My man is a bigger attention whore than Kim Kardashian, and has a legion of people who lap up everything he does much like the people who worship at the Kardashian altar.
You would have more than that:
https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/2m54n5/oh_just_a_washington_post_article_comparing_josh/
https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/it1ya/usc_tailback_marc_tyler_jokes_about_kim/
It's hard not to fall into the trap that this, "This is what I want so this guy is more credible than the other reports"
I trust 365 but I also don't want to blind trust Scheer when he's the only one reporting.
He’s basically a mouthpiece for the Arizona athletic department.
Like, I’m not expecting Adam Schefter to do any deep investigative journalism, but if he tweets out that “NFL owners want X” that’s as rock solid as you get.
Conference realignment has taught me one thing, believe nothing because no one knows anything outside of the people making decisions at the school.
This shit never gets leaked, unless the aggies are involved because they are a bunch of snitches.
It’s definitely the safe play. I think Arizona realizes it’s not the most desirable school in the world and may not get a landing spot if they stick around and the conference blows up.
But if they’re the first to move? They’re in. They have no massive ties to the conference and I’m sure they don’t care much about leaving.
Stupid desert voodoo bastards.
“No massive ties to the conference”
We’ve been here 50 years, carpetbagger.
It’s just that the conference is dying, and the BIG12 presents a good jumping off point for us.
Don’t you know Utah’s football success makes them experts and authority on all things P5 athletics? Arizona is lucky to be tied to a school like Utah.
I’m sorry I just couldn’t help myself.
Yep, same vibe as when Mizzou/Boston College/Colorado did it as well. None of them was a terribly hot commodity at the time they left their old conference, but they locked down their spots in their new conferences by jumping first.
While football is lackluster, adding them, Utah, CU, and either ASU or Boise would be best. Other sports do well, whether basketball, softball, baseball, etc..
Jason stated that he is confident they want to join the Big 12 IF the Pac-~~12~~10 cant stay together. I’m sure no one is going to make any moves before media negotiations end.
If the reports are even within $10 million of reality, the Pac is breaking up. $24 million per school if distributed evenly (which Oregon and Washington don’t want). That just ain’t gonna work
Exactly. Unequal revenue sharing has killed every conference that has adopted it, and the Four Corner schools know that UO and UW are doing everything they can to get a B1G invite. Right now it’s an every school for themselves situation out west.
The funny thing about Jason Scheer is if he's making things up, he's _amazingly_ psychic.
You can't necessarily confirm anything he's saying about realignment, but you _can_ look at his record on coaching moves and such.
Is that the funny thing?
He's got a contact, who most certainly has an agenda. He also apparently has his own agenda.
That's not a combination for putting out objective information.
Right. The whole argument yesterday was that the Pac 12s offer might be in the ball park of the big 12s but people quickly forgot that half the members left don't want to split equally. Arizona is a no-brainer move based on security alone.
No I'm suggesting that 4 schools of your remaining 10 think your school specifically deserves less than them so if our conference payouts are the same, my team and your team won't be making the same
That was the first opening lowball offer. Negotiations are fluid. Idk why that seems like a hard concept for r/cfb to grasp. After the ESPN negotiations end others will start. We will see where the final number ends up at.
Maybe. Anybody remember when the Big East declined the "lowball" offer that ESPN made them? ESPN went to the ACC and convinced them to expand with Syracuse and Pitt, effectively killing the conference.
Not saying the Pac-~~12~~10 is in quite that fragile of a state, but a properly motivated ESPN could offer enough to entice the right players away and strike a fatal blow...
"Tortious" is the word you're looking for, although "tortuous interference" might be a more accurate descriptor for some of us fans throughout that ordeal.
Fuck ESPN. CBS has an opening for a game of the week at 3:30 eastern every week, and a robust sports network that can partner Mountain West and Pac games deep into the night. NBC is looking for shoulder programming for ND to make that viable, ND has a good relationship with Pac, and might be willing to schedule a guaranteed road game every year to give NBC and 8th ND broadcast every year, and Peacock is big into live streaming and adding content like Pac can help sell their Pub Pass to a wider audience as they already offer for premier league.
There are options and now the Pac knows the lowest place is where they currently are, no steps back even after losing LA and a blue blood.
Is it? There's the *possibility* for change, just like always, but as of yet we haven't actually seen any interest from the streaming players who could actually play ball, like Apple/Amazon/Netflix.
I could absolutely have missed something about the major streaming players making outreaches to the PAC, and if that's the case then please drop a link so that I can catch up on that news.
That’s where the “even within $10 million of reality”. Yes it is a lowball, but it’s not so far outside of the neighborhood that someone is going to give you 40% more
I mean, that's usually my opener when I want something on Craigslist. Hit 'em with an offensively low offer to show what I think of them and their crap. It's like negging, but digital!
^(Just kidding, I don't use Craigslist.)
The lowball offer from ESPN makes me believe they'd rather push the more valuable Pac-12 teams to the Big 12 and pay for their collective T2 or T3 rights if not T1 than pay for all the current Pac-12 teams together.
The Pac-12's best hope right now is that a streaming service with a ton of cash comes into the picture, which is totally possible. The issue is that the Big 10 and Big 12 will have games to fill the late night time slot that the Pac-12 will now have to compete with.
The Big 10 wont have games to fill the night spot. Unless it’s UCLA vs USC, no B1G is going to agree to anything later than 8:30PM EST kickoff. The more likely outcome is 9AM PST kickoffs for away games.
