Pac12 dissolution discussion
- Thread starter rotorocker
- Start date
The thing is, there are still a lot of rumors that the B1G will make a move on two more PAC12 school after their transition in leadership.
If you are Fox you probably don’t want to commit to “remnants of the Pac12” content filling your time slots when an additional “B1G late night” game package could become available after the B1G expands further.
Isn't it a really bad sign for the Pac-whatever that Fox isn't talking to them? There must be an expectation that more schools (my guess is Washington and Oregon, who were rumored last year to be looking to join the Big Ten) will jump. If the Big Ten wants them instead of Cal/Stanford, that would go along with @ScarletDave's suggestion above that the emphasis is increasingly going to be on brand -- whether a team will attract eyeballs -- than on carriage fees.
So your suggestion is that the Big Ten wants a school that is not an AAU institution, not even the best public university in its state, and that is subject to a GOR agreement with its conference. Maybe, but it seems a long shot. (The Big Ten seems to think that part of its brand is having AAU institutions.) May I add that someone can be sued for inducing a party to a contract to break that contract, and so the Big Ten has to worry about a lawsuit by the ACC. Perhaps, as has been suggested, that the GOR agreement isn't legally valid, but that's a long shot too.
The BIG could have answered that question already. For all we know. It may all be in the works as we speak or it may never happen.
Until it does happen you will never know.
The longer it drags out though the worse it looks for the PAC 10.
The mere perception that schools might jump out of the Pac-10 hurts the conference in attracting a good TV contract. If the result is a bad contract, then perception will become reality -- schools (probably the four non-Pacific coast schools) will look to jump. Maybe then San Diego State and Fresno State will be invited to the Pac-whatever, but that would be a considerable break with the conference' s past.
I've always thought 2 more schools from the west will be added. I don't expect USC/UCLA to be left out there on their own indefinitely. Timing of that is hard to predict but every time a new tv deal is coming up for negotiation is a good bet.
I also get the impression that the B10 presidents don't want to add more schools at present and it will likely take time for a new commish to get acclimated with everything as well. So if you're a Fox or whomever and want to sublicense a deal for the PAC12, I don't think it would be an issue through next tv deal assuming it isn't a long on and these days I'm not sure it will be a long one.
It has been dragging on but they still do have year to go on their current deal to see if they can drum up anything. I think the B12 jumping them messed things up for the PAC12. I think they're about the same so whichever one came first got first dibs at the available tv money and with media companies losing big bucks in streaming it would leave the other out on a limb somewhat.
Washington and Oregon are not wanted from a monetary perspective. They could be in BIG right now and tv contracts were after they reached out.
too many here simply don't get the modern conference dynamic. In order to have a national league, which is what the BIG is doing, they need national like teams. Washington and Oregon simply don't provide enough punch to make the remaining schools whole. Now as part of a package with ND, Stanford, FSU/UNC and one of Oregon/Washington per say sure
Forgot to mention, I don't agree with this either/or black/white characterization. Streaming or linear, markets or brand. It all matters. It's a mosaic.
The most successful sport in the country foundation is built on linear broadcast networks. The B10 has followed suit. There's no reason not to have a foot in both worlds if you're the media company or the sports property. You can have a foot in both just like retail with brick and mortar vs online. It doesn't have to be either/or. It can be both.
Same goes market vs brand. I think each school has a unique picture made up of market and brand etc.., not just one or the other and those pictures are weighed against each other to see which picture can bring the most value to the conference.
I've mentioned the national league idea right after Oklahoma/Texas were taken by the SEC. Also mentioned how it could lead to ND finally joining the B10 down the line in the 2030s.
I don't know how it will be done, whether in a package or whatever or the time table but I don't see USC/UCLA being out in the west with no one else as permanent. I tend to think it would be Oregon/Wash but whether it's them or other Cali schools, it will be at least 2 IMO. At least a couple schools from the ACC (which could trigger ND) and then you have your national conference which was my idea in response to the SEC taking OU/Texas. They can be regional and the B10 national.
Professional leagues put teams in smaller markets and they make it work, so I'd assume the it would be the same for the B10.
