Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Today would be a good day for the PAC to release their TV deal. Not only a Friday, but the nation is a bit distracted with other news at the moment.
WTF is this? If I comment on a thread here I'm instantly a troll? Wow.
Utah is the only surprise on there for me. GT has a huge incremental TV market which still matters to the BTN. Cal is geographic partner for the other west coast adds, great academics, big TV market, and would help salve the UCLA wound. I suppose Utah would be same-ish as Cal -- a smaller TV market but its incremental if you get Stanford first.
But you vet 10 to choose 4, 6, or MAYBE 8 at the most.
Didn’t say you were a troll, just the post was trolling. The Oregon state stuff gets mentioned why they aren’t even an option every so many pages. It’s an obvious reason why they would suck down the conference payouts if we took them. We would be doing the PAC a favor. Unless you signed up yesterday or you didn’t any other posts, or hadn’t seen their viewership numbers would be the only way you could seriously ask that question.
They may be second fiddle in their broader market (Portland and Seattle), but so are we. So is KSU. So is OSU. I'm sensing a theme here. My point being that even if a school is "second fiddle" in a media market, that doesn't mean having a conference member there doesn't still bring in that media market, at least to a degree. How many KSU grads are there in the KC metro? As many as Oregon St grads in the Portland metro?
I don't spend a lot of time on bulletin boards because I'm very busy and I don't know that I have anything particularly helpful to add to discussions anyway. But I felt this topic was really interesting to me and as a long-time ISU guy, I totally identify with the shaft those folks are getting at OSU and WSU.
They draw TV ratings similar to MWC teams. Nobody cares about those two teams in their own states. Culture wise they fit, except they are probably $5MM type media pullers.
I think that's entirely plausible.
IMO, there's three factions in play:
- The PAC conference as an entity separate from it's members, OSU, WSU, probably Cal and Stanford
- WA, OR, maybe Stanford, and Utah (but only in their delusions, could be fanbase only)
- CO, AZ, ASU, and Utah (in reality)
The second group is still hoping for that B10 invite. When (if) they sign the GOR as part of a new deal, that hope goes away for however long the deal runs. They'd all probably wait as long as possible to sign a new PAC deal just to keep hope alive.
The third group would all probably prefer to stay in the PAC, all things being equal, even knowing WA and OR might bail after the next deal. They'd all probably take less money to stay in the PAC, but the question is how much less? $5M? $10M? At the same time, they have options (B12), but they can't wait forever. There's a date when it's too late to make a move for 2024, and they know that. I think it's June 30th or thereabouts. If the PAC doesn't have a deal, do they walk away without knowing? I think they'd have a very solid understanding of exactly what the B12 is offering.
Yes, now you get it. ISU and KSU would not be the choice of the B1G. That is why Oregon State will never be the choice of the Big 12. You answered your own question.
The point isn’t to grab teams that are also, to use your term “second fiddle” the point is to grab the best possible teams to lock up the Big12 as the third best conference money wise. Why grab a second fiddle team if you can grab Colorado or Arizona/ASU? Or even better if you can grab a Washington/Oregon. Teams you add have to bring in money, OSU and WSU will cost money to bring in unless they agree to an insane discount but at some point when they get a full share that is going to be a problem.
The list shows why ASU fans are smoking crack whether it’s real or not. They might be in mix if big ten adds a full ten teams…maybe.
I think AZ and CU are just more realistic about things.
Isu, KSU, and OSU aren’t being added to the Big12, they’ve been in it.
Agree except I think AZ and CU actively want to leave for B12 already. I know guy who is somewhat of AZ insider and he’s been hearing pro big 12 since last fall.
The real question is would you rather have WSU and OSU, or UH and UCF.
Yeah, note it said they Vetted them as "possible" additions. Not that any of those actually passed the test.
None really are a surprise to me, as I think we have seen speculations to many of these, and I believe everyone on this list is now AAU, it would not surprise me if there are others that have been "vetted" as well.
I think it is great that Utah is listed among five of the remaining Pac schools. It will further inflate their heads and keep disharmony sown among the remaining Pac schools. Now the majority of schools (UA and CU included) will never agree to a GOR that is more than five years.
UH and UCF.
Not that it matters, because it’s just a different situation. The Big12 had to expand. The PAC declined to merge. We were down to 8 members and being linked to the AAC. And in hindsight it’s a good thing we did, because BYU, Houston, and Cincinnati would have been PAC candidates after they found out USC/UCLA were leaving.
