This is from a site that has deep connections to the SC Family.
Usually understands what people behind the scenes want
What are the options? How should I know? I’m not a professional athletic director. I’m only barely more qualified for the job than Lynn Swann was. But that won’t stop me from offering some suggestions. And any analysis of the problem must begin with this: the status quo is unacceptable. The Pac-12 is currently the Venezuela of conferences, with breadlines stretching around the block, and people having to carry wheelbarrows of hard currency to buy a stick of gum. The conference is badly mismanaged. It is poor and getting poorer. The status quo is disastrous.
The mismanagement won’t be easy to fix. Larry Scott sold a foolish bill of goods to university presidents. Let’s do it all ourselves, he said. Yes, the SEC needed a broadcasting partner. So did the Big 10. So did Notre Dame. So did Texas. But we don’t. I’ll run it all myself. It will be great.
Thanks, Larry. Good plan.
And obviously the Pac 12 hasn’t helped itself with the mismanagement at its individual institutions. UCLA is a dumpster fire. And USC, the flagship program of the conference, has refused to make a real financial investment in its program (until now?) and saddled itself with a third-rate coach that has lost everybody — fans, alums, media, high school coaches, high school players and parents — everybody, that is, but Carol “I don’t hire football coaches” Folt.
Mike Bohn almost certainly understands all of this, and his recent shots across the bow about all options being on the table is a good start. Where does USC go from here? I think it should first maximize its leverage and then use that leverage, something neither of Bohn’s predecessors understood or, if they did understand, were not willing to do.
USC maximizes its leverage by committing to football again. There’s an easy solution to this problem: hire Urban Meyer. Do that, and you immediately make your product dramatically more attractive to broadcast partners (And everybody else for that matter). I have nothing else to say about this, because I’ve said it before many times, and practically everybody knows that it’s true. This move gives you additional leverage.
Then use that leverage. You have three options. The first is Act Like The Biggest Bully On The Block: stay in the conference, but only if the conference fires Larry Scott, finds a broadcast partner for the conference, and gives USC a greater share of the proceeds, like Texas gets in the Big 12.
The rest of the conference will howl, with the possible exception of UCLA and Oregon, who can probably also legitimately claim higher-than-average levels of compensation. It can still be done, I suspect, but only if USC can credibly tell its sister institutions that it’s willing to take options two or three if they don’t cooperate. Because the only thing worse than paying USC (and maybe a couple of others) a greater share of the money is being part of the Pac-12 conference if USC (and maybe others) are gone.
This brings us to option two: Move To A Nicer Neighborhood. In this second option, USC joins a new conference, likely the Big 12. Ideally USC would leave the conference in conjunction with the other California schools, particularly UCLA. The two LA institutions — despite their ineptitude of late — would be appealing. A conference like the Big 12 would get two elite academic institutions, two of the premier brands in college sports, an entry into the second-largest media market in the country, and a greater ability to recruit California. That’s an appealing package. That’s worth something. Who else in the conference can offer something that valuable? That’s right. Nobody. Although the Bay Area schools also bring some things to the table. Enough with being held hostage by bottom feeders like Wazzu and Oregon State, with whom USC currently equally splits the Pac-12’s meager proceeds. Should USC continue down that path?
Make that move to the Big 12 with Stanford and Cal and you have the makings of the first 16-team super conference. The California schools and Texas schools in one division; the schools north and east of Texas are in the other division. USC-OU and USC-Texas in football. UCLA-Kansas in basketball. This is a winning combination.
Does this make travel tougher? Sure, marginally. But you’ll still play many of your away games in California, and while Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas are far from Southern California, so is Washington. Frankly, it’s a lot easier to get to Austin and Norman than Pullman. West Virginia is a different story; it may be almost heaven, but it’s also quite a haul from LA. Schedule few of those trips. Make it part of the deal.
https://wearesc.com/musings-from-arledge-bohns-recovery-three-options-and-trojexit/
I wouldn't get too excited.