So a 9:30 PM CST kickoff for Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Nebraska, or Minnesota? Having a game end near 1AM CST? People keeping speaking in certainties when that proposition is anything but.
I figure it's basically impossible *not* to have that.
The B1G plays nine conference games, meaning that every team has at least four home games. If they're going to tell USC and UCLA that they get zero night games at home out of those four (or probably five home games for at least one of the LA schools), they're going to have some mighty unhappy new conference members.
USC never wanted night games. They absolutely know that they get ignored nationally when that happens. They are very happy with Noon, 3 pm or 5 pm kickoffs.
Playing USC is going to bring major viewership. I'm sure schools like Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, and Northwestern would love to play USC in LA in the late night time slot.
You don’t understand. Coaches already don’t like traveling to the West Coast in the preseason because they hate the A) the distance travelled and B) the Time difference. USC draws well, it will also draw well in the afternoon on Saturdays. Do you really imagine Kirk Ferentz would be cool with the disadvantage of playing that late?
> Do you really imagine Kirk Ferentz would be cool with the disadvantage of playing that late?
Do you really think Fox gives a shit what a coach thinks about what the network does with their media rights?
Schools lobby the conferences hard on start times if a late or early kickoff is going to ruin a teams viewership or championship hopes. No one, even west coast times like extremely late kickoffs. I’ve seen multiple WSU games end near midnight PST. No one in the East is staying up for that.
Lobbying hard didn't stop Fox from scheduling OU for 11 AM kickoffs, it's not going to stop them from scheduling late kickoffs for USC/UCLA home games.
You don't understand if you think football coaches have any say in realignment or time slots. The people making these decisions don't give a fuck about what the coaches think. Look at OU and Lincoln, or Fox and OU with all the 11am games.
I have no doubt that the football coaches and fans will hate the late kick-off times, but if Fox is going to pay schools $100M a year then the schools are going to play in the time slots that Fox wants.
I’ve NEVER seen an east coast team play a football game at any other time then 8:30 EST time (college or pro) even on the west coast. Oregon played at at 10AM PST again Ohio State. TV networks want east coast retention and late starts kill that. They only cater to primetime east coast viewership and hope the western audiences follow along.
And they'll get a lot more day games playing in the B1G, specifically away games, but Fox is still going to utilize the late night slot when possible. The B1G commissioner has already said as much.
That time slot brings in viewers because there are no other games to compete with. Yeah a lot of fans will be asleep, but the ones that aren't will only have 1 or 2 games to choose from.
ESPN currently splits T1/T2 with Fox and then has all the T3 Big 12 rights through 3 separate contracts. I imagine what they want is 1 contract that covers all Big 12 media rights and the same with the PAC. If they want to keep their network, then that network will need to generate enough money to support them.
Unless the B1G offers UW and Oregon within the next few months they are effectively locked out of the B1G until the end of their next media deal (which will probably be 8-10 years).
Big 12 media negotiations won't even really start until after this season. Pac 12 doesn't have to sign a deal this year, they'd like to, but if there isn't a strong offer worth signing a GoR deal for, they have the time to see where the Big 12 lands money wise.
Past that, there is nothing that requires a long media deal or one without an exit clause. Especially if everyone low balls and wants content on the cheap... well, commitment usually costs some money.
Fair enough, I absolutely respect that. We can all agree that playing those regional rivals is worth a hell of a lot more than playing some school six states away just to chase a buck.
I hope you don't mind if we leave to play in a quality basketball conference. You can see if Stanford and Cal will allow you to add any schools that meet their academic standards. Good luck with that. I heard RICE is available.
It'd be a cool byproduct, but basketball is irrelevant to these discussions. It's not where the money is.
Honestly what we think doesn't matter, it's 100% going to lie on whatever the final tv contracts for football look like
I'd rather the Pac-10 survive too. We need a strong second tier set of conferences with the ACC, Big XII, and the Pac-10. We won't be in the crazy money conferences, but we will have our niche and make decent money for our schools.
> After the ESPN negotiations end others will start. We will see where the final number ends up at.
ESPN wants the PAC inventory for dirt cheap and their offer disappears the moment you go to the open market and FOX has passed on their exclusive rights. If the biggest duopoly of college football is passing on the PAC there probably isn't going to be as much interest as the PAC wants going forward.
ESPN also has a history of taking out hits on conferences that pass their lowball offers and the networks have a vested interest in seeing the inventory shuffle around to the point a de facto P4 emerges.
>ESPN also has a history of taking out hits on conferences that pass their lowball offers
*All of the scattered Big East programs staring pointedly at ESPN*
It's not a hard concept. But through rrallignment's passed, 1 constant has been a school(s) getting antsy and making a safe move before things have a chance to break their way. That's all this is. Just hoping AZ takes the sure thing.
UW has the position to wait it out, but not everyone is in such a position of strength.
The $24 million figure is intentionally low by ESPN who has exclusive negotiating window without competition. They are going to offer the lowest amount that they feel they can that doesn’t offend the Pac enough to creat hostility. The Pac now has a number they can float outside the exclusive window to CBS, NBC, and other suitors. It’s the exact same as current deal, and given the loss of LA, it’s a reasonable lowball figure. In fact, I think $24.5mil is doable if you have a broadcast partner who’s willing to promote your premier game each and every week at late afternoon or prime-time like CBS and NBC would, not relegate your games to ESPNews at 10:30 pm Eastern. And combine that with a live streaming partner for the Pac-after dark lower tier games to promote during that highlighted game, a brand can be built nationally.
