What? If you think the Big 12 wouldn't take at least six Pac 12 schools without batting an eye (Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado, Washington, and Oregon), I think you maybe need to adjust your expectations.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
That would be ideal from a Big12 standpoint. But what are Pac12 teams getting?If I were Yormark, I'd be tempted to give the 6 Pac schools (4 corners + Oregon and Washington) an offer that's something like below to incentivize them to commit earlier rather than later.
*Maybe even let them know that after 60 days from now, we plan to put fourth an offer to San Diego State, so there may not be room for all 6 schools.
- Commit to joining the Big 12 in the next 30 days and:
- Be assured admission into the Big 12
- Receive full share of the Big 12's new GOR from the very beginning.
- Commit to joining the Big 12 in the next 60 days and:
- Be assured admission into the Big 12
- Receive partial share of the Big 12's new GOR for first 3 years and full share after that.
- Commit to joining the Big 12 after the next 60 days, but before 1/1/23 and:
- Be assured admission into the Big 12 only if fewer than 18 teams have already committed.
- Receive partial share of the Big 12's new GOR for first 6 years and full share after that.
We hear that the Big12 will get $40M plus year 1 in its next agreement, but for Pac12 teams to move they will need to be confident that is the case. They will also need to be confident that they won't have the opportunity to make $75M plus year 1 in the Big10 or SEC. Just like the Pac12 can't have serious discussions with media partners other than Fox & ESPN until later this week. The Big12 might not be able to have serious discussions for another year if Fox & ESPN have exclusive rights built into their current Big12 contract.
Also your assumption is that Media Consultants would tell the Big12 it can maximize its value by staying 100% intact and add x Pac12 schools. Hypothetically, the Media Consultants might tell the Big12 that CBS or NBC is interested and its biggest payout would be for 9 teams from the new Big12 and 6 teams from the Pac10 plus San Diego State. So what would the Big12 do if a network doesn't want K-State, Houston & Iowa State? Don't get bogged down in the 3 teams I hypothetically listed.
But the reality is just like fans on this board dismiss Oregon State, Washington State and Cal. There is a hierarchy among the 12 new Big12 schools from a media $ value standpoint AND by dropping the bottom x Big12 teams would maximize revenue for teams in a new Big12/Pac12 +.
You didnt read what I said, the PAC does have need, the problem is they dont have the togetherness right now to push forward. They dont seem to all be on the same page. They are trying to negotiate a media deal, some schools are looking to get out to the B1G and they arent fully looking at expansion. They need to but they are not all in on it at the same time.
We have no idea how long the USCLA or OUT negotiations took. possibly a year plus, we just heard about them in the final moments so they seemed to be extremely fast, and even then the OUT decision was sped up because of the leak they were not planning on moving forward yet when they did.
Jumping is a lengthy decision, when you dont know what your media deal is yet. They dont know what the open market value is. They dont know if CBS, NBC, Apple etc are going to offer them and what it might be. Then they dont know what we are going to have at that point. These things are not you come here or else and do it now type decisions.
Sure Yormark can convey risk that there are only so many spots etc, but he also doesnt want to be bluffing and be called on his bluff either. This is chess not checkers.
So what are you saying. They happen fast? Or that 8-12 weeks is within reason. If we are saying 8-12 weeks we have a while yet.
But some are saying if we didnt hear something today we are in trouble.
Im saying there are a lot of moving parts.
Pac is trying to get Media deals done, to get values, those teams want to know what those are first. They still are in a 30 day exclusive window with Fox and ESPN. They will want to see what happens on the OPEN Market. Yormark just started today officially. We have to talk to our partners as well to see what different values are for different teams.
I am not saying it is going to take years, or months apon months but the people that think these things take days are just wrong. Too much is at stake.
And things like the ACC GOR is a totally different subject that is legal issues and those do take years in some cases. Many times though because of the uncertainty with those types of things people just wont want to get into that situation. Which makes that GoR stronger because people are just adverse to challenging it because of the uncertainty of outcome. Settlement or not.
You alluded to 8-12 weeks after we found out about USC to be too fast for a follow-up move. It is not. it is also not really 8-12 weeks, but much more than that, given we don't know what ground work was already happening. I'd guess it is closer to a year than 4 weeks right now.
The more instability the PAC has, the more likely 8-12 weeks is a plausible timeline for more moves. The Big 12 was not together at first last summer, which is why we were reportedly "5 minutes away" from the Big 12 crumbling and some schools going to Pac 12.
Stop thinking one move at a time. No one is asking to bluff. I have no idea where you are getting a bluff part. There are real risks had by waiting.
When there are a lot of unknowns, risk averse stakeholders look to remove risk. The riskiest move it is waiting. That is the whole point of this- for Yormark to make that clear. One move at a time people like you may think waiting is the risk free move, but it is not.
The revenue difference between a Big 16 and PAC10 or Pac12 is unlikely to be materially negative in favor of PAC10. And a far better chance for Big 16 to make more. Even more so for a Big 18. That is known within reason. Whatever a provider may pay those 6 in a west coast based conference without So Cal, they will pay equal or more for the same 6 also in Big 12.
But the Big 16 or Big 18 offer is only as good as long as there is a PAC and a Big 12. If the Big 10 first takes PAC schools, the benefit of taking all 4 reduced. If there is no Big 12, well, it is a disaster for any PAC school that is left after the BIG expands. The 4 corners will never be able to eliminate risk like they can now.
uh no I didnt, I said no one is giving an ultimatum like that. And said it took 6-8 weeks to add the last 4 which were easier than adding P5s because it was an elevation from G5, and we had already discussed and vetted them a couple years prior.
I said it is not a fast process, but never gave any form of timeline.
