The PAC 12 (and the B1G) Weigh In

Badass said:
Lol chop !

if the Pac 12 is not aggressively proactive, they are stoopid

Waiting for the girls to call you is the dumbest strategy I can think of, good grief

they should grab BYU and Boise St for starters …
Click to expand...

Just as they would be stoopid to declare their intent to poach schools and open themselves up to a tortious interference claim.
 
Chop said:
So this is how Big Mark Mangino gets back in the game. I think he's from Ohio or somewhere deep in Big Ten country. If they have the balls to hire him back, KU will be instantly on the football map.

Oh, and this is the conference whose most famous coach is Woody Hayes. Mangino's grouching at players and hurting their feelings is par for the course. Sensitive types are not catered to up there.
Click to expand...

Now you got me thinking ....would have been fun to see him lead the Longhorn program through 2020 and into '21. Lol
 
The PAC 12 commissioner has now told the Mercury News that the conference is going to decide on expansion in a couple of weeks, but only whether or not to expand—not on which schools to add (in the event the decision is made to expand). Just an expand/don’t expand decision. A 3/4 vote would be required to approve a formal invitation to any particular school (and that’s only if, and after, the PAC votes to expand in a few weeks). “Multiple industry sources…” are saying there will be no expansion—not enough value added. Most people talking about this are saying basically the same thing—expansion at this point is unlikely. In particular, don’t look for any Big 12 schools to get an invite. John Kurtz put this out there.

The big lingering problem out West: USC reportedly remains highly unsatisfied with the status quo. The Trojans remain a danger to possibly bolt if they don’t get their way. And USC is the flagship program out there. It wouldn’t be the PAC-whatever without USC.
 
Tech and OSU are up. Recruiting in Texas and games earlier in the day

Tech will be in the eastern region with the Cowboys and the Arizona’s and Colorado and Utah and to be determined
 
Chop said:
The PAC 12 commissioner has now told the Mercury News that the conference is going to decide on expansion in a couple of weeks, but only whether or not to expand—not on which schools to add (in the event the decision is made to expand). Just an expand/don’t expand decision. A 3/4 vote would be required to approve a formal invitation to any particular school (and that’s only if, and after, the PAC votes to expand in a few weeks). “Multiple industry sources…” are saying there will be no expansion—not enough value added. Most people talking about this are saying basically the same thing—expansion at this point is unlikely. In particular, don’t look for any Big 12 schools to get an invite. John Kurtz put this out there.

The big lingering problem out West: USC reportedly remains highly unsatisfied with the status quo. The Trojans remain a danger to possibly bolt if they don’t get their way. And USC is the flagship program out there. It wouldn’t be the PAC-whatever without USC.
Click to expand...

Based on my contacts within UW, nobody believes there is any chance that USC goes anywhere. Joining a conference back East simply isn't feasible when they'd travel 3 times zones for the majority of their games. USC is stuck with the Pac 12 unless they want to go Independent. BYU's attempt to go independent is weighing heavily on any private school with dreams of independent bliss. After all, there is only 1 ND and they discovered that outside of football the need a conference for the rest of their sports.

Not sure anyone is beating down USC's door for a football TV deal absent any other teams coming with them.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Based on my contacts within UW, nobody believes there is any chance that USC goes anywhere. Joining a conference back East simply isn't feasible when they'd travel 3 times zones for the majority of their games. USC is stuck with the Pac 12 unless they want to go Independent. BYU's attempt to go independent is weighing heavily on any private school with dreams of independent bliss. After all, there is only 1 ND and they discovered that outside of football the need a conference for the rest of their sports.

Not sure anyone is beating down USC's door for a football TV deal absent any other teams coming with them.
Click to expand...
I think USC could convince Oregon and Washington to create a "pod". The question is Stanford or UCLA. Adding a BIG agreement does nothing financially. No one will vote to add Lubbock, adds nothing.
 
Re: USC not being able to go East or independent. To me, USC and PAC 10 (or 12 or whatever) are synonymous. But don’t kid yourself, USC is one of the giants in the college football world. They would be just fine in any conference or no conference at all. I also understand those people have a lot of money $$$$$.
 
LonghornDave said:
I think USC could convince Oregon and Washington to create a "pod". The question is Stanford or UCLA. Adding a BIG agreement does nothing financially. No one will vote to add Lubbock, adds nothing.
Click to expand...

I'd agree that any USC movement comes with other Pac 12 powers. It has to. That means USC has to pull them along and they historically don't always see eye to eye (think UTx - Nebraska). USC has a crapload of money and well healed alumni and hanger's on (eg. celebrities that simply adopted USC...like Snoop Dog). Still, the administrative costs and burden of being the only school in an Eastern Conference is too much to bear. ESPN taking a bath on the Longhorn Network would also heavily weigh on any attempts for USC to go Independent. They'd have to rely on some subscription revenue and likely not via cable networks but rather one of the new online providers (Hulu, Youtube, etc).