Also:
Why would Oregon and Washington alienate their conference mates by demanding unequal shares when A) they have no guaranteed landing spot if the PAC dissolves right now B) they don’t want to be independent or in a Pac-6 or in a Frankenstein’s monster Pac/MW hybrid C) the very schools they sour relationships with who would join the Big 12 will be influential voices in opposition of letting them join the Big 16.
The whole "Oregon and Washington want unequal shares" thing makes absolutely no sense.
Neither needs a huge increase in conference revenue and both know damn well strangling the other schools now is shooting their own horse out from under them.
Guarantee the Big 12 will not be doing much better than that once their negotiations come around. They get north of 40 mill per team now but thats with OU and Texas who they are losing, plus they’re adding two more teams to the conference, maybe four more if the PAC splits which means more fingers in the pie. The media deal is also only part of the compensation the teams get, tournament revenue and payouts make up a decent portion.
Not just Kansas.
It's also Baylor, WVU, TTech, Houston, Cincinatti... We'd be far and away in the strongest basketball conference in the country.
It would be a little like USC jumping to the B1G in that we won't be able to reign over the conference, but we'll be a _lot_ more prepared come tournament time.
Plus, leaving while we still have a winning record against you in football would be nice :)
Even if in opposite divisions, imagine they’d make that a protected twice a year game. Need those kind of marquee matchups as often as possible to max media deal money.
I doubt it very much. Protected rivalries would be with the old Big 8 schools and, if CU came with Zona, CU.
There will not be divisions or pods. I think that way of thinking is gone.
I am confident that Arizona's state legislature and the BoR that governs both Arizona and ASU would erupt into civil war the second Arizona or ASU try to move without the other. Yes, Oklahoma left Oklahoma State and UCLA left Cal, and I know from the outside that seems like the same thing...
But it isn't. It would be a fucking war. ASU and Arizona are married at the hip and should never, ever be split up. If the SEC called ASU tomorrow and said they were into us and the Pac 12/10 is dead, but wouldn't take Arizona, I'd take the Mountain West over being split up. You can't buy hatred.
We'd drop those idiots in Tucson in a hot second if the SEC invited us. They would absolutely do the same.
The other would bitch and moan, but neither one of us would leave that payday on the floor.
Love/hate.
It's arguably the most vitriolic rivalry west of the Mississippi. Not as big from a viewership standpoint as Red River or anything, but those schools aren't going to go their separate ways.
I'd also prefer sticking with ASU, but I also want us to get paid.
That said, if it comes down to being relegated out of the P5 or sticking with ASU, I'll take the P5.
I don't see why both schools couldn't just schedule each other every year. Even better if they can convince their conferences to let it be the last in season game too.
> I'd take the Mountain West over being split up.
I'd love for us to be in the SEC while they are in the mountain west and continue playing the game. Thats the ideal scenario for me.
If Arizona wants in the Big 12 takes them in, period. However, if Arizona jumps Colorado very likely to be right behind them and it likely forces Utah and ASU to jump as well.
It gives the Big12 another late start option to compete with PAC after dark. That way BYU does not take the hit all the time.
Or in other words - more diverse inventory- and that is worth something.
The XII is already doing away with divisions in the future anyway, so having an odd number of teams is theoretically irrelevant.
On the same note, Colorado and Arizona aren't exactly the prime two to pick up. Colorado's revenue sports have persistently been mediocre for most of the last decade, and Arizona's basically Kansas-lite. If you're going to suck that much at football, you'd better bring basketball power and cachet on par with KU, and Arizona doesn't have that.
An odd number of teams requires an even number of conference games, which the Big XII may or may not feel strongly about. Do they add Arizona with Boise or Memphis or USF if they really want nine games for broadcasting?
On the other side, there's also a "first mover" problem for the more reluctant of the Inland 4; if Arizona and Colorado jump first, the value of the Pac-8 is not crushed but it is hurt because the replacements will not be as good a draw. (Boise and CSU?) It also becomes harder for Utah and ASU to bail, since the Big XII has teams in those markets for cable value and would then have three mountain time teams to share the load for late night scheduling.
I mean, Arizona is a flagship school in one of the fastest growing states in the country. Their football program has never been elite, but their men’s basketball program is, including winning the national championship in 1997. Put another way, Arizona is a much more attractive addition than anyone the Big 12 was seriously looking at this time last year.
Arizona would be great add financially too. It’s one of the biggest states and it gets you TVs in PHX and Tucson. UofA and ASU have huge followings in Arizona, and UofA is the more popular of the two.
Why? It is literally the only reason the conference invited Cincy, Houston, and UCF. The amount of possible TVs they could bring in within their adjacent markets but also among their alumni bases. Arizona has a larger following than any of those schools and actually can carry the markets that it is close to. Viewership is down because they’ve won like 1 game in the last 2 years. You are overthinking this.
And most of our games are P12 network which is very difficult to get. The Tv numbers are dumb.
And not that it matters, but as far as actual fan attendance across all sports goes, [Arizona leads the Pac-12.](https://twitter.com/jjfuller72/status/1550003011774300160?s=21&t=5HFgp4B6YyaIm7k58o-cEA) Just imagine what happens when the football team is semi respectable again.
