Oregon is AAU is research great brand, it must be pointed out oregon is only 150m research dollars in total money. USC and UCLA has research , AAU brings the major California market plus academic. Washington has better research numbers in dollars and brings Seattle WA. FSU AD has told sources that they are falling behind in money, and with further research to leave ACC is 120m now Clemson is also calling for a change. Now this is a big if those two schools leave the big 10 acts. UNC, Duke will also go big 10. I understand leaving ACC could be more complicated then 120m dollars, does Oregon and Washington even at half price does that move the media money for Big 10 to add them?
Big ten is about research dollars oregon at 150m in research is where value is low. Compared to Washington and Washington state. Calf and Stanford fit better in research terms. Oregon the only reason they are a big brand is Phil knight (Nike) something everyone is overlooking Clemson and FSU in Acc is unhappy and have come and said things must change with money in Acc. If fsu and Clemson pay 120m dollars to leave, oregon and Washington are out. The big ten would opt for Florida state and Clemson research dollars and AAU is what the big 10 wants. UNC, Duke would also be in the big 10. Before oregon or Washington
If it looks like the numbers aren't going to work, the Pac-12 should consider pre-emptively dropping football as a sponsored sport. The schools then could find their own football conferences but stay together for the other sports which would save a lot of money.
There's a lot of great thoughts, ideas and conjecture here, but no one really know what's in Kliavfoff's head right now and how the rest of the PAC is involved. Ima gonna pour a beer, and then another, and maybe another, and wait and see.
You guys have played monopoly, right? You know what happens in the end. That's why the government created regulatory bodies, to keep this sort of stupid sh*t from happening. I know that Texas and Oklahoma sort of kicked this storm off, but their move was not as destabilizing. The powers at be should prevent UCLA and USC from moving, period. The financial whims of two institutions should not be allowed to destabilize college athletics in an entire region. I know many of you will say that this is just the way things are now...but damned, sombody has to stand up and call this sh*t out.
One key of expansion that isn't getting much consideration it the desire of the Big 12 to lure the four corner schools (Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah) out of the Pac 12. Should that happen before the Big 10 does anything, then Oregon and Washington won't have much bargaining power left with the Big 10, they'd be selected by the conference, but would get no more than half of the revenue the other 16 teams get. As for Cal and Stanford, yeah, maybe the Big 10 would take them, but the Big 10 is also looking south at a couple of ACC teams (FSU, Miami, UNC, Clemson) to see what becomes of that mess.
I don't think those four corner schools are jumping until someone else jumps to the Big Ten. The Big 12 is strictly a fallback position for everyone in the Pac.
I question the validity of the claim that the Big Ten is ready to add four more PAC 12 schools. Until a new commissioner is hired, I can’t see the Big Ten making any major moves. Adding schools not only requires the agreement of the university presidents but also an accord with Fox, CBS and NBC. This involves considerable negotiations within the Big Ten before any move would be made to add more schools. There is no reason for the Big Ten to rush into this nor do I believe there is yet a consensus to do so. The rumors about further expansion are highly unlike to be based on factual information at this point in time. BTW, when Nebraska and later Rutgers and Maryland were added, none of these schools received full revenue shares during their initial years in the Big Ten, so there is a precedent for doing this in the future. Once the PAC 12 announces the new media deal, then if it is a poor deal, the Big Ten might be open to talking with Oregon, UW, Cal and Stanford should they call.
With those four going into the B1G, that would leave them with 20 teams in the conference. Do you think the B1G would be done expanding then? 24 teams would put them into four divisions of six, which would probably be ideal for scheduling, but honestly I'm not sure if that matters.
I would be beyond ecstatic to see Cal get into the Big Ten. At least I wouldn't be in limbo wondering if the last 20 years of my life screaming for Cal athletics have been in vain.
(Common sense would indicate that Scott's pipe dreams were just that on Day 1. Yeah, he sold the 12 Presidents a bill of goods, but that was easy. He just told them what they wanted to hear, just like parroting back the Prof on an essay final, and they swallowed it hook, line and sinker. The Presidents were the supposed adults in the room.)
He's been a disaster for years...but he's been gone for 2 years come May and apparently the Conference still has yet to bottom out because of his tenure. That's something.
