I don’t see how the Pac12 survives this. We are in a self fulfilling, death spiral now.
The Pac12 needs a media deal that pays out each program in the $25-32 million range. It seems like they weren’t getting that number so they were holding out but then Colorado left and as more schools look to leave the less money networks will be willing to pay.
I don’t see how the Pac12 survives this. We are in a self fulfilling, death spiral now.
The Pac12 needs a media deal that pays out each program in the $25-32 million range. It seems like they weren’t getting that number so they were holding out but then Colorado left and as more schools look to leave the less money networks will be willing to pay.
Honestly I think the posturing is to wait and see if the B1G is willing to accelerate their expansion plans, especially with rumors of FSU breaking the ACC GoR. At this point, the PAC is not getting a competitive offer.
All USC had to do was tell us they were leaving so we could expand. I really don't understand why they chose to kill the conference on their way out.
UT/OU were the reason the Big-12 couldn't expand all those years. I am a life-long Big-8/12'er. I was THRILLED to hear UT/OU were leaving. It was NOT a coincidence, that BYU, Cincy, UCF, and Houston all came in right after that. People think Yormark is the sole reason the Big-12 is alive and kicking. He's Not. Make no mistake, he is Incredible. I Love what he is going, But, Bowlsby was a great commish. He was just handcuffed, completely, by UT & OU.
Appreciate the insight, but you are nothing but a parasite conference. Your bloggers have campaigned and attributed to the demise of our conference. I put a hex on you, all Big 12 fans, and especially that tape worm Yormack.
The latest I have seen said that numbers will be presented tomorrow with somewhere around 22-25 per school for 12 members(SDSU,Tulane, SMU). If that’s the case, they could get creative and give the original 9 ~26 million a year and give the expansion candidates a 50 % cut for now. Similar to what folks say about Cal in the Big 10. Would still be an increase for the newcomers. Idk.
$26 million would be a good deal for Cal. Someone last week suggested that we will be worth more than $30 million when Colorado bolted, but there's no way we would get that much in the current situation.
That could hold the line and the conference together in the short term. I don’t see anyone signing up for a long term contract without an easy out for the Big10.
Yeah with each departure the numbers get worse. Hard to blame CO or AZ too much though - the death blow was UCLA/USC taking off with the largest media market in the PAC.
Can you imagine trying to negotiate this TV deal for the PAC? It’s impossible. You lost LA so none of your historical figures mean anything, and there are constant rumors that your league won’t even exist anymore. I don’t know how they get anything meaningful inked. The longer this drags out, the less likely a deal is, the sooner the whole league collapses
And until something gets done, we will not be able to recruit good payers. We will occasionally find some hidden gems but they would transfer as soon as they become good.
Previously I thought Big 10 or bust, but now I'm willing to accept Big 12.
Man...this year is so important. Like a try out/audition. Half the articles only evaluate our recent records. All the success we have had with guys in the NFL (including two starting QBS) counts for nothing.
Cal has been 3-star U for decades now, with the occasional Jared Goff or Keenan Allen darkening our doorstep as the exception not the rule. Assuming the PAC stays together (my bet), the guys who we now have & have come in through the portal are right in line with our usual talent level. Doesn't mean we won't beat Auburn.
The best hope is leadership and we don’t have that.
We need our AD to get Stanford, UDub, and Oregon on the phone and negotiate a deal to join the B1G. Partial membership for an initial period followed by full membership. Even a 50% B1G share will be better than what the pac will get.
Unfortunately there is no evidence that our AD can cut a deal like that. Would require some impressive negotiating skills, which there is no track record of other than the Madsen hiring.
Honestly, I give Monty and Jay John more of the credit on Madsen. Knowlton brings in Tom Crean or Tim Miles if not for those two… I’ve never been more certain of anything in my life.
It's entirely rational. Our problem is that the B1G is content to wait it out a few years to expand further. Problem with that is that our athletics brand and on field fortunes could continue to erode in a declawed PAC whatever. We need to start winning games.
They would, although it's more likely they would pull in the four together. Taking just UW and OU is the pin that blows any PAC configuration apart, which would mean Cal and Stanford would need an immediate life raft. If they indeed would want to build a west coast cluster to anchor the USC/UCLA/UW/OU schools, it wouldn't seem to make a lot of sense to wait it out at that point IMO.
There are hot rumors of B1G expanding, by taking Oregon, Washington, FSU, & Clemson. Rumor is, this week.
Rumor. So, right now, just smoke. But... a Lot of smoke...
And, what that tells me, is that ACC MAY have a HUGE issue. Because, that would mean they found a way around the GoR. And, if that's true, then it gets REAL interesting, because if I remember correctly, the ACC modeled their GoR off the Big-12's GoR's.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. This COULD get really wild, really quickly.