Things could happen today, or not for 2 more months. Meaning these things take time and we have no idea what all has been worked out and what yet has to be. And in these types of negotiations you wont see a lot of you do this or else being said.
Stop being blind to the Big picture. I hate saying it this way, but there's NOTHING more important to the long term security of the Big 12 than the demise of the PAC.
You say the collapse of the PAC will either happen or it won't. It's hardly that simple.
Taking away the Pac's opportunity to expand all but seals their fate. If taking over the San Diego market is the "price" we must pay to add 4-6 P5 teams and establish ourselves as the P3 conference, it seems like a bargain to me.
If the I'm tired of arguing, though. Neither of us is going to convince the other. Have a good day.
Days? Do you have quote that said days?
I get you need a strawman because you missed the point of the discussion and then made a claim that was proven false just last summer.
I think this is just false and they would assume it's just false. That's why it doesn't work.
This is what you said in response to a post that had 30 to 60 MORE days, in other words 60-90 days from USC's announcement.
All you people that think this will or has to happen immediately really dont understand how things work. None of these decisions happen that fast. And if any of them involve legal matters they take a LOT longer."
So you either you immediately went with a strawman, can't do basic math, or didn't realize that 60-90s days is a plausible timeline for "how these things work". In part, because this likely didn't start on June 30th.
The Pac12 is dead regardless of taking SDSU. The big 12 already has a massive problem with perception and promoting another G5 team isnt going to help that. Its the same reason the Pac cant save its self by adding more teams, no one will come and promoting lower teams just makes your brand seem weak. The big12 is already taking a massive risk promoting 4 G5 teams, anything other then adding Pac or ACC schools isnt going to get he money needed to stay relevant.
Someone literally came in here and asked if we dont announce adding people by today is it a sign we are week.
We have had people thinking this should have happened already, some thought it would happen the day after USCLA, So yes DAYS.
It is not a strawman when I have been reading this thread since day one.
I also dont know what was proven false last summer. Tell me what was proven false, I think what you tried to say I already proved was A)not the same argument, and B) we still arent past that length of time as last summer.
So if you want to go by last summers timeline fine, we still have a couple weeks at least yet. But that was not your narrative now was it.
What is the difference in taking SDSU versus taking WAZZU or Oregon state?
You keep citing attendance ranking from last year. How many SDSU games were on ABC, Fox or CBS. Even ESPN?
Your sample size of 198k might have been 2 games on CBS Sports. As we have all seen in the viewership #'s, you could put Slippery Rock and Vanderbilt on ABC at 7pm Saturday night and it would draw 3M viewers.
I checked and the viewership #'s I found reported on 2 games for SDSU last year. A Friday 9pm game against CU (199k) and a Saturday 11pm game against Hawaii (224k)- both on FS1. As a comparison, the Iowa State v KU game at 7pm on FS1 drew 262k viewers.
Not saying SDSU is a viewership juggernaut, but that viewership #'s have to examined in context of: sample size, network, time slot and competing games.
My god man it was not about a certain amount of days, it was about being impatient. That it will happen when it happens or it won't. That these things take time. Period. Not the amount of time.
Why do you insist on putting a precise time on everything. That was not what I was getting at. But whatever. You just think that if it is not done by a certain time or that we should give them an deadline or ultimatum.
My point was, everyone have a little more patience.
They could believe they are BIG bound too, but you still present the logical arguments otherwise. That is not strong-arming.
You think the odds are zero that waiting means not all 4 have a Big 12 offer?
We have consultants working on the numbers and there is a reason why AZ is the most inclined to jump
How confident are you that there are not Big 12 schools that would prefer helping ESPN solve their ACC issue? 6 of R8 in ACC gets dissolution, gets the SEC OUT sooner, gives the ACC schools a look-in on their deal, and is rumored to appease several ACC schools with unequal revenue sharing getting the football schools close enough to P2.
If the TV Networks want to pay big $ for them, yes.
As fans we all have opinions on what schools are "worthy" of being in the Big12. But all that matters is how our media partner values a school. Houston suddenly became valuable to the Big12 because we had lost A&M and UT. Nothing changed with Houston.
Could be a media partner views SDSU as giving the Big12 visibility in So Cal (LA & SD).
Good god man
You are the one that said days. No one else. You also mistakenly ruled a time frame, not a specific amount of time, as too quickly.
AND you continue to miss the point- it is not about a certain amount of days- that was your deal- it is about passing on the risk of waiting. Don't be so pedantic, whether that is 30 more days or 60 or 90, who knows, but if you are going to be a simpleton, at least have your **** accurate.
Yormark will work to erase the false narrative that the 4 corners are takes whenever they want, risk free in waiting.
Houston was only valuable because the Big12 had to add schools and no P5 team was going to join what appeared to be a sinking ship. It is still a very risky move adding G5 schools with no history of success and adding a 5th wouldn't help the conferences perception and might even decrease media payouts. The reality is that we don't know what the new big12's media dollar amounts will be. Everyone on her including myself thinks they will be higher then what the pac was offered but we don't really know for sure how much higher.
For reference, I would guess these G5 schools had similar exposure. Added a few P5s for reference. Also note several of these did not have near the season that SDSU had or has had recently.
27.Iowa State — 1.219M
28.Cincinnati — 1.216M
34.Navy — 1.039M
44.Army — 804K
49.Boise State — 657K
55.Kansas — 540K
59.Washington State — 483K
63.UCF — 407K
65.Tulsa — 358K
66.Tulane — 356K
69.Oregon State — 321K
70.South Florida — 303K
71.East Carolina — 301K
72.Air Force — 255K
73.Appalachian State — 241K
74.Houston — 232K
75.Coastal Carolina — 223K
76.California — 222K
77.Syracuse — 219K
***78.San Diego State — 198K
79.Memphis — 193K