I think the B12 just makes for a convenient leverage device for schools who want to negotiate a better deal where they are already at.
To get what they want, they need to show they can walk away and the B12 gives them that option.
Yes but it also opens the door for what Texas wanted in 2011.
Texas told the PAC 10 no because they couldn't keep the LHN.
You mean create super conference?
I guess.
I think this is just saber-rattling to show Pac they are unhappy.
I am skeptical of this. Personally I don't really want the Big 12 to add schools from the Pac 12. Wvu is already an outlier in this conference a raid of the Pac 12 would make us and even bigger outlier. If the Big 12 were to expand it would be in Wvu's best interest to be an eastward expansion. Outside of the potential revenue increase no real benefit to us going west.You mean create super conference?
I guess.
I think this is just saber-rattling to show Pac they are unhappy.
The biggest worry I have is if the Texas and Oklahoma schools decided to team up with some of the Pac 12 schools to form an entirely new conference. I spend most of the winter months in the phoenix area and have heard these rumors for years. I don't give much credence to them but when you have the big wigs at espn and fox meddling in the back ground anything is possible.I wouldn't get too excited.
I think the B12 just makes for a convenient leverage device for schools who want to negotiate a better deal where they are already at.
To get what they want, they need to show they can walk away and the B12 gives them that option.
This is from a site that has deep connections to the SC Family.
Usually understands what people behind the scenes want
What are the options? How should I know? I’m not a professional athletic director. I’m only barely more qualified for the job than Lynn Swann was. But that won’t stop me from offering some suggestions. And any analysis of the problem must begin with this: the status quo is unacceptable. The Pac-12 is currently the Venezuela of conferences, with breadlines stretching around the block, and people having to carry wheelbarrows of hard currency to buy a stick of gum. The conference is badly mismanaged. It is poor and getting poorer. The status quo is disastrous.
The mismanagement won’t be easy to fix. Larry Scott sold a foolish bill of goods to university presidents. Let’s do it all ourselves, he said. Yes, the SEC needed a broadcasting partner. So did the Big 10. So did Notre Dame. So did Texas. But we don’t. I’ll run it all myself. It will be great.
Thanks, Larry. Good plan.
And obviously the Pac 12 hasn’t helped itself with the mismanagement at its individual institutions. UCLA is a dumpster fire. And USC, the flagship program of the conference, has refused to make a real financial investment in its program (until now?) and saddled itself with a third-rate coach that has lost everybody — fans, alums, media, high school coaches, high school players and parents — everybody, that is, but Carol “I don’t hire football coaches” Folt.
Mike Bohn almost certainly understands all of this, and his recent shots across the bow about all options being on the table is a good start. Where does USC go from here? I think it should first maximize its leverage and then use that leverage, something neither of Bohn’s predecessors understood or, if they did understand, were not willing to do.
USC maximizes its leverage by committing to football again. There’s an easy solution to this problem: hire Urban Meyer. Do that, and you immediately make your product dramatically more attractive to broadcast partners (And everybody else for that matter). I have nothing else to say about this, because I’ve said it before many times, and practically everybody knows that it’s true. This move gives you additional leverage.
Then use that leverage. You have three options. The first is Act Like The Biggest Bully On The Block: stay in the conference, but only if the conference fires Larry Scott, finds a broadcast partner for the conference, and gives USC a greater share of the proceeds, like Texas gets in the Big 12.
The rest of the conference will howl, with the possible exception of UCLA and Oregon, who can probably also legitimately claim higher-than-average levels of compensation. It can still be done, I suspect, but only if USC can credibly tell its sister institutions that it’s willing to take options two or three if they don’t cooperate. Because the only thing worse than paying USC (and maybe a couple of others) a greater share of the money is being part of the Pac-12 conference if USC (and maybe others) are gone.