Overall... This is Not good for the long toothless NCAA. The only ones that benefit are the "Have's".
The B1G isn't in the business of handing out life rafts. It's all about the benjamins, and in spite of the bay area being #6 tv market, only a tiny percentage of that market watches Cal & Stanford football. No economic upside for Fox, I mean the B1G to add them.
There is definitely upside depending on the size (or lack thereof) of the payout. If the Pac-12 blows up, the B1G have all the negotiating power they need to pull in the four schools at well below market, which seems where this is headed if the current nine teams can't hold.
Think out of the box. The Big Ten’s 100,000+ alumni in the Bay Area will watch and attend the games even if Cal and Stanford students and alumni won’t. They are the viewer market just as they are for NYC and DC. Maryland and Rutgers had semi empty stadiums until they joined the Big Ten. Fox knows this as does the Big Ten. Supporters of the Big 12 are the ones spreading the rumors and hoping for the PAC 10’ demise. The Big Ten wanted to wait until the next round of media negotiations before adding more teams.
Problem with the alumni in the Bay Area argument is that the Big 10 games are all already broadcast nationally or streaming services, so those people can already see the games. The local revenue from tickets is t what’s driving the dollars it’s the tv dollars.
I can assure you that Big 10 alumni go to games where their teams are the visitors. The price of tickets at Maryland and Rutgers are about half of what it costs at most Big Ten schools. I’m been to games in these stadiums where probably 75% of the seats are filled with the colors of the visiting teams.
I'm encouraged that Wilcox finally made some bold changes to his staff and is openly acknowledging that this team needs to start winning games this season. Whether that will work largely rests on what we can get out of the QB position. It's a little disheartening to hear that Mendoza may get the first stab at the job or maybe (more likely) a time share. I was hoping Sam would take the job and run with it (no pun intended). We also have a pretty difficult schedule, so even a good showing may only get us 7-6.
Mendoza getting the nod is a disaster. A time share is a disaster.
This schedule is a bear…we will be fortunate to win 5…not saying fire Wilcox, but NEXT year is the season we bust out. But the P12 is just too solid, especially at the QB position.
Mendoza a disaster? You've never seen him play. He has a geat arm and accurate. Jackson looks like he might be turnover prone. But both are good QB's. I am a retired college coach and know a little about how to judge talent.
We’ll see. Forgive my skepticm, Coach, but they brought in an ultra-athletic kid from the CFP runner-up, AND a kid with starting experience in the ACC, yet a 3* pocket passer with no elite traits or other major scholarship offers out of HS could get the nod? Wilcox has not earned the benefit of the doubt on O, so it’s a concern.
From what I saw of him last year in practice, Mendoza’s arm strength is average, and he lacks athleticism. If he’s accurate, that’s great…Davis Webb in Spav’s system was big and not much of a mover and was fine. But in today’s college football, pocket passer’s need to have elite traits to succeed - not sure Mendoza does. The OL is gonna have to protect much better. Will keep an open mind based on your tout, but I was really hoping the dual threat Sammy Jax would seize the job, because based on the speed of the DL, if you’re OL isn’t dominant, it really helps to have mobility at the QB position. Unfortunately, Sammy Jax’s turnover issues are real.
A Rodgers had no major scholarships offered. In fact, none. No elite traits either. Jujst JUCO exzperience from a rural JC. He did OK, didn't he. We'll see what happens.
I agree with you about our current QBs, but maybe your reference to Kline and Goff is instructive. I think had Tedford stayed, Kline may have indeed been the better choice (and with more playing time, he would have improved). But clearly Goff was the best option for Dykes/Franklin’s Bear Raid. In other words, I think a new coach knows best what personnel is best suited to his system, so you have to defer to them. (I also wonder if Sam may look to the coaches a bit like McIlwain 2.0 in terms of maybe being turnover prone? But that is pure speculation by me, based on nothing)
Listen to the interviews on the Golden Bearcast. Super impressed with both guys and Jackson seemed well aware of what he had to do (and not arrogant at all). Both super coachable guys..
Actually, it would make sense to play them both. It would reduce the chance of injury for Jackson and they have to game plan for both guys.
Yes, would love to see Jackson coached up and not revert to HS instincts where he could run away from everybody.
I do think it's rolling the dice (you need a confident starter), but I agree - we need 2 QBs with game time experience, maybe 2/3 - 1/3, a starter & a backup. Too likely the starter goes down at some point in the season, and you don't want that to translate to an automatic loss (see Cal @ Arizona 2021).
I don’t see how the Pac12 survives this. We are in a self fulfilling, death spiral now.
The Pac12 needs a media deal that pays out each program in the $25-32 million range. It seems like they weren’t getting that number so they were holding out but then Colorado left and as more schools look to leave the less money networks will be willing to pay.
