PAC News

Red_Alert said:
Average Viewership

Oregon: 12th
USC: 14th
UCLA: 25th
Washington: 34th
California: 45th
Stanford: 47th

Winningest FBS Programs

USC: 10th
Washington: 18th
Oregon: 34th
California: 36th
Stanford: 41st
UCLA: 55th

These expansions are about acquiring bluebloods and teams with good viewership.

UCLA may be 55th in All Time Wins, but they'll bring another leg of the LA market as shown in viewership.

BTN will now be bundled into the California, Oregon, and Washington, cable, satellite, and streaming markets (if it's not already) however, FOX, NBC, and CBS, will get lots of eyeballs.

Basically Cal and Stanford don't bring any more value to the Big 10 that they haven't already acquired.

Stanford would possibly get an invite on a package deal if ND would agree to a partial 4 or 5 game Big 10 schedule.
Outside of that I think the Big 10 is done expanding unless the ACC somehow crashes and burns, or their GOR expires in 2036.
Click to expand...
Yes, but blueblood doesn't really mean shit. USC is the only traditional blue blood they're bringing in, and I'm guessing the conference was way more interested in the Southern California market and recruiting exposure. Washington brings another major west coast market. Oregon has national appeal for some reason. UCLA comes with USC and completely locks down the SC market.

Stanford and Cal don't bring much appeal. But they would round out the whole thing with owning every major west coast market. I guess it doesn't mean much when college football doesn't bring much views in the area, but it'd still be more California exposure, not for nothing.

But yes, I totally understand why there's no interest there.
 
Stanford likely to become an independent like Notre Dame.
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
I find it weird that Cal and Stanford (especially Stanford) aren't being talked about re Big 10. They have to land somewhere, they both (again, especially Stanford) have enough history where they have to land somewhere, and if academics are a concern for consideration that obviously wouldn't hold either back.

Maybe more of an issue of they just don't really care. But that seems weird. I guess neither are a big draw. But back to the academic aspect, they give a huge boost in that regard, and it seems to be a factor.

WSU and OSU seem like reasonable Big 12 candidates. Especially considering the Big 12 seems to be pretty open to taking what they can.
Click to expand...

Being in the B1G would be the preference, but like I said, I don't see Stanford begging for it.

Cal has a very apathetic attitude towards sports, even when they have been good.

Stanford is a little better.

I can see Cal joining whatever conference, though I think the Big West is the best fit.

Stanford will be a bit snobbier about which conference it will affiliate itself with. I think if it's not the B1G, they might just go independent.

Rice used to play in the Southwest Conference too, their focus is academics and they just kind of glommed on to whatever conference would take them since.
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
Yes, but blueblood doesn't really mean shit. USC is the only traditional blue blood they're bringing in, and I'm guessing the conference was way more interested in the Southern California market and recruiting exposure. Washington brings another major west coast market. Oregon has national appeal for some reason. UCLA comes with USC and completely locks down the SC market.

Stanford and Cal don't bring much appeal. But they would round out the whole thing with owning every major west coast market. I guess it doesn't mean much when college football doesn't bring much views in the area, but it'd still be more California exposure, not for nothing.

But yes, I totally understand why there's no interest there.
Click to expand...

You'd better believe blueblood means something.

You find it coincidental that all the bluebloods (other than ND) are now in the Big 10 or SEC? The Big 10 and SEC would open the checkbook for Notre Dame tomorrow for full share.

Are you that naive to think that Nebraska was taken into the Big 10 because of the state's huge tv viewing population?
Are you that naive to think that Oklahoma was taken into the SEC because of the state's huge tv viewing population?

Oregon has national appeal because they have a 72.8 winning percentage since 2000 and are #12 in average viewership.
 
It is time to move football to its own alliance and all other sports to more regional conferences. The mega conferences are getting too out of hand to keep sports that struggle financially viable. Football only leagues would solve most of that.
 
