Big 12.

[BurntOrange&White 41646]

I know I’ve seen this twitter account in this thread but couldn’t recall if it’s a fake one or somewhat legit

[Al_4_ISU 12612]

It's a real person, but he's 100% full of shit and doesn't know anything.

[CustersDoctor 585]

This guy's literally doing his PAC10 update from a hotel room while on vacation with his parents. I'm pretty sure that after the podcast he's got to go sit in the cuck chair while his GF gets some BBC.

[BurntOrange&White 41646]

18 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

It's a real person, but he's 100% full of shit and doesn't know anything.

Would be cool though. Fuck pac 12

[Texas Wahoo 3627]

 

 

[bullet 1626]

2 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

It's a real person, but he's 100% full of shit and doesn't know anything.

On a historical note, it was actually a Greg Swaim tweet that started the Shaggy realignment thread.

[bullet 1626]

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/pac-12-unlikely-to-reach-media-rights-deal-with-more-than-50-of-games-airing-on-tv-long-time-consultant-says/

 

"As the Pac-12 continues its search for a new media rights deal, it's become less viable the conference will land a partner willing to feature more than half its games on traditional cable or broadcast television, media consultant Jim Williams told CBS Sports.

The assertion could be a deal-breaker as Pac-12 presidents consider whether a deal heavy on streaming would be enough to keep their schools in the league. Arizona president Robert Robbins twice told CBS Sports in the last three weeks he expected over half the Pac-12 content to be on traditional linear TV platforms with networks such as CBS, Fox, ESPN and NBC considered the gold standard in live sports programming. 

Williams, however, decided to go on the record with comments being repeated throughout the sports media industry: The Pac-12 may be running out of time in getting most of its content seen on a major linear carrier.

"I'm at an absolute loss how NBC, CBS, ESPN, ABC or Fox gets [the Pac-12] to 50 [percent]," said Williams, a Washington D.C.-based, seven-time Emmy Award-winning producer who helped develop five different regional sports networks throughout a career that began in 1977...."

[Jabberwocky 1666]

56 minutes ago, bullet said:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/pac-12-unlikely-to-reach-media-rights-deal-with-more-than-50-of-games-airing-on-tv-long-time-consultant-says/

 

"As the Pac-12 continues its search for a new media rights deal, it's become less viable the conference will land a partner willing to feature more than half its games on traditional cable or broadcast television, media consultant Jim Williams told CBS Sports.

The assertion could be a deal-breaker as Pac-12 presidents consider whether a deal heavy on streaming would be enough to keep their schools in the league. Arizona president Robert Robbins twice told CBS Sports in the last three weeks he expected over half the Pac-12 content to be on traditional linear TV platforms with networks such as CBS, Fox, ESPN and NBC considered the gold standard in live sports programming. 

Williams, however, decided to go on the record with comments being repeated throughout the sports media industry: The Pac-12 may be running out of time in getting most of its content seen on a major linear carrier.

"I'm at an absolute loss how NBC, CBS, ESPN, ABC or Fox gets [the Pac-12] to 50 [percent]," said Williams, a Washington D.C.-based, seven-time Emmy Award-winning producer who helped develop five different regional sports networks throughout a career that began in 1977...."

Just attaching the tweet because it looks all tidy and stuff...

 

[Uncle Nate 2097]

5 hours ago, bullet said:

And Dodds has historically done his best to troll and dump on the Big 12.

This is Dennis, not DeLoss. 

[BurntOrange&White 41646]

1 hour ago, bullet said:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/pac-12-unlikely-to-reach-media-rights-deal-with-more-than-50-of-games-airing-on-tv-long-time-consultant-says/

 

"As the Pac-12 continues its search for a new media rights deal, it's become less viable the conference will land a partner willing to feature more than half its games on traditional cable or broadcast television, media consultant Jim Williams told CBS Sports.

The assertion could be a deal-breaker as Pac-12 presidents consider whether a deal heavy on streaming would be enough to keep their schools in the league. Arizona president Robert Robbins twice told CBS Sports in the last three weeks he expected over half the Pac-12 content to be on traditional linear TV platforms with networks such as CBS, Fox, ESPN and NBC considered the gold standard in live sports programming. 

Williams, however, decided to go on the record with comments being repeated throughout the sports media industry: The Pac-12 may be running out of time in getting most of its content seen on a major linear carrier.

"I'm at an absolute loss how NBC, CBS, ESPN, ABC or Fox gets [the Pac-12] to 50 [percent]," said Williams, a Washington D.C.-based, seven-time Emmy Award-winning producer who helped develop five different regional sports networks throughout a career that began in 1977...."

RIP

[oSuJeff97 3438]

Every day that passes it becomes more and more clear that Yormark has been playing 4D chess to Kliavkoff's Candyland.

PAC is fucking toast.

[Deej 77667]

1 hour ago, bullet said:

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/pac-12-unlikely-to-reach-media-rights-deal-with-more-than-50-of-games-airing-on-tv-long-time-consultant-says/

 

"As the Pac-12 continues its search for a new media rights deal, it's become less viable the conference will land a partner willing to feature more than half its games on traditional cable or broadcast television, media consultant Jim Williams told CBS Sports.

The assertion could be a deal-breaker as Pac-12 presidents consider whether a deal heavy on streaming would be enough to keep their schools in the league. Arizona president Robert Robbins twice told CBS Sports in the last three weeks he expected over half the Pac-12 content to be on traditional linear TV platforms with networks such as CBS, Fox, ESPN and NBC considered the gold standard in live sports programming. 