$45M would be a wash. ~$9M over our current payout which would probably just cover the huge increase in travel & lodging expenses for our 16 sports. $50M is probably the minimum Cal would accept, but they shouldn't. The perception would be devastating - 16 'haves' and 2 or 4 'have nots'? Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Illinois all getting double what Cal & Stanford would get? That's a really bad look & assures that neither bay area school would ever be competitive in the BIG 20. If not offered close to an equal share, decline. If UW & UO go, and the 4 corners schools bail to the big12, join whatever conference, make it the PAC-2, go independent, whatever. Downgrade the program, sign a steaming deal, get out of the race.
Respectfully disagree. There is precedent for new members that aren't powerhouses joining for less than a full share and working up to it. I may not like it, but we're not a powerhouse (...YET! lol). I also don't know about "$45M would be a wash". Not getting anywhere near that with whatever Pac deal may materialize.
$9M would be more than enough to cover travel costs. In FY22, all of Cal Athletics spent $2.3M on travel expenses. You're telling me going to the midwest/potentially east coast a few times per year quadruples this? The math ain't mathing... After all, not every sport goes everywhere every year.
"Downgrade the program, sign a steaming deal, get out of the race."
Personally, I'd find this outcome much more devastating than some deal where Cal gets much more money than the alternative, even while still less than Ohio State and Michigan, for X number of years before "full member" status or whatever.
On the travel: folks need to remember that a scenario with Cal going to the Big Ten likely involves Oregon, Washington, and Stanford also joining and USC and UCLA already being there, which probably means we're in some kind of Western Division within the conference. With that setup, most of the road games will be the normal kinds of trips we're already used to. A handful more will have us going back east, but that's not a major hardship.
Yes, my point exactly. If maybe 25% of our sports schedules shifts to east-coast/midwest trips, no way does that translate to a quadrupling of travel costs. If those trips end up doubling the cost compared to what would have been in the old Pac-12, that's still only a 25% increase in spending, or ˜$0.5M. Financially speaking, it really is a no-brainer to join if given the invitation at any increase in revenue considering long term prospects.
What was told to me was preseason, but the remaining PAC12 schools (less Oregon which has a media market not worth much) seemed aligned in agreement that they would not subject their student athletes to the rigor of a BIG10 travel schedule. Like I said, that was from the preseason and a source next to the top, but is it still the case? I do not know. Ima gonna pour me a beer, then another, and maybe another, and wait and see. Worrying about something I can't control is a waste of my energy. I'd rather drink beer. ;-)
Washington and Oregon are headed to the Big 10. Way too much smoke for it to not happen.
When that happens, Utah, Colorado, Arizona and ASU will all be welcomed to the Big 12.
Washington State and Oregon State will have to accept the Mountain West.
Only question is does Stanford and Cal get the golden parachute to the Big 10 or are we left in the cold with the Mountain West (or worse).
Best case is we get a 50% share for the Big 10. And I do think that happens once they know how low they can go with their offer. Worst case is are too proud for Mountain West and try an independent deal with Stanford or drop a level to the rest of the IC schools.
The independent option is interesting. Had never considered that, though I don't know how we could pull that off without TV money. The Memorial debt alone dictates that Cal will never quite be able to get out of big time football even if we wanted to.
Question: How many teams would the Big 10 have to take before the name breaks? UCLA and USC would make 16; these four would make 20. I think the answer is - there is no limit due to the perception of equity simply in the name. But at some point it gets really ridiculous.
Oregon is AAU is research great brand, it must be pointed out oregon is only 150m research dollars in total money. USC and UCLA has research , AAU brings the major California market plus academic. Washington has better research numbers in dollars and brings Seattle WA. FSU AD has told sources that they are falling behind in money, and with further research to leave ACC is 120m now Clemson is also calling for a change. Now this is a big if those two schools leave the big 10 acts. UNC, Duke will also go big 10. I understand leaving ACC could be more complicated then 120m dollars, does Oregon and Washington even at half price does that move the media money for Big 10 to add them?