I'm going to relay what was said in Chicago, 'flying to SFO vs O'hare matters not, we still need to be on a plane for high profile sports teams' Point is obvious but illustrate, they don't need washington or oregon for LA area teams
To be national, you have to "be national" as in have coverage across different parts of the country. It's part of why I tend to lean towards Oregon/Washington for whenever down the line. If the end goal is national, having just 2 teams in southern Cal with a bunch in the midwest and a handful up and down the east doesn't make sense structurally.
The GOR is definitely an obstacle
Not sure how it wouldn’t be legally valid, though that would be nice
it's why they will move south, not northwest as they are already national in scope and content. Now you can make the case that they need more content for post 5pm east coast transition to westcoast but adding washington and oregon isn't making them more national. The reality is it diminishes the payout across the board, adds only a marginally less amount of air miles vs Chicago and more western BIG schools, leaves bigger mkts on the board and creates 1 more laggard in sports and the belief is that after Nike, what does Oregon have (although Oregon has presented the BIG with a package that highlights continued Nike support and funds long after death) but still......
I've mentioned the issue about Phil Knight's longevity and how that would affect them long term and have read that supposedly they'd be taken care of long after his death. If you made me choose between the 2, I'd think Washington because they seem closer to the profile of a B10 school than Oregon. Washington would be fine to cover the northwest. The NFL just has Seattle.
I completely agree that moving south is a priority and they will add teams from the ACC eventually. I'm just saying I don't expect the west to be only USC/UCLA.
Let me ask you this. Forget about timetables because those are unpredictable. The carousel stops spinning and the B10 is done permanently. What are the schools, on top of the current 16. from ND, the ACC, the PAC12 that are added in your opinion.
can't disagree with that at all on top of that, Washington is a great school
done with ND, Stanford, UNC, UF/FSU (BIG wants a Florida presence and one of those names with FSU being the front runner due to UF longstanding tradition with SEC also, BIG doesn't want to raid SEC). Those are the hitters that will drive an increase in tv rev. On top of that, it reduces ND scheduling options so forces their hand at some point. ND can't do anything until the GOR is done but those 4 are the names. No one else, in any configuration, adds enough to the bottom line.
also the west doesn't mean orgeon/washington
remember, ND plays Stanford every year and they want a game in LA, San Fran, NYC, and Southern area each year if at all possible. ND is the key for the next go round. pushing to a conference is the cherry we all want
I agree with you that the B1G will add two more western teams, but not that sports leagues “have added small market teams and made it work”
Small market teams in the major sports were almost all added long ago before TV rights became the dominant revenue stream, and since then market size is definitely a big factor in expansion.
Okay well that would be a stop at 20 teams which I think is a definite possibility. Anything from 20-24 is possible IMO so stopping at 20 is plausible.
That would make the majority in the midwest, 5 up and down the east (PSU, Maryland, RU, UNC, FSU) and 3 in the west (Stanford, USC, UCLA). If they stop at 20, I think that is a realistic scenario.
My mind was thinking, at least 4 from the west with coverage of the northwest as well (with at least Washington) but that would push the number beyond 20. I have said I think Stanford would be a helpful carrot to get ND (although the ACC being weakened could make it a less important carrot).
If they stop at 20, I think your scenario could be right. If they go beyond 20, then I think Washington and/or Oregon could come into play.
Well Jacksonville isn't that old and markets have mattered long before then. Isn't that why at least at one time (don't know about now) the NFC package got more money than the AFC package? They had the bigger markets. Wasn't it a big deal that the NYG owners were willing to share revenue equally. It was a big deal because they were the NY team with more clout.
So markets have mattered in the NFL for a long time but somehow they ended up in Jacksonville? There are other examples in other sports too. Honestly, I don't know the reasoning but they do it and it works and they still make a bunch of money. I just think of it partially as being able to reach all corners geographically and that's helpful to a league.
it's possible for sure but it's all about the numbers. Feeding 24 is herculean so you'd have to have some SEC schools to up that ante.
ND can't do anything till the GOR expires per the contract.
I believe, no firsthand knowledge but am surmising, that networks are keeping dollars close to the chest as the next few moves will lock 10+ yrs of captured eyeballs on the most lucrative and far reaching college football landscape ever known.