Williams, however, decided to go on the record with comments being repeated throughout the sports media industry: The Pac-12 may be running out of time in getting most of its content seen on a major linear carrier.

"I'm at an absolute loss how NBC, CBS, ESPN, ABC or Fox gets [the Pac-12] to 50 [percent]," said Williams, a Washington D.C.-based, seven-time Emmy Award-winning producer who helped develop five different regional sports networks throughout a career that began in 1977...."

[camel at sea 589]

2 hours ago, Jabberwocky said:

Just attaching the tweet because it looks all tidy and stuff...

 

Big 12 interest in SDSU is interesting.  CU, Zona, ASU, and SDSU would be a nice group of four if Utah wants to go down with the PAC ship.  Keeping the PAC out of southern California would be a strong move by Yormark and it would probably mollify the Cali alums at UA and ASU.

[BurntOrange&White 41646]

16 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

Big 12 interest in SDSU is interesting.  CU, Zona, ASU, and SDSU would be a nice group of four if Utah wants to go down with the PAC ship.  Keeping the PAC out of southern California would be a strong move by Yormark and it would probably mollify the Cali alums at UA and ASU.

Imo it would be a kill shot for pac for big 12 to take SDSU especially considering all the pac 12 water boys bolstering SDSU. Would be hilarious actually for them to take a SDSU and Arizona. 

[billfromlaketravis 11784]

Utah staying in the PAC if Colorado, ASU, and Arizona leave is next level bitterness. They might hate BYU more than aggy hates us. 

[DFW Horn 6637]

43 minutes ago, camel at sea said:

Big 12 interest in SDSU is interesting.  CU, Zona, ASU, and SDSU would be a nice group of four if Utah wants to go down with the PAC ship.  Keeping the PAC out of southern California would be a strong move by Yormark and it would probably mollify the Cali alums at UA and ASU.

SDSU compares favorably to UH and Cincinnati. Why not?

Did Yormark negotiate a pro rata increase for any new members over the term of the Big 12's media deal? If so, the Aztecs are a good backup plan if one of the 4 Corners balks.

[TKthunder2 5058]

I mean the PAC (with 12 teams that included the LA school eyeballs) most weeks had 1 game OTA on FOX/ABC and 2-3 games on ESPN/FS1 and 2-3 games on P12Net. Which was roughly 50% give or take week to week.

With LA gone and FOX gone and no deal from CBS/NBC out there it was obvious they’d take the hit at the top and end up with 2 games on ESPN maybe 1-2 regular season games at best on ABC.

With only 10 teams you’re talking 5 conference games (even if you add SDSU/SMU who no one watches so it only adds to the weak content) so 40% has always been the number in my mind. They want their top 2 games of the week on linear.

But those are the only games Apple/Amazon want. Sure they’ll take the others but to sell subscriptions they want Oregon v Washington not Oregon St v Washington St.

So again we’re back to taking money and going streaming, or taking exposure and losing money relative to your peers. Either way it’s just a bandaid until the next round of realignment where you lose your next biggest brands.

FOX could pay $50m/yr to the Big12 for the 4C schools for that content, or piggyback with Apple for the PAC tier two games. Apple gets the game of the week and the worthless tier three trash content and FOX gets 2 games a week to put on FOX or FS1. The question is will that be more expensive or less expensive than just giving the Big 12 $50 million?

The SEC (prior to UT/OU) got $300million/year for tier one for 14 teams for $21.5m/yr/per team. The Big 12 Now + gave the members (w/o Texas/OU) $24million/year or 3 million/yr/per school for their third tier rights and the ACCN payed out $40 (which is less than $3m/per) but they haven’t hit 100% distribution of the network due to startup costs.

So if we assume the PAC12-2 could get $21 million a year/per team for tier one from Apple (assuming they are paying a premium to get them to stream) and $3 million/per for tier three still leaves a $7 million/per year/per school for $70 million total gap between the PAC12 versus the Big12 that they need tier 2 to fill. So for $20 million more than paying for the 4C to join the Big 12 FOX could get the 2nd/3rd best PAC games each week for FOX/FS1.

Doesn’t sound like a great deal to me.

[TKthunder2 5058]

54 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Imo it would be a kill shot for pac for big 12 to take SDSU especially considering all the pac 12 water boys bolstering SDSU. Would be hilarious actually for them to take a SDSU and Arizona. 

They’d wait on Utah or Oregon or Washington. I honestly think Washington State would be better than SDSU.

49 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Utah staying in the PAC if Colorado, ASU, and Arizona leave is next level bitterness. They might hate BYU more than aggy hates us. 

They won’t. They’ll bitch and moan but if Colorado and Arizona leave Utah will jump ship too.

25 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

SDSU compares favorably to UH and Cincinnati. Why not?

Did Yormark negotiate a pro rata increase for any new members over the term of the Big 12's media deal? If so, the Aztecs are a good backup plan if one of the 4 Corners balks.

They got ESPN (but not FOX) to agree to a pro rata increase for P5 expansion only. They’d have to negotiate with both ESPN and FOX to get SDSU.

The target is the 4C schools, everything else is just noise. I’d be surprised if the B12 didn’t already have approval from FOX to add the four corner schools.