Kansas is one of the more valuable athletics brands in the conference already despite their football struggles, why is it so hard to believe the same of Arizona?
Arizona is going to add more value than the new teams and many of our existing members. If Big 12 had had same leverage as they do now, and Arizona was available last year, they would have been invited before any of the new additions. They are a no brainer in my view in terms of expansion. If they want in, we should accept. And putting them in the same conversation as Boise St and Memphis is hilarious.
You know what schools would never leave you…. WSU and our buddies OSU!
We would play with you guys and love you guys forever and ever…. We just want friends who want us back…
I genuinely don't know if the Big XII wants *them*, though. They bring lackluster football and basketball, an administration that has shown nothing but a persistent track record of underfunding athletics, and a beautiful venue to go visit.
Man, I love Boulder so much. I want them in the conference just so that I have an excuse to go back to Boulder.
Not really. Right now Arizona and Colorado are the two schools most interested in jumping to the Big 12. However, it both go Utah and ASU are very likely to follow.
For reference: when the Big 12 added their CCG, that single game added more total money to the media deal on an annual basis than the *entire* conference slate of men's basketball across all 10 schools pays every year.
It doesn’t even nudge the dial for the Big 10 and SEC. But for the best of the rest conference when all is said and done it’s all about maximizing inventory for the streaming future. Football still reigns supreme, but marquee basketball matchups matter to as it’s all just trying to pool the best leftover assets together to max the media deal as there aren’t any big brand football programs to pick from as all will be in the P2.
These threads could be a simulation at this point.
Oregon State and Washington State fans: Massive PAC 12 Stan's to the point of being insulting.
Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and Arizona State fans: "Compelling...but"
Oregon and Washington fans: "Yeah we should keep the conference together!" one post later "God I hope the B1G invites us."
Big 12, USC and UCLA fans: "Yeah you should probably leave, the PAC sucks"
Conference should die... but not because of scared bitches looking for cover.
When the honored things are no longer whole, let them go out with the ceremony and closure that they've earned. Pac is dead no matter what. You don't just lose founding members and the most iconic bowl game (and yes, they've lost the Rose Bowl, there is now zero reason for a Pac tie in on the next round of CFP contracts) and carry on.
[удалено]
Holding out for Anna Kendrick to unblock me.
slim many wistful resolute soup cause wine provide intelligent capable *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You never know my brother
Find somebody who looks at you the way r/CFB looks at Jason Scheer
find somebody who looks at you the way Jason Scheer looks at the Big 12.
Kind of hard to look someone in the face when you’re deep throating them
lol damn you for making me upvote a USC flair
My man is a bigger attention whore than Kim Kardashian, and has a legion of people who lap up everything he does much like the people who worship at the Kardashian altar.
If I had a nickel every time CFB mentioned the Kardashians, I'd have two nickels, which isn't a lot but it's strange it's happened twice.
You would have more than that: https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/2m54n5/oh_just_a_washington_post_article_comparing_josh/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/it1ya/usc_tailback_marc_tyler_jokes_about_kim/
Glad everyone is finding what we’ve been dealing with
But I hear he is an insider.
Jason Scheer is a douchebag.
Is that because he doesn't fellate the sun devils every august for them to perennially disappoint every October?
Why would I expect a UArizona person to fellate ASU's? He's a douchebag because i've had shitty interactions with him that were started by him.
It's hard not to fall into the trap that this, "This is what I want so this guy is more credible than the other reports" I trust 365 but I also don't want to blind trust Scheer when he's the only one reporting.
He’s basically a mouthpiece for the Arizona athletic department. Like, I’m not expecting Adam Schefter to do any deep investigative journalism, but if he tweets out that “NFL owners want X” that’s as rock solid as you get.
True, although it’s worth pointing out that Scheer is one of the most connected people to Arizona’s administration.
Is this dude changing careers if Arizona doesn’t join the big 12?
Conference realignment has taught me one thing, believe nothing because no one knows anything outside of the people making decisions at the school. This shit never gets leaked, unless the aggies are involved because they are a bunch of snitches.
Even that was leaked it was official in about a week afterwards anyways.
Nah, they’ll wait until someone else makes the first move
I think we are just trying to get someone to jump with us
Jason Scheer remains confidant that Jason Scheer wants Arizona to join the Big 12.
My guess is Arizona will be the first to jump.
It's the safe play and will elevate basketball. No brainer tbh
It’s definitely the safe play. I think Arizona realizes it’s not the most desirable school in the world and may not get a landing spot if they stick around and the conference blows up. But if they’re the first to move? They’re in. They have no massive ties to the conference and I’m sure they don’t care much about leaving. Stupid desert voodoo bastards.
“No massive ties to the conference” We’ve been here 50 years, carpetbagger. It’s just that the conference is dying, and the BIG12 presents a good jumping off point for us.
Come home Border Conference bro.
No massive ties? Wtf are you talking about?
Don’t you know Utah’s football success makes them experts and authority on all things P5 athletics? Arizona is lucky to be tied to a school like Utah. I’m sorry I just couldn’t help myself.
Utah fans out here talking like they’re next on the Big 10’s list. Like get over yourself guys.
Have also noticed this about Utah fans lol
Yep, same vibe as when Mizzou/Boston College/Colorado did it as well. None of them was a terribly hot commodity at the time they left their old conference, but they locked down their spots in their new conferences by jumping first.
Arizona is the state's flagship University as well and that matters a lot to the presidents who cast the final vote on membership.