Wizardhawk said:
It is time to move football to its own alliance and all other sports to more regional conferences. The mega conferences are getting too out of hand to keep sports that struggle financially viable. Football only leagues would solve most of that.
Click to expand...

I think the problem with that is that basketball is part of the media deal.

But I don't know how much.

But I do agree with your idea and was thinking it myself. But ... too late now. Ship has sailed. If they had the idea in the beginning they could have kept the conferences and just realigned football.
 
Red_Alert said:
You'd better believe blueblood means something.

You find it coincidental that all the bluebloods (other than ND) are now in the Big 10 or SEC? The Big 10 and SEC would open the checkbook for Notre Dame tomorrow for full share.

Are you that naive to think that Nebraska was taken into the Big 10 because of the state's huge tv viewing population?
Are you that naive to think that Oklahoma was taken into the SEC because of the state's huge tv viewing population?

Oregon has national appeal because they have a 72.8 winning percentage since 2000 and are #12 in average viewership.
Click to expand...
Yeah, because Notre dame is a national brand. Nebraska is the only team that has failed upwards because of their blue blood status, and it’s because they did it at the right time. You think the Big 10 would be beating that door down right now if the deal didn’t happen when it did?
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
Yeah, because Notre dame is a national brand. Nebraska is the only team that has failed upwards because of their blue blood status, and it’s because they did it at the right time. You think the Big 10 would be beating that door down right now if the deal didn’t happen when it did?
Click to expand...

Sure do.

The reason is because no matter how bad Nebraska's been the last 6 years, they're still #16 in average viewership last season with a population of just 1.9 million.

Have a chip on your shoulder all you want but Washington is #34 in average viewership with a population of 7.5 million.
Washington was brought in thanks to Oregon being #12 in viewership. Neither gets a sniff if Oregon's not #12 with a 72.8% winning record since 2000.

Oregon has better viewership than USC, but USC was brought in and given full share because they're a blueblood and in a large tv market. UCLA doesn't get in without USC.
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
Yes, but blueblood doesn't really mean shit. USC is the only traditional blue blood they're bringing in, and I'm guessing the conference was way more interested in the Southern California market and recruiting exposure. Washington brings another major west coast market. Oregon has national appeal for some reason. UCLA comes with USC and completely locks down the SC market.

Stanford and Cal don't bring much appeal. But they would round out the whole thing with owning every major west coast market. I guess it doesn't mean much when college football doesn't bring much views in the area, but it'd still be more California exposure, not for nothing.

But yes, I totally understand why there's no interest there.
Click to expand...

jontaejones said:
Being in the B1G would be the preference, but like I said, I don't see Stanford begging for it.

Cal has a very apathetic attitude towards sports, even when they have been good.

Stanford is a little better.

I can see Cal joining whatever conference, though I think the Big West is the best fit.

Stanford will be a bit snobbier about which conference it will affiliate itself with. I think if it's not the B1G, they might just go independent.

Rice used to play in the Southwest Conference too, their focus is academics and they just kind of glommed on to whatever conference would take them since.
Click to expand...
From what I’m reading is Cal’s AD is In extremely bad financial state and support for their teams is at a very low level. I don’t think any of the bigger conferences want to deal with that and it doesn’t appear they can financially make it in a G5. They may have to go independent and just start cutting sports.
 
Wizardhawk said:
It is time to move football to its own alliance and all other sports to more regional conferences. The mega conferences are getting too out of hand to keep sports that struggle financially viable. Football only leagues would solve most of that.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure that would be close to suicide in recruiting as far as basketball, baseball and many of the other sports. Recruits are going to want that big time conference schedule and tournament because that’s when most people tune in.
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
Yeah, because Notre dame is a national brand. Nebraska is the only team that has failed upwards because of their blue blood status, and it’s because they did it at the right time. You think the Big 10 would be beating that door down right now if the deal didn’t happen when it did?
Click to expand...
Ha, agreed. Nebraska certainly oversold their program to the B1G. But congrats to them, they got in at the right time so they are good. If it was today, they would be on the fence in getting in on this movement.
 
