Pac-12 to decide whether to expand within a couple weeks

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
9,682
10,146
113
38
You seem to be missing the point, sir. The info is not what’s in question. It’s like leaking things they want to Dennis Dodd or someone like that Which is kind of what I’m seeing here.

It’s the idea that connected people would permit top secret info to be shared freely on a public website that I’m having the hardest time wrapping my head around.

Anyway. Carry on. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
No worries, I understand your skepticism, enjoy your weekend as well!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cyclones1969

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
9,157
7,758
113
Dubuque
I know it's piling on to bring ESPN into any of this, but I happened to hear a couple of guys talking college football on ESPN Radio yesterday afternoon. They both gleefully jumped on a comment that the remaining Big XII schools "don't matter." They said, "I know you alumni and fans don't feel that way, but it's just a fact. Your teams don't matter."

This is completely asinine. Why do Northwestern and Rutgers and Illinois and Oregon State and Colorado and Mississippi State and Vanderbilt "matter" but Iowa State and Oklahoma State and TCU don't? Simply because of which conference they happen to be lucky enough to be in? Well, that's just not a true statement on its face. Every D-1 FBS football team "matters" - the bluebloods have to play somebody, right, and they don't want to only play each other because, well, one of them would lose a bunch of games.

It's just ridiculous, the amount of sheer confident statements flying around with absolutely no truth or facts behind them. And yes, being it was ESPN Radio, of course they have a motive in pushing that line of commentary. But anybody with half a brain cell should just be gobsmacked by the tonnage of ignorance in that statement.

That is the frustrating reality. There are about 15 schools that really drive the media rights $ and the other 45 P5 schools have been along for the ride from a TV partner standpoint.

Unfortunately, on field/court success isn't the primary driver when conferences negotiate the media rights deals. Even though it does have an impact on ratings when games are scheduled from week-to-week. My bet is ESPN would rather show ISU v Okie State than Arkansas vs. Mississippi State.

I think there is hope for ISU and other Big12 schools once this initial wave of realignment ends. The big problem for Big12 schools and makes it easy for ESPN mouth pieces is that demographics go against the remaining 8. The total population of Iowa, Oklahoma, W Virginia and Kansas is around $15M. Whereas the Big10, SEC & ACC are all in the 75M range.
 

Cloneon

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2015
3,007
3,120
113
West Virginia
That is the frustrating reality. There are about 15 schools that really drive the media rights $ and the other 45 P5 schools have been along for the ride from a TV partner standpoint.

Unfortunately, on field/court success isn't the primary driver when conferences negotiate the media rights deals. Even though it does have an impact on ratings when games are scheduled from week-to-week. My bet is ESPN would rather show ISU v Okie State than Arkansas vs. Mississippi State.

I think there is hope for ISU and other Big12 schools once this initial wave of realignment ends. The big problem for Big12 schools and makes it easy for ESPN mouth pieces is that demographics go against the remaining 8. The total population of Iowa, Oklahoma, W Virginia and Kansas is around $15M. Whereas the Big10, SEC & ACC are all in the 75M range.
You couldn't be more wrong. 15 schools by themselves die. They need enough schools to play, enough wins to maintain interest, and enough eyes to make it worth it. Do the math. It's not 15 schools. As pointed out earlier, 'parity' in a conference 'nets' more eyes than a lopsided conference of equal size. With this idea of putting X schools in a conference, you better darned have numbers to back what 'X' is.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: agentbear

snowcraig2.0

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 2, 2007
12,555
10,359
113
47
Cedar Rapids, IA
The big ten really doesn't want anything to change but if they have to expand they want to look at the PAC teams because the ACC isn't available. The alliance is a way for the big ten to keep the PAC where it is, schedule some high profile games and get negotiating power for the playoff. The PAC gets a stay from execution because USC is not happy. ACC has no power because of horrible negotiating in their last deal that lasts till 2035 so they just want a seat at the table and they will get some good games scheduled too. Its not a great scenario for the PAC or ACC but they really don't have any other choice.

Just stop.
 

snowcraig2.0

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 2, 2007
12,555
10,359
113
47
Cedar Rapids, IA
it is a little weird you get information from inside sources, and share it on fan sites of schools not affiliated with the alliance.

have you joined other fansites to do this?

and, wouldn’t a source, or sources, with intimate knowledge of a negotiation, that hasn’t even publicly started, not want any information released?

