Jump to content
WCSBoard

Picking Up The Pieces


PAC MAN

Recommended Posts

Things appear to be moving.  This is the moment.  Resistance to SMU, which looks like a desperation effort on Kliavkoff's part, is churning up in several locations.  Kliavkoff's promised $40 million per school appears to be wishful thinking.  Several reports of a potential jump by ASU.  Also, reports of new contacts from Brett Yormark's office to current Pac members.  Watch what happens with Michael Crow, and also if there's anything brewing with Bob Robbins and Todd Saliman.  Oregon currently is at a disadvantage with an interim head, not in the position they'd like to be as a conference leader.  As usual, the Bay Area schools are sleeping, and OSU/WSU are attempting to keep things together.  The Big-12 is shopping.  The Pac-10 is attempting a Covid-style lockdown.

The odd thing, one of the oddest things, is that the "Pac-12 Board" isn't discussing this.  What could be more fundamental?  Instead, the energy keeps flowing to respond to some southern-troll who posts on this board and then gets a slew of responses.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2023 at 7:52 AM, EastCoastFan said:

Things appear to be moving.  This is the moment.  Resistance to SMU, which looks like a desperation effort on Kliavkoff's part, is churning up in several locations.  Kliavkoff's promised $40 million per school appears to be wishful thinking.  Several reports of a potential jump by ASU.  Also, reports of new contacts from Brett Yormark's office to current Pac members.  Watch what happens with Michael Crow, and also if there's anything brewing with Bob Robbins and Todd Saliman.  Oregon currently is at a disadvantage with an interim head, not in the position they'd like to be as a conference leader.  As usual, the Bay Area schools are sleeping, and OSU/WSU are attempting to keep things together.  The Big-12 is shopping.  The Pac-10 is attempting a Covid-style lockdown.

The odd thing, one of the oddest things, is that the "Pac-12 Board" isn't discussing this.  What could be more fundamental?  Instead, the energy keeps flowing to respond to some southern-troll who posts on this board and then gets a slew of responses.

 

Where are you seeing these developments? I have not seen anything about ASU wavering on my normal message board sources or the Athletic. Hope its not true. Would think that Pac12 schools should stay united at least long enough to hear what the media offer is from traditional networks and from Amazon. I don't think we are there yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2023 at 2:29 PM, row Z said:

Where are you seeing these developments? I have not seen anything about ASU wavering on my normal message board sources or the Athletic. Hope its not true. Would think that Pac12 schools should stay united at least long enough to hear what the media offer is from traditional networks and from Amazon. I don't think we are there yet. 

https://www.outkick.com/asu-angry-with-pac-12-conference-open-to-leaving/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for that link. I am sure there are contingency plans being discussed in all of the Pac12 athletic department, if the offers Kliavkoff gets are not financially attractive. At some point, it may come down to whether a Pac12 school can do better than Kliavkoff's offer outside the Pac12. It seems unlikely to me that that will be the case, given that the Big10 is not looking for more teams, and the Big12 only got $31M per school. Will ASU really make more joining the Big12 than staying with UW, Oregon, Utah, Cal, Stanford and all of our late night time slots? I kind of doubt it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think I’m smart enough to chime in much re: expansion. I don’t see how adding the 8th most popular program in Texas adds anything to this conference, but that seems to be the path ahead of us so I assume it’s all 4D chess that I don’t understand. Did UTEP say no?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2023 at 9:42 PM, glduck said:

I don’t think I’m smart enough to chime in much re: expansion. I don’t see how adding the 8th most popular program in Texas adds anything to this conference, but that seems to be the path ahead of us so I assume it’s all 4D chess that I don’t understand. Did UTEP say no?