This brings us to option two: Move To A Nicer Neighborhood. In this second option, USC joins a new conference, likely the Big 12. Ideally USC would leave the conference in conjunction with the other California schools, particularly UCLA. The two LA institutions — despite their ineptitude of late — would be appealing. A conference like the Big 12 would get two elite academic institutions, two of the premier brands in college sports, an entry into the second-largest media market in the country, and a greater ability to recruit California. That’s an appealing package. That’s worth something. Who else in the conference can offer something that valuable? That’s right. Nobody. Although the Bay Area schools also bring some things to the table. Enough with being held hostage by bottom feeders like Wazzu and Oregon State, with whom USC currently equally splits the Pac-12’s meager proceeds. Should USC continue down that path?
Make that move to the Big 12 with Stanford and Cal and you have the makings of the first 16-team super conference. The California schools and Texas schools in one division; the schools north and east of Texas are in the other division. USC-OU and USC-Texas in football. UCLA-Kansas in basketball. This is a winning combination.
Does this make travel tougher? Sure, marginally. But you’ll still play many of your away games in California, and while Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas are far from Southern California, so is Washington. Frankly, it’s a lot easier to get to Austin and Norman than Pullman. West Virginia is a different story; it may be almost heaven, but it’s also quite a haul from LA. Schedule few of those trips. Make it part of the deal.
https://wearesc.com/musings-from-arledge-bohns-recovery-three-options-and-trojexit/
This is from a site that has deep connections to the SC Family.
Usually understands what people behind the scenes want
What are the options? How should I know? I’m not a professional athletic director. I’m only barely more qualified for the job than Lynn Swann was. But that won’t stop me from offering some suggestions. And any analysis of the problem must begin with this: the status quo is unacceptable. The Pac-12 is currently the Venezuela of conferences, with breadlines stretching around the block, and people having to carry wheelbarrows of hard currency to buy a stick of gum. The conference is badly mismanaged. It is poor and getting poorer. The status quo is disastrous.
The mismanagement won’t be easy to fix. Larry Scott sold a foolish bill of goods to university presidents. Let’s do it all ourselves, he said. Yes, the SEC needed a broadcasting partner. So did the Big 10. So did Notre Dame. So did Texas. But we don’t. I’ll run it all myself. It will be great.
Thanks, Larry. Good plan.
And obviously the Pac 12 hasn’t helped itself with the mismanagement at its individual institutions. UCLA is a dumpster fire. And USC, the flagship program of the conference, has refused to make a real financial investment in its program (until now?) and saddled itself with a third-rate coach that has lost everybody — fans, alums, media, high school coaches, high school players and parents — everybody, that is, but Carol “I don’t hire football coaches” Folt.
Mike Bohn almost certainly understands all of this, and his recent shots across the bow about all options being on the table is a good start. Where does USC go from here? I think it should first maximize its leverage and then use that leverage, something neither of Bohn’s predecessors understood or, if they did understand, were not willing to do.
USC maximizes its leverage by committing to football again. There’s an easy solution to this problem: hire Urban Meyer. Do that, and you immediately make your product dramatically more attractive to broadcast partners (And everybody else for that matter). I have nothing else to say about this, because I’ve said it before many times, and practically everybody knows that it’s true. This move gives you additional leverage.
Then use that leverage. You have three options. The first is Act Like The Biggest Bully On The Block: stay in the conference, but only if the conference fires Larry Scott, finds a broadcast partner for the conference, and gives USC a greater share of the proceeds, like Texas gets in the Big 12.
The rest of the conference will howl, with the possible exception of UCLA and Oregon, who can probably also legitimately claim higher-than-average levels of compensation. It can still be done, I suspect, but only if USC can credibly tell its sister institutions that it’s willing to take options two or three if they don’t cooperate. Because the only thing worse than paying USC (and maybe a couple of others) a greater share of the money is being part of the Pac-12 conference if USC (and maybe others) are gone.