Honestly I think the posturing is to wait and see if the B1G is willing to accelerate their expansion plans, especially with rumors of FSU breaking the ACC GoR. At this point, the PAC is not getting a competitive offer.
All USC had to do was tell us they were leaving so we could expand. I really don't understand why they chose to kill the conference on their way out.
UT/OU were the reason the Big-12 couldn't expand all those years. I am a life-long Big-8/12'er. I was THRILLED to hear UT/OU were leaving. It was NOT a coincidence, that BYU, Cincy, UCF, and Houston all came in right after that. People think Yormark is the sole reason the Big-12 is alive and kicking. He's Not. Make no mistake, he is Incredible. I Love what he is going, But, Bowlsby was a great commish. He was just handcuffed, completely, by UT & OU.
Appreciate the insight, but you are nothing but a parasite conference. Your bloggers have campaigned and attributed to the demise of our conference. I put a hex on you, all Big 12 fans, and especially that tape worm Yormack.
The latest I have seen said that numbers will be presented tomorrow with somewhere around 22-25 per school for 12 members(SDSU,Tulane, SMU). If that’s the case, they could get creative and give the original 9 ~26 million a year and give the expansion candidates a 50 % cut for now. Similar to what folks say about Cal in the Big 10. Would still be an increase for the newcomers. Idk.
$26 million would be a good deal for Cal. Someone last week suggested that we will be worth more than $30 million when Colorado bolted, but there's no way we would get that much in the current situation.
That could hold the line and the conference together in the short term. I don’t see anyone signing up for a long term contract without an easy out for the Big10.
Yeah with each departure the numbers get worse. Hard to blame CO or AZ too much though - the death blow was UCLA/USC taking off with the largest media market in the PAC.
Can you imagine trying to negotiate this TV deal for the PAC? It’s impossible. You lost LA so none of your historical figures mean anything, and there are constant rumors that your league won’t even exist anymore. I don’t know how they get anything meaningful inked. The longer this drags out, the less likely a deal is, the sooner the whole league collapses
And until something gets done, we will not be able to recruit good payers. We will occasionally find some hidden gems but they would transfer as soon as they become good.
Previously I thought Big 10 or bust, but now I'm willing to accept Big 12.
I'd take any arrangement that allows us to keep power 5 status and enough $ to fund the nonrevenue sports.
Man...this year is so important. Like a try out/audition. Half the articles only evaluate our recent records. All the success we have had with guys in the NFL (including two starting QBS) counts for nothing.
Cal has been 3-star U for decades now, with the occasional Jared Goff or Keenan Allen darkening our doorstep as the exception not the rule. Assuming the PAC stays together (my bet), the guys who we now have & have come in through the portal are right in line with our usual talent level. Doesn't mean we won't beat Auburn.
I am still hoping for a B1G invite. No, its not rational at all. But its better than thinking about the alternatives.
All of this, was triggered by, and is still in the hands of, B1G.
If B1G stands pat, PAC survives.
The best hope is leadership and we don’t have that.
We need our AD to get Stanford, UDub, and Oregon on the phone and negotiate a deal to join the B1G. Partial membership for an initial period followed by full membership. Even a 50% B1G share will be better than what the pac will get.
Unfortunately there is no evidence that our AD can cut a deal like that. Would require some impressive negotiating skills, which there is no track record of other than the Madsen hiring.
Honestly, I give Monty and Jay John more of the credit on Madsen. Knowlton brings in Tom Crean or Tim Miles if not for those two… I’ve never been more certain of anything in my life.
Knowlton is a disaster.
It's entirely rational. Our problem is that the B1G is content to wait it out a few years to expand further. Problem with that is that our athletics brand and on field fortunes could continue to erode in a declawed PAC whatever. We need to start winning games.
The B1G would probably take UW and Oregon first yeah? I dunno.
They would, although it's more likely they would pull in the four together. Taking just UW and OU is the pin that blows any PAC configuration apart, which would mean Cal and Stanford would need an immediate life raft. If they indeed would want to build a west coast cluster to anchor the USC/UCLA/UW/OU schools, it wouldn't seem to make a lot of sense to wait it out at that point IMO.
There are hot rumors of B1G expanding, by taking Oregon, Washington, FSU, & Clemson. Rumor is, this week.
Rumor. So, right now, just smoke. But... a Lot of smoke...
And, what that tells me, is that ACC MAY have a HUGE issue. Because, that would mean they found a way around the GoR. And, if that's true, then it gets REAL interesting, because if I remember correctly, the ACC modeled their GoR off the Big-12's GoR's.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. This COULD get really wild, really quickly.
Overall... This is Not good for the long toothless NCAA. The only ones that benefit are the "Have's".
The B1G isn't in the business of handing out life rafts. It's all about the benjamins, and in spite of the bay area being #6 tv market, only a tiny percentage of that market watches Cal & Stanford football. No economic upside for Fox, I mean the B1G to add them.
