PAC News

Wild Turkey said:
I'm not the one that is delusional and thinks the B1G is falling behind and the answer is to add Oregon spearheading a national expansion of the conference.

Talk about delusions of grandeur.
Click to expand...

The B1G isn't falling behind because they are a national conference. That was the point dipshit.
 
duckboy33 said:
No more crazy than having USC and Rutgers in the same conference and that's already happened.

The Big Ten really had no choice. The Big Ten as midwest conference falls further and further behind the SEC. The Big Ten as a national conference continues to thrive.
Click to expand...

duckboy33 said:
The B1G isn't falling behind because they are a national conference. That was the point dipshit.
Click to expand...

So we are clear: You are saying that before the addition of USC (who hasn't taken a snap in the league), the B1G was a Midwest conference that was falling behind the SEC but not that they have added UCLA and USC they are thriving?

Basically Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and the rest wouldn't be able to cut it without adding the PAC teams per your theory.
 
Wild Turkey said:
That 20mm number was being floated before the meeting yesterday and since then no one has numbers just an idea the deal was less than the Big 12 with subscription incentives that could take them over that amount.
Click to expand...
Maybe in the future sports league TV deals will be based on 'scripts and incentives, but with all the other leagues getting guaranteed money right now, this deal is pretty crappy.
 
Hu War Yu said:
Maybe in the future sports league TV deals will be based on 'scripts and incentives, but with all the other leagues getting guaranteed money right now, this deal is pretty crappy.
Click to expand...
When you factor in that it would be complete death for recruiting it’s fatal.

Look everyone is focused on Arizona right now but Oregon and Washington aren’t going to sign up for that deal either. It’s dead in the water so all we are doing at this point is letting a process work itself out where presidents can justify killing a conference in the kindest way possible.

Oregon and Washington can get a Big 12 deal at any point they just need to sign the GOR.

Arizona seems in great shape as well.

Who needs to be concerned is ASU and Utah because if they mess around and let’s say Arizona, Oregon and Washington make the move before they do the Big 12 might be content with what they got.

The smart schools would be making a move now and securing their position.
 
Wild Turkey said:
So we are clear: You are saying that before the addition of USC (who hasn't taken a snap in the league), the B1G was a Midwest conference that was falling behind the SEC but not that they have added UCLA and USC they are thriving?

Basically Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and the rest wouldn't be able to cut it without adding the PAC teams per your theory.
Click to expand...

Most of the Big Ten's moves have been in reaction to the SEC. This is no accident, the Big Ten had to do something to keep up with the SEC's increased value after each expansion. The Big Ten understands Notre Dame is the only midwest brand that would help them do that but Notre Dame has had no desire to join the Big Ten. The Big Ten did not want to live in a world where the SEC made significantly more money than them. Outside of creating a national conference, how exactly would the Big Ten keep up?

In retrospect, the Big Ten committed to becoming a national conference when they added Maryland and Rutgers. They obviously didn't add those teams for the football brands or because they were a good geographic fit. It was about creating a national footprint. Having Penn State, Maryland and Rutgers gave the Big Ten access to the huge Eastern markets. The NE corridor (DC-Baltimore-Philly-NJ/NYC) is still an extremely important region to control. After UT/OU went to the SEC, the Big Ten knew it needed to add value. They decided to acquire the 2nd largest media market in the US and a blue blood program. Then they've waited for the PAC to die without their top market and will likely go back for OR/WA to control the entire west coast. Maybe not, maybe LA is enough for them. I think we'll find that out soon.

But the prize has always been the south east markets. That's where people are moving, economies are growing, where the best recruiting is, and where the most passion for college football is found. However, ESPN now controls the SEC/ACC. That's effectively shut the Big Ten out of the most prized region. But there's a lot of unhappy campers in the ACC right now. I'm interesting to see how this part of the story plays out because it's more interesting.


TLDR version: Of course Penn State, Michigan and Ohio State "could cut it" without USC and UCLA. That's not what this is about. It's about how to keep up with the SEC long term.
 
Wild Turkey said:
When you factor in that it would be complete death for recruiting it’s fatal.

Look everyone is focused on Arizona right now but Oregon and Washington aren’t going to sign up for that deal either. It’s dead in the water so all we are doing at this point is letting a process work itself out where presidents can justify killing a conference in the kindest way possible.

Oregon and Washington can get a Big 12 deal at any point they just need to sign the GOR.

Arizona seems in great shape as well.

Who needs to be concerned is ASU and Utah because if they mess around and let’s say Arizona, Oregon and Washington make the move before they do the Big 12 might be content with what they got.

The smart schools would be making a move now and securing their position.
Click to expand...
I get the feeling the Big 12 "isn't god enough" for Oregon and Washington.

Would be ironic for schools like Cal and Stanford to be left out in the cold, when they were adamant that they never wanted to be in a conference with a religious school like Baylor all those years ago
 
Hu War Yu said:
Would be ironic for schools like Cal and Stanford to be left out in the cold, when they were adamant that they never wanted to be in a conference with a religious school like Baylor all those years ago
Click to expand...
Excited Celebration GIF
 
Hu War Yu said:
I get the feeling the Big 12 "isn't god enough" for Oregon and Washington.

Would be ironic for schools like Cal and Stanford to be left out in the cold, when they were adamant that they never wanted to be in a conference with a religious school like Baylor all those years ago
Click to expand...