This brings us to option two: Move To A Nicer Neighborhood. In this second option, USC joins a new conference, likely the Big 12. Ideally USC would leave the conference in conjunction with the other California schools, particularly UCLA. The two LA institutions — despite their ineptitude of late — would be appealing. A conference like the Big 12 would get two elite academic institutions, two of the premier brands in college sports, an entry into the second-largest media market in the country, and a greater ability to recruit California. That’s an appealing package. That’s worth something. Who else in the conference can offer something that valuable? That’s right. Nobody. Although the Bay Area schools also bring some things to the table. Enough with being held hostage by bottom feeders like Wazzu and Oregon State, with whom USC currently equally splits the Pac-12’s meager proceeds. Should USC continue down that path?
Make that move to the Big 12 with Stanford and Cal and you have the makings of the first 16-team super conference. The California schools and Texas schools in one division; the schools north and east of Texas are in the other division. USC-OU and USC-Texas in football. UCLA-Kansas in basketball. This is a winning combination.
Does this make travel tougher? Sure, marginally. But you’ll still play many of your away games in California, and while Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas are far from Southern California, so is Washington. Frankly, it’s a lot easier to get to Austin and Norman than Pullman. West Virginia is a different story; it may be almost heaven, but it’s also quite a haul from LA. Schedule few of those trips. Make it part of the deal.
https://wearesc.com/musings-from-arledge-bohns-recovery-three-options-and-trojexit/
Poor Greggy
Tell us how much better Pitt has it.
Getting pretty pathetic that you attempt to continue to ridiculous narrative without even knowing what is going on.
I won’t troll your efforts in this thread. I call tell you have passion for this discussion. But you connect dots from many directions. The Big12 is making money as 10. The gravy train for non BigTen and non SEC programs is history it seems. Expansion boils down to Texas and Oklahoma going there separate ways with no GOR extension. If GOR is Extended why not stay at 10.
I am skeptical of this. Personally I don't really want the Big 12 to add schools from the Pac 12. Wvu is already an outlier in this conference a raid of the Pac 12 would make us and even bigger outlier. If the Big 12 were to expand it would be in Wvu's best interest to be an eastward expansion. Outside of the potential revenue increase no real benefit to us going west.
The biggest worry I have is if the Texas and Oklahoma schools decided to team up with some of the Pac 12 schools to form an entirely new conference. I spend most of the winter months in the phoenix area and have heard these rumors for years. I don't give much credence to them but when you have the big wigs at espn and fox meddling in the back ground anything is possible.
Because you keep all options open.
Because Texas cannot extend their dick in this conference without killing it.
Need another true alpha.
USC most likely. They have recruits and Televisions.
Texas, USC and Oklahoma will all be in the same conference.
Stanford either agrees with USCs demands and Texas/Oklahoma move to the PAC 12
Or
USC for sure with probably at least one Arizona school moves to the Big 12.
Or the entire Cal 4
Demographics say the B1G is on the declineIf they were to do that I dont think it would be with Pac....B1G most likely.
Demographics say the B1G is on the decline
The B1G in terms of recruiting power doesn't have much.
You have to look at what conference produces the most bluechip players within the conference.
I dont really buy that....
I understand the PAC has good recruiting grounds but they arent dominating in anyway.
Its an open market.
I don't think it would change recruiting much. Since we have joined the big 12 we have only had 2 recruiting classes that were significantly better than what we historically get.. Adding pac 12 schools isn't going to change that. The kids in Ohio want to play for Ohio state or one of the other Big 10 schools if they can. We only had 2 kids from Jersey and 2 from Maryland in the 2020 class. There not coming here in big numbers now and adding pac 12 schools isn't going to change that. It would be better for wvu to have schools added where there is an active recruiting presence.Recruiting...
Even if WVU didn't recruit the West it is a selling point.
Big 12 vs ACC vs B1G
Where would the players in New Jersey, DMV and Ohio want to play?
Neal Brown already sells the Big 12 as it is in the current.
If it had another big name program like USC it could be sold even better.
Long term demographics may not favor Big 10 but after Texas they don't favor Big 12 either.Demographics say the B1G is on the decline
The B1G in terms of recruiting power doesn't have much.