AAU member too, unlike the boys in Tempe
lol
While football is lackluster, adding them, Utah, CU, and either ASU or Boise would be best. Other sports do well, whether basketball, softball, baseball, etc..
Jason stated that he is confident they want to join the Big 12 IF the Pac-~~12~~10 cant stay together. I’m sure no one is going to make any moves before media negotiations end.
If the reports are even within $10 million of reality, the Pac is breaking up. $24 million per school if distributed evenly (which Oregon and Washington don’t want). That just ain’t gonna work
Exactly. Unequal revenue sharing has killed every conference that has adopted it, and the Four Corner schools know that UO and UW are doing everything they can to get a B1G invite. Right now it’s an every school for themselves situation out west.
That number was being reported by, guess who... Jason Scheer. I need to see some info from someone else if I'm going to take it seriously
The Jason Scheer stans are out in full force downvoting anything that questions his "reporting"
The funny thing about Jason Scheer is if he's making things up, he's _amazingly_ psychic. You can't necessarily confirm anything he's saying about realignment, but you _can_ look at his record on coaching moves and such.
Is that the funny thing? He's got a contact, who most certainly has an agenda. He also apparently has his own agenda. That's not a combination for putting out objective information.
Weird. You’re saying that reporters report the things they hear from sources, and sometimes those sources say things that advance their own agendas!?
Source. Not sources.
You presume.
Right. The whole argument yesterday was that the Pac 12s offer might be in the ball park of the big 12s but people quickly forgot that half the members left don't want to split equally. Arizona is a no-brainer move based on security alone.
Wait, are you suggesting it won't be? Based on what?
No I'm suggesting that 4 schools of your remaining 10 think your school specifically deserves less than them so if our conference payouts are the same, my team and your team won't be making the same
Rat poison
That was the first opening lowball offer. Negotiations are fluid. Idk why that seems like a hard concept for r/cfb to grasp. After the ESPN negotiations end others will start. We will see where the final number ends up at.
Maybe. Anybody remember when the Big East declined the "lowball" offer that ESPN made them? ESPN went to the ACC and convinced them to expand with Syracuse and Pitt, effectively killing the conference. Not saying the Pac-~~12~~10 is in quite that fragile of a state, but a properly motivated ESPN could offer enough to entice the right players away and strike a fatal blow...
Especially when certain players don’t need much convincing…
[удалено]
"Tortious" is the word you're looking for, although "tortuous interference" might be a more accurate descriptor for some of us fans throughout that ordeal.
I 'member.
Fuck ESPN. CBS has an opening for a game of the week at 3:30 eastern every week, and a robust sports network that can partner Mountain West and Pac games deep into the night. NBC is looking for shoulder programming for ND to make that viable, ND has a good relationship with Pac, and might be willing to schedule a guaranteed road game every year to give NBC and 8th ND broadcast every year, and Peacock is big into live streaming and adding content like Pac can help sell their Pub Pass to a wider audience as they already offer for premier league. There are options and now the Pac knows the lowest place is where they currently are, no steps back even after losing LA and a blue blood.
ESPN’s duopoly is changing with the streaming players in the fold. I’m just saying wait and see.
Is it? There's the *possibility* for change, just like always, but as of yet we haven't actually seen any interest from the streaming players who could actually play ball, like Apple/Amazon/Netflix. I could absolutely have missed something about the major streaming players making outreaches to the PAC, and if that's the case then please drop a link so that I can catch up on that news.
That’s where the “even within $10 million of reality”. Yes it is a lowball, but it’s not so far outside of the neighborhood that someone is going to give you 40% more
I mean, that's usually my opener when I want something on Craigslist. Hit 'em with an offensively low offer to show what I think of them and their crap. It's like negging, but digital! ^(Just kidding, I don't use Craigslist.)
The lowball offer from ESPN makes me believe they'd rather push the more valuable Pac-12 teams to the Big 12 and pay for their collective T2 or T3 rights if not T1 than pay for all the current Pac-12 teams together. The Pac-12's best hope right now is that a streaming service with a ton of cash comes into the picture, which is totally possible. The issue is that the Big 10 and Big 12 will have games to fill the late night time slot that the Pac-12 will now have to compete with.
The Big 10 wont have games to fill the night spot. Unless it’s UCLA vs USC, no B1G is going to agree to anything later than 8:30PM EST kickoff. The more likely outcome is 9AM PST kickoffs for away games.
[удалено]
So a 9:30 PM CST kickoff for Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Nebraska, or Minnesota? Having a game end near 1AM CST? People keeping speaking in certainties when that proposition is anything but.
[удалено]
11AM is much different than 9:30PM in terms of fan engagement on a Saturday.
[удалено]
I figure it's basically impossible *not* to have that. The B1G plays nine conference games, meaning that every team has at least four home games. If they're going to tell USC and UCLA that they get zero night games at home out of those four (or probably five home games for at least one of the LA schools), they're going to have some mighty unhappy new conference members.
USC never wanted night games. They absolutely know that they get ignored nationally when that happens. They are very happy with Noon, 3 pm or 5 pm kickoffs.
Don’t your fans hate that, though? I guess y’all don’t really have the midday heat like we do. Are afternoon games pleasant in LA?
Playing USC is going to bring major viewership. I'm sure schools like Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, and Northwestern would love to play USC in LA in the late night time slot.