There is definitely upside depending on the size (or lack thereof) of the payout. If the Pac-12 blows up, the B1G have all the negotiating power they need to pull in the four schools at well below market, which seems where this is headed if the current nine teams can't hold.
The market for Cal is California, not just The Bay Area. Stanford is National (good brand but not necessarily eyes or butts in seats).
Think out of the box. The Big Ten’s 100,000+ alumni in the Bay Area will watch and attend the games even if Cal and Stanford students and alumni won’t. They are the viewer market just as they are for NYC and DC. Maryland and Rutgers had semi empty stadiums until they joined the Big Ten. Fox knows this as does the Big Ten. Supporters of the Big 12 are the ones spreading the rumors and hoping for the PAC 10’ demise. The Big Ten wanted to wait until the next round of media negotiations before adding more teams.
Problem with the alumni in the Bay Area argument is that the Big 10 games are all already broadcast nationally or streaming services, so those people can already see the games. The local revenue from tickets is t what’s driving the dollars it’s the tv dollars.
I can assure you that Big 10 alumni go to games where their teams are the visitors. The price of tickets at Maryland and Rutgers are about half of what it costs at most Big Ten schools. I’m been to games in these stadiums where probably 75% of the seats are filled with the colors of the visiting teams.
I have hope for basketball but I really don’t have any hope of Wilcox turning it around anytime soon.
We'll see about Wilcox after this season.
I'm encouraged that Wilcox finally made some bold changes to his staff and is openly acknowledging that this team needs to start winning games this season. Whether that will work largely rests on what we can get out of the QB position. It's a little disheartening to hear that Mendoza may get the first stab at the job or maybe (more likely) a time share. I was hoping Sam would take the job and run with it (no pun intended). We also have a pretty difficult schedule, so even a good showing may only get us 7-6.
Mendoza getting the nod is a disaster. A time share is a disaster.
This schedule is a bear…we will be fortunate to win 5…not saying fire Wilcox, but NEXT year is the season we bust out. But the P12 is just too solid, especially at the QB position.
Mendoza a disaster? You've never seen him play. He has a geat arm and accurate. Jackson looks like he might be turnover prone. But both are good QB's. I am a retired college coach and know a little about how to judge talent.
We’ll see. Forgive my skepticm, Coach, but they brought in an ultra-athletic kid from the CFP runner-up, AND a kid with starting experience in the ACC, yet a 3* pocket passer with no elite traits or other major scholarship offers out of HS could get the nod? Wilcox has not earned the benefit of the doubt on O, so it’s a concern.
From what I saw of him last year in practice, Mendoza’s arm strength is average, and he lacks athleticism. If he’s accurate, that’s great…Davis Webb in Spav’s system was big and not much of a mover and was fine. But in today’s college football, pocket passer’s need to have elite traits to succeed - not sure Mendoza does. The OL is gonna have to protect much better. Will keep an open mind based on your tout, but I was really hoping the dual threat Sammy Jax would seize the job, because based on the speed of the DL, if you’re OL isn’t dominant, it really helps to have mobility at the QB position. Unfortunately, Sammy Jax’s turnover issues are real.
A Rodgers had no major scholarships offered. In fact, none. No elite traits either. Jujst JUCO exzperience from a rural JC. He did OK, didn't he. We'll see what happens.
Well, sure…if Mendoza becomes an all-time Top 10 NFL QB, I’ll absolutely eat some crow.
I agree with you about our current QBs, but maybe your reference to Kline and Goff is instructive. I think had Tedford stayed, Kline may have indeed been the better choice (and with more playing time, he would have improved). But clearly Goff was the best option for Dykes/Franklin’s Bear Raid. In other words, I think a new coach knows best what personnel is best suited to his system, so you have to defer to them. (I also wonder if Sam may look to the coaches a bit like McIlwain 2.0 in terms of maybe being turnover prone? But that is pure speculation by me, based on nothing)
Watching his spring game play, it's a bit more than speculation.
Listen to the interviews on the Golden Bearcast. Super impressed with both guys and Jackson seemed well aware of what he had to do (and not arrogant at all). Both super coachable guys..
Actually, it would make sense to play them both. It would reduce the chance of injury for Jackson and they have to game plan for both guys.
Yes, would love to see Jackson coached up and not revert to HS instincts where he could run away from everybody.
I do think it's rolling the dice (you need a confident starter), but I agree - we need 2 QBs with game time experience, maybe 2/3 - 1/3, a starter & a backup. Too likely the starter goes down at some point in the season, and you don't want that to translate to an automatic loss (see Cal @ Arizona 2021).
Also, for context: I was disheartened when Goff got the QB job over Kline, so I'm clearly no QB sage.