You have to look at what conference produces the most bluechip players within the conference.
I don't think it would change recruiting much. Since we have joined the big 12 we have only had 2 recruiting classes that were significantly better than what we historically get.. Adding pac 12 schools isn't going to change that. The kids in Ohio want to play for Ohio state or one of the other Big 10 schools if they can. We only had 2 kids from Jersey and 2 from Maryland in the 2020 class. There not coming here in big numbers now and adding pac 12 schools isn't going to change that. It would be better for wvu to have schools added where there is an active recruiting presence.
Long term demographics may not favor Big 10 but after Texas they don't favor Big 12 either.
Wvu isn't being used at all. The majority of the recruits in the dmz are not going to big 12 schools.I don't get that logic.
Schools in the Big 12 are using you to open up the DMV.
I don't see why WVU can't make this reciprocal.
Maybe if there is a higher presence there. But most just have to cherry pick.
going after the pac 12 schools isn't going to benefit wvu that much when it comes to recruiting.I agree.
That is why you have to position yourself for the future.
It was going to be USC or Florida State.
PAC 12 has more obvious issues and is easier to leave than the ACC.
ESPN protecting the ACC so the B1G didn't move down the East Coast kept that conference together.
ACC still most likely has another 10 years no matter how far they fall behind everyone else.
But regarding Texas
Key number in 2025. 64 Million.
That will be the SEC payout.
Texas right now is only at 53 million with all their TV rights.
Wvu isn't being used at all. The majority of the recruits in the dmz are not going to big 12 schools.
going after the pac 12 schools isn't going to benefit wvu that much when it comes to recruiting.
What evidence do you have to support this claim? Texas doesn't 1 player from the dmv in the 2020 recruiting. Oklahoma only has 2. Wvu has the best shot at landing recruits from the dmv but that's mostly do to proximity. Penn State and Maryland have a bunch. Adding pac 12 schools isn't going to change this.The ones targeted usually are.
The big 12 gave wvu this and it really didn't bolster recruiting that much. Wvu would be better off playing non conference games in areas it recruits that's what would help the most. Wvu recruited pretty well in Florida when we played teams from Florida. Wvu going to the big 12 didn't lead to Texas recruits kicking down are door. Holgorsen stated that they tried to recruit Texas but there wasn't much interest and he had deep ties to the state.Even without recruiting itself...
Gives WVU more money. Bigger recruiting budget, better official visits and helps with facilities.
When WVU has better facilities than their competition it helps with recruiting.
Neal Brown believes WVU as the only Big 12 school in the area gives him an advantage.
Especially since the ACC isn't anywhere close financially.
Ohio State and Penn State...
Well. You do play Penn State coming up
What evidence do you have to support this claim? Texas doesn't 1 player from the dmv in the 2020 recruiting. Oklahoma only has 2. Wvu has the best shot at landing recruits from the dmv but that's mostly do to proximity. Penn State and Maryland have a bunch. Adding pac 12 schools isn't going to change this.
The big 12 gave wvu this and it really didn't bolster recruiting that much. Wvu would be better off playing non conference games in areas it recruits that's what would help the most. Wvu recruited pretty well in Florida when we played teams from Florida. Wvu going to the big 12 didn't lead to Texas recruits kicking down are door. Holgorsen stated that they tried to recruit Texas but there wasn't much interest and he had deep ties to the state.
Not everyone has the same regard for the ACC as you Greggy.
The downfall of the PAC 12 is business related. The PAC 12 isn't as worthless as some people think.
Use your business mind Greggy. Hostile Takeover.
But some schools like USC will he happy.
Demographics say the B1G is on the decline
The B1G in terms of recruiting power doesn't have much.
You have to look at what conference produces the most bluechip players within the conference.
They don't have to target many..
It potentially adds more money to WVU. This helps because it allows you to separate from the ACC schools and close the gap between Penn State and Ohio State.
WVU walked into the Big 12 with the worst facilities. Your administration is trying to change this.
By changing this you are separating from the ACC.