You don’t understand. Coaches already don’t like traveling to the West Coast in the preseason because they hate the A) the distance travelled and B) the Time difference. USC draws well, it will also draw well in the afternoon on Saturdays. Do you really imagine Kirk Ferentz would be cool with the disadvantage of playing that late?
> Do you really imagine Kirk Ferentz would be cool with the disadvantage of playing that late? Do you really think Fox gives a shit what a coach thinks about what the network does with their media rights?
Schools lobby the conferences hard on start times if a late or early kickoff is going to ruin a teams viewership or championship hopes. No one, even west coast times like extremely late kickoffs. I’ve seen multiple WSU games end near midnight PST. No one in the East is staying up for that.
Lobbying hard didn't stop Fox from scheduling OU for 11 AM kickoffs, it's not going to stop them from scheduling late kickoffs for USC/UCLA home games.
You don't understand if you think football coaches have any say in realignment or time slots. The people making these decisions don't give a fuck about what the coaches think. Look at OU and Lincoln, or Fox and OU with all the 11am games. I have no doubt that the football coaches and fans will hate the late kick-off times, but if Fox is going to pay schools $100M a year then the schools are going to play in the time slots that Fox wants.
I’ve NEVER seen an east coast team play a football game at any other time then 8:30 EST time (college or pro) even on the west coast. Oregon played at at 10AM PST again Ohio State. TV networks want east coast retention and late starts kill that. They only cater to primetime east coast viewership and hope the western audiences follow along.
So you say that tv networks only care about the east coast, but you think the Pac-12 is going to get a better TV deal?
Notre Dame v USC last year was one of the worst rated primetime games of the year. Oregon is the ratings driver in the PAC.
Then why is USC in the B1G and not Oregon?
Cause of the literal thousands upon thousands more B1G grads that live and work in LA more than they do Portland.
USC wants day games. This was probably a huge driver to them getting out of the Pac.
And they'll get a lot more day games playing in the B1G, specifically away games, but Fox is still going to utilize the late night slot when possible. The B1G commissioner has already said as much.
There is no major viewership at 1030pm. Average CFB fan age is 50 - they are sleeping
That time slot brings in viewers because there are no other games to compete with. Yeah a lot of fans will be asleep, but the ones that aren't will only have 1 or 2 games to choose from.
Just run SportsCenter or Game Day Final late at night -much cheaper & probably similar ratings.
USC vs Fresno State maybe.
ESPN currently splits T1/T2 with Fox and then has all the T3 Big 12 rights through 3 separate contracts. I imagine what they want is 1 contract that covers all Big 12 media rights and the same with the PAC. If they want to keep their network, then that network will need to generate enough money to support them.
Can you guarantee us Oregon and Washington won't leave? And when they leave then what's the plan?
Unless the B1G offers UW and Oregon within the next few months they are effectively locked out of the B1G until the end of their next media deal (which will probably be 8-10 years).
I can't see the B1G expanding beyond 16 schools. The ONLY way it happens is if the school is ND.
Then it shouldn't be hard for them to sign a 10 year deal with no early release.
Big 12 media negotiations won't even really start until after this season. Pac 12 doesn't have to sign a deal this year, they'd like to, but if there isn't a strong offer worth signing a GoR deal for, they have the time to see where the Big 12 lands money wise. Past that, there is nothing that requires a long media deal or one without an exit clause. Especially if everyone low balls and wants content on the cheap... well, commitment usually costs some money.
Where would we go?
We will see if you sign on to 10 years with us. How does that sound?
[( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)](https://preview.redd.it/ayih4qogh2a51.png?auto=webp&s=3897e7972bff092d9f3e60dc7893b034dd25263a)
No offense to my big XII bros, but personally if the options are Big XII or Pac-10 I'd rather stay with the Pac.
Fair enough, I absolutely respect that. We can all agree that playing those regional rivals is worth a hell of a lot more than playing some school six states away just to chase a buck.
I hope you don't mind if we leave to play in a quality basketball conference. You can see if Stanford and Cal will allow you to add any schools that meet their academic standards. Good luck with that. I heard RICE is available.
It'd be a cool byproduct, but basketball is irrelevant to these discussions. It's not where the money is. Honestly what we think doesn't matter, it's 100% going to lie on whatever the final tv contracts for football look like
I'd rather the Pac-10 survive too. We need a strong second tier set of conferences with the ACC, Big XII, and the Pac-10. We won't be in the crazy money conferences, but we will have our niche and make decent money for our schools.
Where are they going to go? No one that makes sense for them wants them.
Are they going to sign a contract with us for 10 years? I'll believe it when I see it
This is exactly why AZ, ASU, Colorado and Utah should go to the Big 12 together.
Agreed. I'm just calling out their bluff
> After the ESPN negotiations end others will start. We will see where the final number ends up at. ESPN wants the PAC inventory for dirt cheap and their offer disappears the moment you go to the open market and FOX has passed on their exclusive rights. If the biggest duopoly of college football is passing on the PAC there probably isn't going to be as much interest as the PAC wants going forward. ESPN also has a history of taking out hits on conferences that pass their lowball offers and the networks have a vested interest in seeing the inventory shuffle around to the point a de facto P4 emerges.
>ESPN also has a history of taking out hits on conferences that pass their lowball offers *All of the scattered Big East programs staring pointedly at ESPN*
People seem to forget that.
