Big 12/ Pac 12 Merger (keep all the teams)

[HawaiiClone]

What will the Big 12 need to do to bring about a Pac-12 merger?

The college sports calendar contains some very significant origination and expiration dates over the next few years. Jon Wilner of the Wilner Hotline mentioned a few of them: 2024: The Pac-12 begins a new media contract cycle 2025: The Big 12 begins a…

trojanswire.usatoday.com

I would add 2 out of 3 from Memphis, Boise State and San Diego St to get to 24 teams.

Also, there is this article in The Athletic:

How a Pac-12/Big 12 conference merger would play football

Here's how to organize and schedule a Big 12/Pac-12 merged conference. Looks pretty good!

theathletic.com

 

[IASTATE07]

No thanks.

 

[CysRage]

They Big 12 has greater leverage. Take the best from the Pac once they find their media renegotiation estimates are crap.

 

[HawaiiClone]

They Big 12 has greater leverage. Take the best from the Pac once they find their media renegotiation estimates are crap.

That's another option.

 

[2speedy1]

Nope, nope, no.

No more than 4-6 best teams from the Pac. No elevating G5. No diluting the Big 12. No reducing the per team pay.

Our current value 40-45M.
Pacs current value 20-25M.

If you merged them all you just reduce our pay to 30M.

If you add G5 teams just to add numbers, not only do you take spots for ACC teams some day. You reduce the pay even more. G5 teams value even less than Pac schools.

Everyone needs to stop, with the Add more G5, we took the best there were, we arent adding more. We have the opportunity to add the Best avail from the Pac to maintain or increase our value. You dont take them all just because, to decrease our pay/value. That makes no sense.

Of course the Athletic, Mercury, Trojanwire etc are going to say these things, they are all totally biased for the Pac, think its more valuable than it is, and think the Cal schools are more valuable than they are.
None of which is true, those are all garbage takes, and trash media sources trying to artificially boost their home Pet conference up. They will do anything and say anything to save it. These same media sources have been saying the Pac was going to take Big 12 schools too, etc. They are all trash.

 

[Acylum]

I’d take none before I’d take all the leftovers.

 

[RonBurgundy]

Taking WSU, OSU or Cal just dilutes the per school payout.

Just take ASU, UA, CU and Utah. Gladly take UO and UW, but I think the B1G will end up taking them if they can’t get ND. Let the PAC 12 die. Don’t save them.

 

[HawaiiClone]

Nope, nope, no.

No more than 4-6 best teams from the Pac. No elevating G5. No diluting the Big 12. No reducing the per team pay.

Our current value 40-45M.
Pacs current value 20-25M.

If you merged them all you just reduce our pay to 30M.

If you add G5 teams just to add numbers, not only do you take spots for ACC teams some day. You reduce the pay even more. G5 teams value even less than Pac schools.

Everyone needs to stop, with the Add more G5, we took the best there were, we arent adding more. We have the opportunity to add the Best avail from the Pac to maintain or increase our value. You dont take them all just because, to decrease our pay/value. That makes no sense.

Of course the Athletic, Mercury, Trojanwire etc are going to say these things, they are all totally biased for the Pac, think its more valuable than it is, and think the Cal schools are more valuable than they are.
None of which is true, those are all garbage takes, and trash media sources trying to artificially boost their home Pet conference up. They will do anything and say anything to save it. These same media sources have been saying the Pac was going to take Big 12 schools too, etc. They are all trash.

Don't know all the figures, but adding the four corner schools, Oregon and Washington would seem to be good financially. Does anyone know what Cal and Stanford would bring financially?

 

[SCNCY]

Don't know all the figures, but adding the four corner schools, Oregon and Washington would seem to be good financially. Does anyone know what Cal and Stanford would bring financially?

From viewership, probably much nothing.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

Don't know all the figures, but adding the four corner schools, Oregon and Washington would seem to be good financially. Does anyone know what Cal and Stanford would bring financially?

Nobody knows anything, especially the guy confidently stating the Big 12 is worth $40MM or more and the Pac-12 worth less than $25MM.

Lots of people will pretend that these are self-evident facts and that anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you. They will do this because it is good for Iowa State, and they prefer to think that the good outcome for Iowa State is guaranteed, simple as that. In reality, I doubt the highest-level decisionmakers at the schools themselves know these numbers because they are still being negotiated with various networks, and your "worth" is just whichever deal you end up making.