Your lack of understanding mirrors what many of us also feel.  No one has explained how adding games against minor G5 schools somehow sweetens our media deal so that the remaining ten real Pac schools get a larger per-school payout than they would if the league didn't expand.  America is itching to watch SMU vs WSU or San Diego St take on Arizona?  That may be "inventory," but it unfortunately is the type that's been in the back of the warehouse, with nobody wanting to truck it to market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/8/2023 at 9:41 PM, row Z said:

I have seen support for the logic behind adding SMU from a couple of sources, including Wilner and Canzano on their most recent podcast. On paper, the Dallas Fort Worth area is a valuable market for tv, high school football is strong and will result in better conference recruiting in Texas, SMU has a big endowment and is eager to spend on football, they have already made big moves with NIL and the portal, and the school is well ranked academically. But, all of this requires projecting their fit in the conference in the future, because today it just seems like a big step down from Big12 schools we thumbed our nose at (including BYU, OK State, Texas Tech etc.).

It appears inventory is the driving factor for adding SMU. Personally, I see both Tulane and UTSA as potential PAC adds in the future. The latter has great potential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2023 at 5:34 PM, Mano said:

Seems a lot of the rumors and "leaks" are coming from Big 12 and their supporters. We'll see how everything shakes out in the end.

Yes, most of the rumors of the PAC's impending demise seem to come from B12 supporters. Reminds me of the AAC supporters when Texas and Oklahoma announced they were leaving the B12. The ACC honks were discussing which B12 teams was worthy of poaching.

The PAC will stay together through, at least, the end of this decade. The only place they have to go is the B12, and the PAC university Presidents do value be associated with 7 AAU schools. The B1G isn't taking any more PAC teams this round, if ever. Actually heard that both Washington and Oregon together don't reach a half-share value in the B1G and, if true, they will never get a serious look from the B1G. I expect all hell to break loose when the ACC's GOR expires in 2034 however. There are many ACC teams that are attractive to both the B1G and the SEC. Anyway, USC is more than content being on an island as they feel they are Notre Dame west. Will have to see how UCLA does but I expect to see them with "buyer's remorse" relatively quickly. They will not fare well in the B1G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2023 at 9:00 AM, Aztecgolfer said:

Yes, most of the rumors of the PAC's impending demise seem to come from B12 supporters. Reminds me of the AAC supporters when Texas and Oklahoma announced they were leaving the B12. The ACC honks were discussing which B12 teams was worthy of poaching.

The PAC will stay together through, at least, the end of this decade. The only place they have to go is the B12, and the PAC university Presidents do value be associated with 7 AAU schools. The B1G isn't taking any more PAC teams this round, if ever. Actually heard that both Washington and Oregon together don't reach a half-share value in the B1G and, if true, they will never get a serious look from the B1G. I expect all hell to break loose when the ACC's GOR expires in 2034 however. There are many ACC teams that are attractive to both the B1G and the SEC. Anyway, USC is more than content being on an island as they feel they are Notre Dame west. Will have to see how UCLA does but I expect to see them with "buyer's remorse" relatively quickly. They will not fare well in the B1G.

 

As for UCLA, their last Rose Bowl appearance was in 1999 ( 24 years ago ) and their last Rose Bowl win was in 1986 ( 37 years ago ), so they probably figure they might as well get paid, as they didn't fare all that well in the PAC either. The thing the move could screw up is their basketball program, which has actually had success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/20/2023 at 7:48 AM, Aztecgolfer said:

You gonna be this way when we become conference mates?

Literally everything you say is stupid, so yeah, probably.  And it's highly unlikely we'll be "conference mates."  And if it does happen, it'll be in 10 years, and you'll probably be in hospice, barred from internet usage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/22/2023 at 12:01 AM, row Z said:

The replies to that tweet are pretty negative, but wouldn't Apple be a comparable streaming platform to Amazon? If the compensation is good, I think Apple could be fine. 

Apple's user base is dying, Amazon's is growing.  This choice, if it happens and is the bulk of the media product, will be the end of the conference.  Quickly.  Why?  Nobody in Boston or Orlando or Chicago will pay additional for getting on a streaming service just for the Pac-10, but in those areas millions of people alreay are on Amazon, and just have to tune in.  The bulk of the nation will be lost imediately with Apple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...