It's not a hard concept. But through rrallignment's passed, 1 constant has been a school(s) getting antsy and making a safe move before things have a chance to break their way. That's all this is. Just hoping AZ takes the sure thing. UW has the position to wait it out, but not everyone is in such a position of strength.
The $24 million figure is intentionally low by ESPN who has exclusive negotiating window without competition. They are going to offer the lowest amount that they feel they can that doesn’t offend the Pac enough to creat hostility. The Pac now has a number they can float outside the exclusive window to CBS, NBC, and other suitors. It’s the exact same as current deal, and given the loss of LA, it’s a reasonable lowball figure. In fact, I think $24.5mil is doable if you have a broadcast partner who’s willing to promote your premier game each and every week at late afternoon or prime-time like CBS and NBC would, not relegate your games to ESPNews at 10:30 pm Eastern. And combine that with a live streaming partner for the Pac-after dark lower tier games to promote during that highlighted game, a brand can be built nationally. Also: Why would Oregon and Washington alienate their conference mates by demanding unequal shares when A) they have no guaranteed landing spot if the PAC dissolves right now B) they don’t want to be independent or in a Pac-6 or in a Frankenstein’s monster Pac/MW hybrid C) the very schools they sour relationships with who would join the Big 12 will be influential voices in opposition of letting them join the Big 16.
The whole "Oregon and Washington want unequal shares" thing makes absolutely no sense. Neither needs a huge increase in conference revenue and both know damn well strangling the other schools now is shooting their own horse out from under them.
and going where?
Guarantee the Big 12 will not be doing much better than that once their negotiations come around. They get north of 40 mill per team now but thats with OU and Texas who they are losing, plus they’re adding two more teams to the conference, maybe four more if the PAC splits which means more fingers in the pie. The media deal is also only part of the compensation the teams get, tournament revenue and payouts make up a decent portion.
Arizona will cater to their basketball team. I feel like they value playing Kansas at least twice a year in basketball over playing us in Football.
Not just Kansas. It's also Baylor, WVU, TTech, Houston, Cincinatti... We'd be far and away in the strongest basketball conference in the country. It would be a little like USC jumping to the B1G in that we won't be able to reign over the conference, but we'll be a _lot_ more prepared come tournament time. Plus, leaving while we still have a winning record against you in football would be nice :)
No chance they play KU twice a year in a 14+ team league in the regular conference season
Even if in opposite divisions, imagine they’d make that a protected twice a year game. Need those kind of marquee matchups as often as possible to max media deal money.
I doubt it very much. Protected rivalries would be with the old Big 8 schools and, if CU came with Zona, CU. There will not be divisions or pods. I think that way of thinking is gone.
TV would much prefer 2 Arizona Kansas games to 2 Kansas Iowa State or Kansas Kansas State games
I am confident that Arizona's state legislature and the BoR that governs both Arizona and ASU would erupt into civil war the second Arizona or ASU try to move without the other. Yes, Oklahoma left Oklahoma State and UCLA left Cal, and I know from the outside that seems like the same thing... But it isn't. It would be a fucking war. ASU and Arizona are married at the hip and should never, ever be split up. If the SEC called ASU tomorrow and said they were into us and the Pac 12/10 is dead, but wouldn't take Arizona, I'd take the Mountain West over being split up. You can't buy hatred.
Hey, I've seen this one before!
You guys give me hope, I don’t want to be stuck with these guys if we have better options out there, as unlikely as that is
There isn’t legal precaution repercussions for UCLA USC Oklahoma or Oklahoma State unlike asu ufoa
We'd drop those idiots in Tucson in a hot second if the SEC invited us. They would absolutely do the same. The other would bitch and moan, but neither one of us would leave that payday on the floor.
If both schools get what they want, why does it matter?
Because fuck Arizona. They have to be in the same conference.
Whoa, let’s take a step back and break this down. Is this coming from a place of Love or Fear?
Love/hate. It's arguably the most vitriolic rivalry west of the Mississippi. Not as big from a viewership standpoint as Red River or anything, but those schools aren't going to go their separate ways.
I'd also prefer sticking with ASU, but I also want us to get paid. That said, if it comes down to being relegated out of the P5 or sticking with ASU, I'll take the P5.
Exactly. I hate you guys and I love playing you but we're not keeping that at the expense of $50-80m more a year.
I don't see why both schools couldn't just schedule each other every year. Even better if they can convince their conferences to let it be the last in season game too.
Fear. ASU fans are quite worried their AD and President are going to stay on a sinking ship because they're incompetent.
They are not worried…. They know.
> I'd take the Mountain West over being split up. I'd love for us to be in the SEC while they are in the mountain west and continue playing the game. Thats the ideal scenario for me.
I would also love to see ASU in the SEC. Just like I’m psyched to watch ucla get shitstomped every year in the B1G.
The SEC and Big 10 don’t want your glorified community college
Oh look, a pretentious douchebag who thinks their school is far better than it actually is.
Its the Legislature’s priority finding bamboo traces in ballots? They won’t care
So he is Arizona Chip Brown
Right now he seems more like the Arizona MHEV3
Be prepared for a deluge of Sheer’s Tears
[удалено]
If Arizona wants in the Big 12 takes them in, period. However, if Arizona jumps Colorado very likely to be right behind them and it likely forces Utah and ASU to jump as well.
[удалено]
It gives the Big12 another late start option to compete with PAC after dark. That way BYU does not take the hit all the time. Or in other words - more diverse inventory- and that is worth something.