This latest "agreement" from each of the conferences is simply a shot across the bow that tells the SEC that they now have resistance to them dictating the rules (NCAA, Championships, etc.). It could have an impact when the current scheduling obligations dissipate so 10-15 years out? The SEC would abandon the NCAA but that has potential to HURT it's revenue as much as help it. Look no further than the experience of the EU soccer league to see how fans think of moves like that. Even fans included in that Super League idea revolted. Consider that UT would never play TTech, Baylor or any Texas school except ATM if it were not part of the NCAA. No March Madness. The SEC would get the blame for torching college athletics. The harm to their brand would be immeasurable which is why the alliance between the ACC, B1G and P12 might be an effective warning shot.
 
Chop said:
Re: USC not being able to go East or independent. To me, USC and PAC 10 (or 12 or whatever) are synonymous. But don’t kid yourself, USC is one of the giants in the college football world. They would be just fine in any conference or no conference at all. I also understand those people have a lot of money $$$$$.
Click to expand...

It's a premium brand but the era of huge network payouts for a single football team is waning. Cable Networks are taking a bath in subscriber loss. The Longhorn Network while benefitting UT may be one the of the single worst decisions by ESPN in a history of poor decisions. USC certainly knows this thus stepping out of the P12 right now would be an immense gamble.
 
Chop said:
Re: USC not being able to go East or independent. To me, USC and PAC 10 (or 12 or whatever) are synonymous. But don’t kid yourself, USC is one of the giants in the college football world. They would be just fine in any conference or no conference at all. I also understand those people have a lot of money $$$$$.
Click to expand...
Agreed and USC is big time. Oregon has NIKE, Washington has good but not great fans. California is a sheet show in general so UCLA could just mess it up. Too bad because I love the Rose Bowl. I like Colorado but I suspect they will move to the BIG and build on the Husker Big ten curse. I still think realignment will continue this year and the only thing that seems to make sense is moves from ACC and Pac to Big and SEC. I think the "alliance" will just poke the tiger and hasten the SEC moves.
 
LonghornDave said:
Agreed and USC is big time. Oregon has NIKE, Washington has good but not great fans. California is a sheet show in general so UCLA could just mess it up. Too bad because I love the Rose Bowl. I like Colorado but I suspect they will move to the BIG and build on the Husker Big ten curse. I still think realignment will continue this year and the only thing that seems to make sense is moves from ACC and Pac to Big and SEC. I think the "alliance" will just poke the tiger and hasten the SEC moves.
Click to expand...

The effectiveness of the "alliance" is and will continue to be holding the heavyweights inside the tent (OSU, MI, Clemson, FSU, USC, etc.). If any jump to the SEC then they've lost.
 
I think the B1G has the most power and influence of any of them, not much behind the SEC--pretty darn close, and with a truly massive population base. Keep aOSU and Michigan in the fold, and they'll be fine whatever else happens. The B1G will also strongly resist being pushed around, and dictated to, by Southerners. Those who have lived up North know their general attitude towards, and pre-conceived notions of, persons and institutions from South of the Mason-Dixon line.
 
Being out here in PAC 12 Country and having seen a few games at UofA, the football is subpar except for USC. Hell, UofA lost every game in the shortened 2020 season including a 70-7 woodshed beating by ASU. They only won four games in 2019, losing 8 including 7 straight losses to end the season. The point is, the teams not called USC are not good or anywhere being good. USC is most likely the only competitive team in football in the whole conference. Putting in programs like Texas Tech, Kansas, Baylor or KSU won't move the needle much. TCU might give them some competition as might oSu. But that's about it. My thought is that ISU heads to the B1G, but that is a "maybe" and not a statement of fact.
 
No worries, NIL will ruin college football, maybe all college sports, well before they can do it with reorganizing mess ups.
 
Dave Wannstedt has now prognosticated the following:

OSU and K State to the PAC
KU and ISU to the B1G
WV to the ACC

I think he’s wet. Why would the PAC want K State over some Texas teams like Texas Tech and TCU? Think recruiting and TV sets. USC could demand their game at Tech be played in Arlington. I can, however, see WV to the ACC.
 
Chop said:
Dave Wannstedt has now prognosticated the following:

OSU and K State to the PAC
KU and ISU to the B1G
WV to the ACC

I think he’s wet. Why would the PAC want K State over some Texas teams like Texas Tech and TCU? Think recruiting and TV sets. USC could demand their game at Tech be played in Arlington. I can, however, see WV to the ACC.
Click to expand...

I think Dave is talking out of the wrong end. KSU to the PAC12?
 
I think that the supposed alliance of the B1G, ACC, and PAC12 should call itself the Nouveau Triple Entente. Because it would sound cosmopolitan and tres chic.