He's full of ****.
 

blackuniforms

Member
Jun 3, 2021
76
-13
18
I don’t know if I think that. He’s got big 10 info. My point was I found it hard to believe anyone of importance would be ok with people freely disbursing what should be top secret stuff.
Top secret is a strange choice of words, but I get what you are saying.
 

Beyerball

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 18, 2013
7,474
6,819
113
Texas
I don't know anything about what is happening internally with the PAC but I cant think of anything they could do to increase their potential media earnings by the time of their next negotiation. They could add some big8 schools but that would most likely keep them consistent with their current media money not increase it. They really don't have very many cards to play

Yea you are right...Adding a couple teams that offer an entirely new time zone wouldn't mean much for TV viewership and hence $$.

You are correct. The PAC best move forward is to make sure only 1/3 of the country watches their games instead of 1/2 to 2/3...
 

Beyerball

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 18, 2013
7,474
6,819
113
Texas
The big ten really doesn't want anything to change but if they have to expand they want to look at the PAC teams because the ACC isn't available. The alliance is a way for the big ten to keep the PAC where it is, schedule some high profile games and get negotiating power for the playoff. The PAC gets a stay from execution because USC is not happy. ACC has no power because of horrible negotiating in their last deal that lasts till 2035 so they just want a seat at the table and they will get some good games scheduled too. Its not a great scenario for the PAC or ACC but they really don't have any other choice.

So when does the scheduling of these games begin? bc every BIG and PAC team is booked with non conference games until 2027ish..

So is the BIG or ACC gonna tell the PAC they will schedule 1-2 games non conf starting in 2028? The PAC will be dead by then and behind by oh $30-$40 mil a year per team..

Aside from that...1-2 games a year per team with the BIG is not going to alter the PAC TV deal much.

I find it funny you make the argument of keeping the PAC happy with a small scheduling pact but tell all of us that adding a few pretty solid fball programs in an entirely new time zone is just never going to happen..

lol.
 

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
9,682
10,146
113
38
So when does the scheduling of these games begin? bc every BIG and PAC team is booked with non conference games until 2027ish..

So is the BIG or ACC gonna tell the PAC they will schedule 1-2 games non conf starting in 2028? The PAC will be dead by then and behind by oh $30-$40 mil a year per team..

Aside from that...1-2 games a year per team with the BIG is not going to alter the PAC TV deal much.

I find it funny you make the argument of keeping the PAC happy with a small scheduling pact but tell all of us that adding a few pretty solid fball programs in an entirely new time zone is just never going to happen..

lol.
Again I have no insight as to what conversations are happening internally with the PAC12 only some details as to what the alliance consists of. I have no idea of what a scheduling plan would look like or even if the schools would all agree to it. The PAC could very well add some big8 schools but if it were obvious that those schools would increase the media payouts it would have already happened. The alliance is to keep the Big Ten from stealing USC and Oregon and to provide political power in setting up the terms for a new playoff and keep ESPN from consolidating their power. Its possible that grabbing some schools from the Big8 would be allowed but I haven't heard anything from the big ten side that says that is happening. If it did I imagine the Big8 schools would be getting a far smaller media cut then the rest of the schools but that is just speculation on my part.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: SEIOWA CLONE

Beyerball

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 18, 2013
7,474
6,819
113
Texas
Again I have no insight as to what conversations are happening internally with the PAC12 only some details as to what the alliance consists of. I have no idea of what a scheduling plan would look like or even if the schools would all agree to it. The PAC could very well add some big8 schools but if it were obvious that those schools would increase the media payouts it would have already happened. The alliance is to keep the Big Ten from stealing USC and Oregon and to provide political power in setting up the terms for a new playoff and keep ESPN from consolidating their power. Its possible that grabbing some schools from the Big8 would be allowed but I haven't heard anything from the big ten side that says that is happening. If it did I imagine the Big8 schools would be getting a far smaller media cut then the rest of the schools but that is just speculation on my part.

It would not have happened already...tx and ou were talking to SEC for a year prob more...This took every conference and every AD and President by complete surprise...

You expect with school starting soon and as busy as Univ President's and AD's are that within 2-3 weeks they will have decided to add school 'X"? No way.

It might not happen. But to say it should have happened by now is not feasible. With the potential of lawsuits publicly flying and the accusation of "tampering" being thrown around...You think the PAC is publicly gonna grab a team in 2-3 weeks?