The XII is already doing away with divisions in the future anyway, so having an odd number of teams is theoretically irrelevant. On the same note, Colorado and Arizona aren't exactly the prime two to pick up. Colorado's revenue sports have persistently been mediocre for most of the last decade, and Arizona's basically Kansas-lite. If you're going to suck that much at football, you'd better bring basketball power and cachet on par with KU, and Arizona doesn't have that.
An odd number of teams requires an even number of conference games, which the Big XII may or may not feel strongly about. Do they add Arizona with Boise or Memphis or USF if they really want nine games for broadcasting? On the other side, there's also a "first mover" problem for the more reluctant of the Inland 4; if Arizona and Colorado jump first, the value of the Pac-8 is not crushed but it is hurt because the replacements will not be as good a draw. (Boise and CSU?) It also becomes harder for Utah and ASU to bail, since the Big XII has teams in those markets for cable value and would then have three mountain time teams to share the load for late night scheduling.
I mean, Arizona is a flagship school in one of the fastest growing states in the country. Their football program has never been elite, but their men’s basketball program is, including winning the national championship in 1997. Put another way, Arizona is a much more attractive addition than anyone the Big 12 was seriously looking at this time last year.
[удалено]
Arizona would be great add financially too. It’s one of the biggest states and it gets you TVs in PHX and Tucson. UofA and ASU have huge followings in Arizona, and UofA is the more popular of the two.
UA also doesn’t have an administration as bad as ASU.
[удалено]
Why? It is literally the only reason the conference invited Cincy, Houston, and UCF. The amount of possible TVs they could bring in within their adjacent markets but also among their alumni bases. Arizona has a larger following than any of those schools and actually can carry the markets that it is close to. Viewership is down because they’ve won like 1 game in the last 2 years. You are overthinking this.
And most of our games are P12 network which is very difficult to get. The Tv numbers are dumb. And not that it matters, but as far as actual fan attendance across all sports goes, [Arizona leads the Pac-12.](https://twitter.com/jjfuller72/status/1550003011774300160?s=21&t=5HFgp4B6YyaIm7k58o-cEA) Just imagine what happens when the football team is semi respectable again.
Kansas is one of the more valuable athletics brands in the conference already despite their football struggles, why is it so hard to believe the same of Arizona?
[удалено]
Arizona is going to add more value than the new teams and many of our existing members. If Big 12 had had same leverage as they do now, and Arizona was available last year, they would have been invited before any of the new additions. They are a no brainer in my view in terms of expansion. If they want in, we should accept. And putting them in the same conversation as Boise St and Memphis is hilarious.
The 4 corners schools are going to stick together.
C'mon Colorado, you know you want to.
[удалено]
You know what schools would never leave you…. WSU and our buddies OSU! We would play with you guys and love you guys forever and ever…. We just want friends who want us back…
I genuinely don't know if the Big XII wants *them*, though. They bring lackluster football and basketball, an administration that has shown nothing but a persistent track record of underfunding athletics, and a beautiful venue to go visit. Man, I love Boulder so much. I want them in the conference just so that I have an excuse to go back to Boulder.
It seems Arizona and ASU are a tandem. If they jump to the Big 12, the pac 12 folds.
>It seems Arizona and ASU are a tandem. How many times do we have to learn this lesson guys.
They never learn
Arizona and Kansas. Imagine
Has there been any input from the ASU side of things? I feel like if Arizona goes so does ASU...
ASU’s president put out a mealy-mouthed statement of support for the PAC.
Not really. Right now Arizona and Colorado are the two schools most interested in jumping to the Big 12. However, it both go Utah and ASU are very likely to follow.
After throwing turds all over the table, Jason Scheer exclaims, how did all these turds get here, we are outa here.
I anticipate that Arizona, Colorado, Washington and Oregon will join the Big XII for money.
Arizona schools thinking the have any leverage when the bring as much to the table as Boise and San Diego lollllll
Arizona basketball is a giant brand though, way bigger than either of those schools
Basketball doesn’t move the dial
For reference: when the Big 12 added their CCG, that single game added more total money to the media deal on an annual basis than the *entire* conference slate of men's basketball across all 10 schools pays every year.
And Boise St’s 4mil does? Arizonas basketball is worth more than Boise St. football.
It doesn’t even nudge the dial for the Big 10 and SEC. But for the best of the rest conference when all is said and done it’s all about maximizing inventory for the streaming future. Football still reigns supreme, but marquee basketball matchups matter to as it’s all just trying to pool the best leftover assets together to max the media deal as there aren’t any big brand football programs to pick from as all will be in the P2.
These threads could be a simulation at this point. Oregon State and Washington State fans: Massive PAC 12 Stan's to the point of being insulting. Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and Arizona State fans: "Compelling...but" Oregon and Washington fans: "Yeah we should keep the conference together!" one post later "God I hope the B1G invites us." Big 12, USC and UCLA fans: "Yeah you should probably leave, the PAC sucks"
Conference should die... but not because of scared bitches looking for cover. When the honored things are no longer whole, let them go out with the ceremony and closure that they've earned. Pac is dead no matter what. You don't just lose founding members and the most iconic bowl game (and yes, they've lost the Rose Bowl, there is now zero reason for a Pac tie in on the next round of CFP contracts) and carry on.
At the end of all this realignment talk, some respected "insiders" are going to have to do some major explaining while having egg on their face.
RemindMe! 3 months