Apparently the B1G is exploring options for 18 (adding Oregon and Washington) and 20 (adding Stanford and Cal).

Anyone's guess how it all plays out, but my best guess would be going ahead and moving to a full 20. Washington St and Oregon St seem to be boned.
 
duckboy33 said:
Most of the Big Ten's moves have been in reaction to the SEC. This is no accident, the Big Ten had to do something to keep up with the SEC's increased value after each expansion. The Big Ten understands Notre Dame is the only midwest brand that would help them do that but Notre Dame has had no desire to join the Big Ten. The Big Ten did not want to live in a world where the SEC made significantly more money than them. Outside of creating a national conference, how exactly would the Big Ten keep up?

In retrospect, the Big Ten committed to becoming a national conference when they added Maryland and Rutgers. They obviously didn't add those teams for the football brands or because they were a good geographic fit. It was about creating a national footprint. Having Penn State, Maryland and Rutgers gave the Big Ten access to the huge Eastern markets. The NE corridor (DC-Baltimore-Philly-NJ/NYC) is still an extremely important region to control. After UT/OU went to the SEC, the Big Ten knew it needed to add value. They decided to acquire the 2nd largest media market in the US and a blue blood program. Then they've waited for the PAC to die without their top market and will likely go back for OR/WA to control the entire west coast. Maybe not, maybe LA is enough for them. I think we'll find that out soon.

But the prize has always been the south east markets. That's where people are moving, economies are growing, where the best recruiting is, and where the most passion for college football is found. However, ESPN now controls the SEC/ACC. That's effectively shut the Big Ten out of the most prized region. But there's a lot of unhappy campers in the ACC right now. I'm interesting to see how this part of the story plays out because it's more interesting.


TLDR version: Of course Penn State, Michigan and Ohio State "could cut it" without USC and UCLA. That's not what this is about. It's about how to keep up with the SEC long term.
Click to expand...
So your argument is that unless the B1G makes these expansion moves the SEC would continue to separate itself and leave the B1G in the dust? Their only shot at staying relevant is to add teams across the nation to improve the brand.
 
Wild Turkey said:
So your argument is that unless the B1G makes these expansion moves the SEC would continue to separate itself and leave the B1G in the dust? Their only shot at staying relevant is to add teams across the nation to improve the brand.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't use the terminology "staying relevant". The Big Ten is certainly a viable conference without expanding, no doubt about that. But yes, if they want to keep up with the SEC long term, they needed a profile outside of the midwest.
 
Hu War Yu said:
I get the feeling the Big 12 "isn't god enough" for Oregon and Washington.

Would be ironic for schools like Cal and Stanford to be left out in the cold, when they were adamant that they never wanted to be in a conference with a religious school like Baylor all those years ago
Click to expand...
The Big 12 might not be good enough but the B1G might not want to add them at this time either. If they got a definitive no then pride be damned at that point.

I do think their odds of getting a reduced revenue invite to the B1G is decent because the league has created a scheduling nightmare for themselves and might need the additional teams. The good side is that they will make more than they did in the Big 12 but the bad side is they will be making less than USC and UCLA plus with the additional travel costs might net about the same as the Big 12 and be 2nd class citizens to Rutgers, Maryland, Illinois, Northwestern and Minnesota.
 
duckboy33 said:
I wouldn't use the terminology "staying relevant". The Big Ten is certainly a viable conference without expanding, no doubt about that. But yes, if they want to keep up with the SEC long term, they needed a profile outside of the midwest.
Click to expand...
or they "won't stay relevant"is definitely implied in what you write.
 
Wild Turkey said:
or they "won't stay relevant"is definitely implied in what you write.
Click to expand...

I didn't use that terminology. They could be #2 without doing any of this. I believe that's relevant. But if they stuck with what they had, would they fall behind the SEC? Yes
 
Tharvot said:
Apparently the B1G is exploring options for 18 (adding Oregon and Washington) and 20 (adding Stanford and Cal).

Anyone's guess how it all plays out, but my best guess would be going ahead and moving to a full 20. Washington St and Oregon St seem to be boned.
Click to expand...
I hope they add Oregon, Washington, Cal, Stanford, Clemson and FSU.

My honest opinion is that will make the conference so dysfunctional and a logistical nightmare it will only by default help the SEC. Recruits won't even know why they will get to play during their career or how many times.
 
Wild Turkey said:
or they "won't stay relevant"is definitely implied in what you write.
Click to expand...

I mean that has been the entire B1G expansion driving force. Sure they are particular about school standards, but they are looking at high population areas (with the exception of Nebraska but that was the exception to the rule due to a large national following).

Logistically, it's silly to have LA and New Jersey in the same conference, but frankly it was already silly with Lincoln, NE and NJ in the same conf. Adding more west coast presence and stretching all the way up through PNW actually makes it logistically a little more reasonable. How they go about scheduling and setting up divisions/pods might be interesting though.
 
duckboy33 said:
USC: Add any of the Big 12 schools and we're leaving.

PAC: Ok, we won't add anyone.

USC: We're leaving anyways

I hate to say it but USC played the conference and left everyone else in a really bad spot.
Click to expand...
Wait a damn minute. It is all USC's fault? All this time I thought everything was Texas's fault.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top