Anyway -
The New College Football “Alliance” Is Not One

The thing is: The alliance does not technically exist,because the leagues did not sign any kind of contract. (Big Ten commish Kevin Warren says that if you need to go back and check contract language, well, you’ve gotten into business with the wrong people.) It is also not “a reaction to Texas and Oklahoma going to the SEC,” Warren says, “but to be totally candid, you have to evaluate what’s going on in the landscape of college athletics” (such as, specifically, Texas and Oklahoma going to the SEC). What the alliance will do is not clear. The leagues say they’ll have a scheduling arrangement in football and basketball but acknowledge that that won’t start at any particular time because of existing game contracts. (The Big Ten and ACC also already have a hoops scheduling deal, but I guess the Pac-12 can now hang out with them too.) The three conferences will likely work together to stall College Football Playoff expansion for a few years. They’ll put out press releases about their commitment to “student-athlete mental and physical health, safety, wellness and support,” which is the first bullet point in their press release about this new arrangement.

However, the point of the alliance is not to do anything. It is to provide the appearance of doing something, because the SEC has most definitely Done Something, and that demands a counter in the collective wisdom of college athletic administration. Even if the Big Ten, ACC, and Pac-12 wind up doing a useful thing or two together, there is no reason to expect an alliance between the three to hold up for any meaningful period of time, even though the lack of any paperwork means it could theoretically live for eternity.
Click to expand...
 
It could be just the start of a self-defense gentlemens' agreement (of sorts) against a complete SEC takeover of major college football. That's what they fear--the SEC poaching their top teams and leaving their conferences in the dust. (like they just did to the Big XII)

Clemson, aOSU, and USC to their respective conferences: "New rules--when our representative enters the room, all shall rise. He'll also seat at the head of the table, with the conference commissioner next to him in a short little kiddie chair. We will also get a double share of the conference tv and bowl revenue, etc. All of our games shall be at the time of our choosing, and we reserve the right to demand away games be played at a nearby major/pro stadium. Our alumni get all the luxury boxes at your stadium when we play away. Our band shall be located immediately behind your team's bench. What's that--you don't like it? I have the SEC commissioner on the other line..."
 
Last edited:
Chop said:
It could be just the start of a self-defense gentlemens' agreement (of sorts) against a complete SEC takeover of major college football. That's what they fear--the SEC poaching their top teams and leaving their conferences in the dust. (like they just did to the Big XII)

Clemson, aOSU, and USC to their respective conferences: "New rules--when our representative enters the room, all shall rise. He'll also seat at the head of the table, with the conference commissioner next to him in a short little kiddie chair. We will also get a double share of the conference tv and bowl revenue, etc. All of our games shall be at the time of our choosing, and we reserve the right to demand away games be played at a nearby major/pro stadium. Our alumni get all the luxury boxes at your stadium when we play away. Our band shall be located immediately behind your team's bench. What's that--you don't like it? I have the SEC commissioner on the other line..."
Click to expand...


To me, the rubber meets the road the next time the SEC urges rule changes at the NCAA or college football playoff. After that I'll be very curious how the scheduling angle plays out. Do those 3 conferences freeze out the SEC reducing their exposure into other parts of the country? We already know the SEC rarely plays other Power 5 conference teams but will it be more apparent, more impactful? What about TV contract negotiations? The remaining 3 can't touch the SEC Network but ABC/FOX/CBS/NBC and ESPN would fair game.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Heard the Pac12 announced they will not be expanding.

Cue Monty Python "Bring out yer dead" memes for the Irate 8.
Click to expand...

Reading up more on the Pac 12 announcement there are some cogent points emerging. If the Pac 12 was going to announce expansion why do it now? The B12 still exists until 2025 so wouldn't that announcement come in 2022 or 2023? They'd likely just announce that they were adding X schools, like the SEC just did with UT/OU.
 
Just sit tight as there are more moves coming over the next 18 to 24 months. USC moving on from the PAC-12 and ND joining the ACC will be the key to the timing.
 
Joining the B1G is expensive for any new members. New schools need to purchase an equal share of the B1G network which for Nebraska was >$40M back in 2010. That amount was taken from reduced B1G payouts over 6 years. They received ~60% of what other teams in the B1G received from 2010-2016. Of course, those reduced payouts still exceeded the full B12 payouts.

In 2010 the B1G was only paying out ~$20M per team. In 2019-20 year they paid $56M. The buy-in now must be approaching $100M.
 
What about a Super League (outside of the NCAA) the winner of which is crowned National Champions:

East Conference
---------------
East Division
----------------
Georgia
Florida
Sons of Klem
Free Shoe U

West Division
----------------
ND
Alabama
aOSU
Meatchicken

West Conference
---------------------
East Division
----------------
Texas
ou
LSU
Iowa State

West Division
-----------------
USC
Stanford
Oregon
Washington

Those current Power 5 schools not making the cut above play within the NCAA and are crowned NCAA National Champions (better known as the "Best of the Rest").
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top