I can assure you...There is not 1 single President at any University telling a major sportswriter if they are or are not interested in team 'X'.

Just logically step back and look at the PAC conference. 3 teams matter. 2/3 have solid TV ratings. Other 9 are far worse than the A8 in fball and TV ratings.

in 2019 (6) or half of the PAC teams averaged less than 1mil viewers per game for the year. That is really bad.

I look forward to 2021 with hopefully ISU being given some favorable network and time slots for once in their damn existence.. If things go as planned I'll bet ISU would finish 2nd in the PAC in 2021 in TV ratings..

We are talking about a PACN that literally nearly sold their network to venture capital company to just borrow $$ to survive..
 

CyCrazy

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2008
27,072
15,308
113
Ames
Again I have no insight as to what conversations are happening internally with the PAC12 only some details as to what the alliance consists of. I have no idea of what a scheduling plan would look like or even if the schools would all agree to it. The PAC could very well add some big8 schools but if it were obvious that those schools would increase the media payouts it would have already happened. The alliance is to keep the Big Ten from stealing USC and Oregon and to provide political power in setting up the terms for a new playoff and keep ESPN from consolidating their power. Its possible that grabbing some schools from the Big8 would be allowed but I haven't heard anything from the big ten side that says that is happening. If it did I imagine the Big8 schools would be getting a far smaller media cut then the rest of the schools but that is just speculation on my part.

You literally know nothing. Move along.
 

SEIOWA CLONE

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2018
6,793
6,989
113
63
What if part of the alliance is to limit the number of teams the SEC gets in a new 12 team playoff? Something like limiting 3 teams per conference for the play-offs. This means B1G, ACC, and PAC have no reason to expand because they would be reducing their current schools chances at getting a playoff berth. The B1G will always get 3 teams like the SEC. They can still allow a none P4 access to the playoff, likely Big 12 champion. The ACC and PAC would go back in forth between 2 and 3 participants every year giving those conferences more access then they likely would have. If their is no limit per conference the SEC is putting 5 or 6 trams every year. Everyone wins but the SEC.
First the SEC will never agree to only allowing 3 teams per conference into the playoff, and really they shouldn't. The SEC is the only conference to have 3 different teams that have made the playoff, only conference that has had two different teams win the championship, and only conference to have multiple teams from the same league make the playoff in a given year.

Expanding any conferences will not harm any teams chances for making the playoff, only improve the leagues chance to get multiple teams into the playoff. I really doubt that Alabama and LSU are sitting there thinking, "man with OU and UT coming to our league, it makes it harder to make the playoff if they expand." Nope they are thinking "with those two teams now we can get half the field into the playoffs in a good year, and only 3 or 4 in a down year. "
 
  • Like
Reactions: agentbear

Gonzo

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2009
26,764
31,137
113
Behind you
First the SEC will never agree to only allowing 3 teams per conference into the playoff, and really they shouldn't. The SEC is the only conference to have 3 different teams that have made the playoff, only conference that has had two different teams win the championship, and only conference to have multiple teams from the same league make the playoff in a given year.

Expanding any conferences will not harm any teams chances for making the playoff, only improve the leagues chance to get multiple teams into the playoff. I really doubt that Alabama and LSU are sitting there thinking, "man with OU and UT coming to our league, it makes it harder to make the playoff if they expand." Nope they are thinking "with those two teams now we can get half the field into the playoffs in a good year, and only 3 or 4 in a down year. "

Lol, that's pretty optimistic. Playing against an SEC schedule, I highly doubt OU or UT are going to be making the CFP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: blackuniforms

CyCrazy

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2008
27,072
15,308
113
Ames
First the SEC will never agree to only allowing 3 teams per conference into the playoff, and really they shouldn't. The SEC is the only conference to have 3 different teams that have made the playoff, only conference that has had two different teams win the championship, and only conference to have multiple teams from the same league make the playoff in a given year.

Expanding any conferences will not harm any teams chances for making the playoff, only improve the leagues chance to get multiple teams into the playoff. I really doubt that Alabama and LSU are sitting there thinking, "man with OU and UT coming to our league, it makes it harder to make the playoff if they expand." Nope they are thinking "with those two teams now we can get half the field into the playoffs in a good year, and only 3 or 4 in a down year. "

So what the SEC doesnt run CFB. You are deluded.