Big ten is about research dollars oregon at 150m in research is where value is low. Compared to Washington and Washington state. Calf and Stanford fit better in research terms. Oregon the only reason they are a big brand is Phil knight (Nike) something everyone is overlooking Clemson and FSU in Acc is unhappy and have come and said things must change with money in Acc. If fsu and Clemson pay 120m dollars to leave, oregon and Washington are out. The big ten would opt for Florida state and Clemson research dollars and AAU is what the big 10 wants. UNC, Duke would also be in the big 10. Before oregon or Washington
If it looks like the numbers aren't going to work, the Pac-12 should consider pre-emptively dropping football as a sponsored sport. The schools then could find their own football conferences but stay together for the other sports which would save a lot of money.
There's a lot of great thoughts, ideas and conjecture here, but no one really know what's in Kliavfoff's head right now and how the rest of the PAC is involved. Ima gonna pour a beer, and then another, and maybe another, and wait and see.
Is Big Ten here yet?
You guys have played monopoly, right? You know what happens in the end. That's why the government created regulatory bodies, to keep this sort of stupid sh*t from happening. I know that Texas and Oklahoma sort of kicked this storm off, but their move was not as destabilizing. The powers at be should prevent UCLA and USC from moving, period. The financial whims of two institutions should not be allowed to destabilize college athletics in an entire region. I know many of you will say that this is just the way things are now...but damned, sombody has to stand up and call this sh*t out.
One key of expansion that isn't getting much consideration it the desire of the Big 12 to lure the four corner schools (Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah) out of the Pac 12. Should that happen before the Big 10 does anything, then Oregon and Washington won't have much bargaining power left with the Big 10, they'd be selected by the conference, but would get no more than half of the revenue the other 16 teams get. As for Cal and Stanford, yeah, maybe the Big 10 would take them, but the Big 10 is also looking south at a couple of ACC teams (FSU, Miami, UNC, Clemson) to see what becomes of that mess.
I don't think those four corner schools are jumping until someone else jumps to the Big Ten. The Big 12 is strictly a fallback position for everyone in the Pac.
I question the validity of the claim that the Big Ten is ready to add four more PAC 12 schools. Until a new commissioner is hired, I can’t see the Big Ten making any major moves. Adding schools not only requires the agreement of the university presidents but also an accord with Fox, CBS and NBC. This involves considerable negotiations within the Big Ten before any move would be made to add more schools. There is no reason for the Big Ten to rush into this nor do I believe there is yet a consensus to do so. The rumors about further expansion are highly unlike to be based on factual information at this point in time. BTW, when Nebraska and later Rutgers and Maryland were added, none of these schools received full revenue shares during their initial years in the Big Ten, so there is a precedent for doing this in the future. Once the PAC 12 announces the new media deal, then if it is a poor deal, the Big Ten might be open to talking with Oregon, UW, Cal and Stanford should they call.
With those four going into the B1G, that would leave them with 20 teams in the conference. Do you think the B1G would be done expanding then? 24 teams would put them into four divisions of six, which would probably be ideal for scheduling, but honestly I'm not sure if that matters.
I would be beyond ecstatic to see Cal get into the Big Ten. At least I wouldn't be in limbo wondering if the last 20 years of my life screaming for Cal athletics have been in vain.
Excitement to join the B1G is Stockholm Syndrome. That conference can kiss my *ss. I watch the B1G when I need white noise for a nap.
Yikes. Really seeing now just how devastating the Larry Scott era was for the Conference.
Seriously, Jimmy? Just now?
(Common sense would indicate that Scott's pipe dreams were just that on Day 1. Yeah, he sold the 12 Presidents a bill of goods, but that was easy. He just told them what they wanted to hear, just like parroting back the Prof on an essay final, and they swallowed it hook, line and sinker. The Presidents were the supposed adults in the room.)
Yeah, I probably misspoke. ;-)
He's been a disaster for years...but he's been gone for 2 years come May and apparently the Conference still has yet to bottom out because of his tenure. That's something.
yeah, he has had long coat-tails, but on that, I blame the Presidents who paid him royally for such stupidity.
The Pac 12’s demise has been a real team effort.