Here's a report estimating the ten Pac-12 schools are worth $30MM.

Here's a report post-OU/UT exit estimating the Big 12 could lose half its media rights value, or $14MM a year, which would have reduced the latest payout to $28MM. And that $28MM includes media rights and everything else, meaning media rights alone are just a portion of that. Use your critical thinking to decide how that figure would be affected by the additions of BYU and the three AAC schools.

And here's a projection, factoring in the OU/UT move but not the USC/UCLA one, showing the Big 12 on slightly stronger footing than the Pac-12, which would have been made significantly stronger by the LA schools' move. On this board, you will hear way more about this one than the last link.

Nobody knows anything yet.

 

[2speedy1]

Nobody knows anything, especially the guy confidently stating the Big 12 is worth $40MM or more and the Pac-12 worth less than $25MM.

Lots of people will pretend that these are self-evident facts and that anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you. They will do this because it is good for Iowa State, and they prefer to think that the good outcome for Iowa State is guaranteed, simple as that. In reality, I doubt the highest-level decisionmakers at the schools themselves know these numbers because they are still being negotiated with various networks, and your "worth" is just whichever deal you end up making.

Here's a report estimating the ten Pac-12 schools are worth $30MM.

Here's a report post-OU/UT exit estimating the Big 12 could lose half its media rights value, or $14MM a year, which would have reduced the latest payout to $28MM. And that $28MM includes media rights and everything else, meaning media rights alone are just a portion of that. Use your critical thinking to decide how that figure would be affected by the additions of BYU and the three AAC schools.

And here's a projection, factoring in the OU/UT move but not the USC/UCLA one, showing the Big 12 on slightly stronger footing than the Pac-12, which would have been made significantly stronger by the LA schools' move. On this board, you will hear way more about this one than the last link.

Nobody knows anything yet.

That 30M is based on taking what was said about Oregon and Washington being worth $60M as a pair. Then averaged at 30M per or 300M for 10 schools. That was an early estimate. It was then reported that Media offerings were Less than 250M for the Pac so less than 25M after USCLA.

The 40M+ number comes from the widely published study done that showed each conference value a few months ago, post OuT and Pre USCLA, from Navigate. Which showed the Big 12 valued in 2025 after OuT, and while USCLA was still figured in the Pac, was still in the mid 40s, and still ahead of the Pac. By your own admission you use this and show that the Big 12 is ahead even before USCLA departed.

The other thing you have to note is this study gives everyone a bump in 2026....why? Because they believe there is a change to the playoff and payout at that point. How they factored that at that point is going to be a huge change now too, especially if there is only 3 or 4 conferences viable, that playoff could look and pay much different than they expected. With the Big 12 getting less of a playoff bump as everyone else, which we now know that may have changed. Ultimately at the point this came out the bottom 3 were neck and neck. But now with USCLA you have to admit the Pac has to have fallen significantly behind.

Now the value of the Pac is considered to be considerably lower now that the 2 highest value programs are gone. So by all estimates the 25M number is close, and the 45M number appears to be close for us.

Yes early numbers were really bad for the Big 12 but again that shows the huge media bias, and then once we added and solidified with the best available teams things looked better. The Pac does not have near as good viewership numbers to fall back on as the rest of the Big 12 does either.

But you are right no one knows anything, but you can not say that the Pac in its current form is as valuable as the Big 12, It was not even as valuable before USCLA. So in no way do you take the entire thing in some form of a merger unless there is a major underlying reason, as it is certainly going to bring down the overall value of the conference. You only take the teams that bring equal or greater value, or have some other major reason.

This is why the Big 10 is not jumping at even Oregon and Washington. Because doing so would dilute the overall value and in tern bring less value to each member. Eventually that may change, or they may find they have another reason or a formula that works, but that is where we are at.

Anyone that says you add the low value, all, or G5 schools, or takes opinions from most media especially west coast biased media is not thinking things through clearly.

 

[cyIclSoneU]

That 30M is based on taking what was said about Oregon and Washington being worth $60M as a pair. Then averaged at 30M per or 300M for 10 schools. That was an early estimate. It was then reported that Media offerings were Less than 250M for the Pac so less than 25M after USCLA.

The 40M+ number comes from the widely published study done that showed each conference value a few months ago, post OuT and Pre USCLA, from Navigate. Which showed the Big 12 valued in 2025 after OuT, and while USCLA was still figured in the Pac, was still in the mid 40s, and still ahead of the Pac. By your own admission you use this and show that the Big 12 is ahead even before USCLA departed.