Wasn't it Mary Slippy or Mary Samsonite?
Can't see Syracuse in the mix, but what do I know.
Pride goes before a fall.
As Swarbrick said in an earlier interview about the SEC and Big 10 being competing solar systems and how you might have to align with one or the other. I would believe that you would have more influence being on the inside of the organization (SEC or Big 10) in regards to NIL or the structure of the organization than being on the outside. ND could have used themselves as leverage to get some of what they thought was important to them.
Now, the structure on NIL and everything else is being set. And ND is going to have little say on the matter. Schools within either the SEC or Big 10 are going to say where were you when the foundation and ground rules were being set. And now you want us to redo all of that work, don't think so.
As Swarbrick said in an earlier interview about the SEC and Big 10 being competing solar systems and how you might have to align with one or the other. I would believe that you would have more influence being on the inside of the organization (SEC or Big 10) in regards to NIL or the structure of the organization than being on the outside. ND could have used themselves as leverage to get some of what they thought was important to them.
Now, the structure on NIL and everything else is being set. And ND is going to have little say on the matter. Schools within either the SEC or Big 10 are going to say where were you when the foundation and ground rules were being set. And now you want us to redo all of that work, don't think so.
75 million for ND? I will believe it when I see it.If that’s true that’s phenomenal for them.
I’m sure ND is very much involved in all of the changes going on in college football. Jack Swarbuck was on the college football playoff committee. Not too shabby for an independent with a minor obligation to the ACC.
Just the thought of them joining the SEC, keeps the BIG in check and vice versa. Neither want to see them join the other congference..
I’m sure ND is very much involved in all of the changes going on in college football. Jack Swarbuck was on the college football playoff committee. Not too shabby for an independent with a minor obligation to the ACC.
Just the thought of them joining the SEC, keeps the BIG in check and vice versa. Neither want to see them join the other congference..
ND would never join the SEC, pure dog and ponie show. SEC has already stated they are staying regional focused whereas B10 is national and that is how ND sees themselves. On top of that, the research consortium and olympic sports issues pushes them to B10.
the real travesty is that no one blocking them out yet. It's simple, have conference amend the scheduling in such a way that it makes it harder and harder for nd to stay independent.
at some point, they'll be in a conference
If I recall correctly, back in the late 90's when the Big 10 and Notre Dame did this dance before. 29 out of 31 Academic Departments voted in favor of joining the Big 10. It was the alumni and students who were opposed. Thus they stayed independent.
As you touched on Rutgers95, the Olympic sports would fit well within the Big 10. The Big 10 plays pretty much the same sports. Would reduce their travel tremendously.
As you touched on Rutgers95, the Olympic sports would fit well within the Big 10. The Big 10 plays pretty much the same sports. Would reduce their travel tremendously.
ok I'll play
what does Washington and Miami bring that makes the conference whole?
95 - no flame, serious question
You honestly think UF would ever leave the SEC?
B1G would take them in a heartbeat - and ahead of FSU at that - but are you suggesting they’d even remotely consider leaving (pending the B1G and SEC payouts are similar)?
JSD, for what it is worth.
Back around 2008, Barry Alvarez made the comment, that somebody way out reached out to the Big 10 about potential membership. He never said who it was, but he said it was somebody completely out there that you would not believe.
There was a lot of speculation on who it could be. The consensus was that it was University of Florida. No idea if true or not, but there was a lot of buzz on it.
Back around 2008, Barry Alvarez made the comment, that somebody way out reached out to the Big 10 about potential membership. He never said who it was, but he said it was somebody completely out there that you would not believe.
There was a lot of speculation on who it could be. The consensus was that it was University of Florida. No idea if true or not, but there was a lot of buzz on it.
No reason for collusion. ND will join a conference when it works for them.
As long as the ACC houses their Olympic sports and ther tv contract keeps them in striking distance. They aren’t joining a conference. Any conference.
Highly doubt it would be the SEC too, but until they are in signed, who really knows?
Even though they are not a major research
school. I think they are doing there institution a disservice not joining the Big.