Red_Alert said:
Sure do.

The reason is because no matter how bad Nebraska's been the last 6 years, they're still #16 in average viewership last season with a population of just 1.9 million.

Have a chip on your shoulder all you want but Washington is #34 in average viewership with a population of 7.5 million.
Washington was brought in thanks to Oregon being #12 in viewership. Neither gets a sniff if Oregon's not #12 with a 72.8% winning record since 2000.

Oregon has better viewership than USC, but USC was brought in and given full share because they're a blueblood and in a large tv market. UCLA doesn't get in without USC.
Click to expand...
unimpressed michael keaton GIF
 
rumors out the PAC 4 are looking to salvage the conference with some MWC and AAC schools. if they do they should go back to divisions.

Boise State
Cal
Fresno State
Oregon State
San Diego State
Stanford
Washington State

Memphis
Nevada
Colorado State
SMU
Tulane
UTSA
Wyoming
 
OlyDuck said:
rumors out the PAC 4 are looking to salvage the conference with some MWC and AAC schools. if they do they should go back to divisions.

Boise State
Cal
Fresno State
Oregon State
San Diego State
Stanford
Washington State

Memphis
Nevada
Colorado State
SMU
Tulane
UTSA
Wyoming
Click to expand...
Those conferences would have to fold first or the PAC would get smoked with a tampering lawsuit. If they tried to leave before the conference folded they would have to buy themselves out and that new league won’t even get a 20mm per school contract and the MWC buyout is 30mm.

PACs timing on this is just horrible and there really isn’t a way to salvage it. Plus CAL‘s Athletic department is practically bankrupt per reports. Zero shot of pulling that off.
 
Wild Turkey said:
From what I’m reading is Cal’s AD is In extremely bad financial state and support for their teams is at a very low level. I don’t think any of the bigger conferences want to deal with that and it doesn’t appear they can financially make it in a G5. They may have to go independent and just start cutting sports.
Click to expand...

Support for Cal sports has always been mediocre. That said, theyre still the flagship California university, and sports will remain alive.

Worst case scenario is FCS.
 
jontaejones said:
Support for Cal sports has always been mediocre. That said, theyre still the flagship California university, and sports will remain alive.

Worst case scenario is FCS.
Click to expand...
They’re almost bankrupt and will be bringing in half what they used to. They will be living off UCLA’s piece of the B1G they had to forfeited but when that’s done I wouldn’t bet on anything.
 
Wild Turkey said:
Those conferences would have to fold first or the PAC would get smoked with a tampering lawsuit. If they tried to leave before the conference folded they would have to buy themselves out and that new league won’t even get a 20mm per school contract and the MWC buyout is 30mm.

PACs timing on this is just horrible and there really isn’t a way to salvage it. Plus CAL‘s Athletic department is practically bankrupt per reports. Zero shot of pulling that off.
Click to expand...
Depends on how they do it. Adding aac first because their buyouts are less.wait for mwc buyouts to reduce to 17 for the 25 season. If apple is still looking for content could still get close to 20. Mwc pays 4mil. Aac around 7. Close to 20mil is still more for all the g5 movers. Pac4 less
 
Wild Turkey said:
They’re almost bankrupt and will be bringing in half what they used to. They will be living off UCLA’s piece of the B1G they had to forfeited but when that’s done I wouldn’t bet on anything.
Click to expand...
Cal has more going on than men's football.

resize (1).jpeg
 
OlyDuck said:
rumors out the PAC 4 are looking to salvage the conference with some MWC and AAC schools. if they do they should go back to divisions.

Boise State
Cal
Fresno State
Oregon State
San Diego State
Stanford
Washington State

Memphis
Nevada
Colorado State
SMU
Tulane
UTSA
Wyoming
Click to expand...
That's a horrendous conference.

Worse than any iteration of Conference USA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top