The other thing you have to note is this study gives everyone a bump in 2026....why? Because they believe there is a change to the playoff and payout at that point. How they factored that at that point is going to be a huge change now too, especially if there is only 3 or 4 conferences viable, that playoff could look and pay much different than they expected. With the Big 12 getting less of a playoff bump as everyone else, which we now know that may have changed. Ultimately at the point this came out the bottom 3 were neck and neck. But now with USCLA you have to admit the Pac has to have fallen significantly behind.

Now the value of the Pac is considered to be considerably lower now that the 2 highest value programs are gone. So by all estimates the 25M number is close, and the 45M number appears to be close for us.

Yes early numbers were really bad for the Big 12 but again that shows the huge media bias, and then once we added and solidified with the best available teams things looked better. The Pac does not have near as good viewership numbers to fall back on as the rest of the Big 12 does either.

But you are right no one knows anything, but you can not say that the Pac in its current form is as valuable as the Big 12, It was not even as valuable before USCLA. So in no way do you take the entire thing in some form of a merger unless there is a major underlying reason, as it is certainly going to bring down the overall value of the conference. You only take the teams that bring equal or greater value, or have some other major reason.

This is why the Big 10 is not jumping at even Oregon and Washington. Because doing so would dilute the overall value and in tern bring less value to each member. Eventually that may change, or they may find they have another reason or a formula that works, but that is where we are at.

Anyone that says you add the low value, all, or G5 schools, or takes opinions from most media especially west coast biased media is not thinking things through clearly.

View attachment 100770

Who said the bolded, other than the Navigate study that I posted and you also included (which did not say the Pac-12 number)? Was it that BYU guy in Alabama on Twitter?

There is no wide reporting about any of this, contrary to what you are saying. It’s all wild guesses if not just barely better than that.

 

[Cyforce]

What will the Big 12 need to do to bring about a Pac-12 merger?

The college sports calendar contains some very significant origination and expiration dates over the next few years. Jon Wilner of the Wilner Hotline mentioned a few of them: 2024: The Pac-12 begins a new media contract cycle 2025: The Big 12 begins a…

trojanswire.usatoday.com

I would add 2 out of 3 from Memphis, Boise State and San Diego St to get to 24 teams.

Also, there is this article in The Athletic:

How a Pac-12/Big 12 conference merger would play football

Here's how to organize and schedule a Big 12/Pac-12 merged conference. Looks pretty good!

theathletic.com

Focus west for now. Better schools from the ACC will likely come available the east.

 

[Clonefan94]

I genuinely feel bad for any team left out in the cold. What is happening to college football now is a travesty. That being said, for Iowa State to be on the inside, we need the Big 12 to be pro active. This may be the one chance we have to at least put one foot in the door. I know by rule, conferences aren’t supposed to recruit, but if we aren’t doing everything we can to get Washington, Oregon, Utah and the AZ schools to come to the Big 12,, we are doomed. Networks are hemorrhaging money trying to secure conferences, so they want to consolidate we need to lock teams up while we can or we are doomed. We have the leverage right now. We may not in 5 years.

 

[2speedy1]

Who said the bolded, other than the Navigate study that I posted and you also included (which did not say the Pac-12 number)? Was it that BYU guy in Alabama on Twitter?

There is no wide reporting about any of this, contrary to what you are saying. It’s all wild guesses if not just barely better than that.

I read several places about it, don't remember exactly now, but either way. Could have been mostly speculation. As much of all of this realignment stuff is.

If they were estimated to pay $34-40M with USCLA, as the Navigate study shows, (even though they paid less than $20M this year) I don't see how anyone can think they will not pay significantly less than that now.

Especially when the top 2 brands left, Oregon and Washington, in the conference are believed to be worth a combined $60M, which was according to Bob Thompson, former president of Fox Sports Networks.

So if the TOP 2 brands left in Wash and Oreg. are worth 30M each, how in the world are the rest worth an average of 30M? To keep that average at 30?

Is all this speculation... sure... but isn't that everything in regards to this. No one knows anything for the most part. We all just speculate.

 

[WhoISthis]

Who said the bolded, other than the Navigate study that I posted and you also included (which did not say the Pac-12 number)? Was it that BYU guy in Alabama on Twitter?