$45M would be a wash. ~$9M over our current payout which would probably just cover the huge increase in travel & lodging expenses for our 16 sports. $50M is probably the minimum Cal would accept, but they shouldn't. The perception would be devastating - 16 'haves' and 2 or 4 'have nots'? Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Illinois all getting double what Cal & Stanford would get? That's a really bad look & assures that neither bay area school would ever be competitive in the BIG 20. If not offered close to an equal share, decline. If UW & UO go, and the 4 corners schools bail to the big12, join whatever conference, make it the PAC-2, go independent, whatever. Downgrade the program, sign a steaming deal, get out of the race.
Respectfully disagree. There is precedent for new members that aren't powerhouses joining for less than a full share and working up to it. I may not like it, but we're not a powerhouse (...YET! lol). I also don't know about "$45M would be a wash". Not getting anywhere near that with whatever Pac deal may materialize.
$9M would be more than enough to cover travel costs. In FY22, all of Cal Athletics spent $2.3M on travel expenses. You're telling me going to the midwest/potentially east coast a few times per year quadruples this? The math ain't mathing... After all, not every sport goes everywhere every year.
"Downgrade the program, sign a steaming deal, get out of the race."
Personally, I'd find this outcome much more devastating than some deal where Cal gets much more money than the alternative, even while still less than Ohio State and Michigan, for X number of years before "full member" status or whatever.
On the travel: folks need to remember that a scenario with Cal going to the Big Ten likely involves Oregon, Washington, and Stanford also joining and USC and UCLA already being there, which probably means we're in some kind of Western Division within the conference. With that setup, most of the road games will be the normal kinds of trips we're already used to. A handful more will have us going back east, but that's not a major hardship.
Yes, my point exactly. If maybe 25% of our sports schedules shifts to east-coast/midwest trips, no way does that translate to a quadrupling of travel costs. If those trips end up doubling the cost compared to what would have been in the old Pac-12, that's still only a 25% increase in spending, or ˜$0.5M. Financially speaking, it really is a no-brainer to join if given the invitation at any increase in revenue considering long term prospects.
agreed, plus travel cost doesn't scale linearly with distance. cheaper food and hotels in the midwest might actually make it a comparable cost.
Interesting write up Avi. But considering what I have heard from high level sources I will be surprised if this ever happens.
What do these sources think will be the outcome? The media deal will be enough to keep everyone together?
What was told to me was preseason, but the remaining PAC12 schools (less Oregon which has a media market not worth much) seemed aligned in agreement that they would not subject their student athletes to the rigor of a BIG10 travel schedule. Like I said, that was from the preseason and a source next to the top, but is it still the case? I do not know. Ima gonna pour me a beer, then another, and maybe another, and wait and see. Worrying about something I can't control is a waste of my energy. I'd rather drink beer. ;-)
Drink, drank, drunk last night. Drunk the night before
One keg a’ beer…
for the four of us...
Heh good approach. Thanks for your insights.
Washington and Oregon are headed to the Big 10. Way too much smoke for it to not happen.
When that happens, Utah, Colorado, Arizona and ASU will all be welcomed to the Big 12.
Washington State and Oregon State will have to accept the Mountain West.
Only question is does Stanford and Cal get the golden parachute to the Big 10 or are we left in the cold with the Mountain West (or worse).
Best case is we get a 50% share for the Big 10. And I do think that happens once they know how low they can go with their offer. Worst case is are too proud for Mountain West and try an independent deal with Stanford or drop a level to the rest of the IC schools.
The independent option is interesting. Had never considered that, though I don't know how we could pull that off without TV money. The Memorial debt alone dictates that Cal will never quite be able to get out of big time football even if we wanted to.
SEC scoops us up
I have zero confidence that the Pac 12 Exec’s know what they are doing. I’m worried that they will get out smarted and the Pac 12 will be blown
Up.
Tell the big 10 to take a hike. You will see what a mess UCLA and USC will become.
Question: How many teams would the Big 10 have to take before the name breaks? UCLA and USC would make 16; these four would make 20. I think the answer is - there is no limit due to the perception of equity simply in the name. But at some point it gets really ridiculous.
Big Ten(s)
They seemed to be shifting their branding to "B1G".. but the "1" wouldnt work anymore either if its 20. I'd suggest "The Twig".