There is no wide reporting about any of this, contrary to what you are saying. It’s all wild guesses if not just barely better than that.

Nobody knows anything, especially the guy confidently stating the Big 12 is worth $40MM or more and the Pac-12 worth less than $25MM.

Lots of people will pretend that these are self-evident facts and that anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you. They will do this because it is good for Iowa State, and they prefer to think that the good outcome for Iowa State is guaranteed, simple as that. In reality, I doubt the highest-level decisionmakers at the schools themselves know these numbers because they are still being negotiated with various networks, and your "worth" is just whichever deal you end up making.

Here's a report estimating the ten Pac-12 schools are worth $30MM.

Here's a report post-OU/UT exit estimating the Big 12 could lose half its media rights value, or $14MM a year, which would have reduced the latest payout to $28MM. And that $28MM includes media rights and everything else, meaning media rights alone are just a portion of that. Use your critical thinking to decide how that figure would be affected by the additions of BYU and the three AAC schools.

And here's a projection, factoring in the OU/UT move but not the USC/UCLA one, showing the Big 12 on slightly stronger footing than the Pac-12, which would have been made significantly stronger by the LA schools' move. On this board, you will hear way more about this one than the last link.

Nobody knows anything yet.

If you want to go this route, the networks truly don’t know either. And their quant teams are rather limited

There are only so many people paid to generate these models and projections at the level both the networks and conferences would use, and hence they work with generally the same consultant groups.

This isn’t 20 years ago or 10 years ago. Realignment has been the foremost task of the B12 for 10+ years. the conference had a better idea then you’re implying imo, and it’s likely some of it has been leaked.

I think the Big 12 had a good idea what their valuations are, they don’t know what they’ll get until in the window. It’s not a liquid market. Now that the BIG stopped at 2 from PAC, which was unexpected, does this change strategy? Not necessarily for Big 12, but ESPN. Do they have an incentive to grossly overbid on PAC? Do they overpay to move top of PAC to ACC? Can they?

 

[Ace000087]

Man... Utah and K-State fans are getting pretty surly about us on twitter right now... what gives?

 

[2speedy1]

Man... Utah and K-State fans are getting pretty surly about us on twitter right now... what gives?

Link?

 

[HoopsTournament]

Link?

Exactly, don’t post something like that without a link.

 

[simply1]

That 30M is based on taking what was said about Oregon and Washington being worth $60M as a pair. Then averaged at 30M per or 300M for 10 schools. That was an early estimate. It was then reported that Media offerings were Less than 250M for the Pac so less than 25M after USCLA.

The 40M+ number comes from the widely published study done that showed each conference value a few months ago, post OuT and Pre USCLA, from Navigate. Which showed the Big 12 valued in 2025 after OuT, and while USCLA was still figured in the Pac, was still in the mid 40s, and still ahead of the Pac. By your own admission you use this and show that the Big 12 is ahead even before USCLA departed.

The other thing you have to note is this study gives everyone a bump in 2026....why? Because they believe there is a change to the playoff and payout at that point. How they factored that at that point is going to be a huge change now too, especially if there is only 3 or 4 conferences viable, that playoff could look and pay much different than they expected. With the Big 12 getting less of a playoff bump as everyone else, which we now know that may have changed. Ultimately at the point this came out the bottom 3 were neck and neck. But now with USCLA you have to admit the Pac has to have fallen significantly behind.

Now the value of the Pac is considered to be considerably lower now that the 2 highest value programs are gone. So by all estimates the 25M number is close, and the 45M number appears to be close for us.

Yes early numbers were really bad for the Big 12 but again that shows the huge media bias, and then once we added and solidified with the best available teams things looked better. The Pac does not have near as good viewership numbers to fall back on as the rest of the Big 12 does either.

But you are right no one knows anything, but you can not say that the Pac in its current form is as valuable as the Big 12, It was not even as valuable before USCLA. So in no way do you take the entire thing in some form of a merger unless there is a major underlying reason, as it is certainly going to bring down the overall value of the conference. You only take the teams that bring equal or greater value, or have some other major reason.

This is why the Big 10 is not jumping at even Oregon and Washington. Because doing so would dilute the overall value and in tern bring less value to each member. Eventually that may change, or they may find they have another reason or a formula that works, but that is where we are at.

Anyone that says you add the low value, all, or G5 schools, or takes opinions from most media especially west coast biased media is not thinking things through clearly.

View attachment 100770

You think Arizona adds value?