PAC News

[Wild Turkey]

Big 12 Commissioner Dumps Cold Water On Stanford And Cal

It sounds like Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark has no interest in adding Cal and Stanford. Will the conference expand further?

www.outkick.com

Brett Yormark's statement when asked about Cal and Stanford and the Big 12 is passing on adding them.

"Right now we’re done. We had a vision. We had a strategy and effectively we’ve been able to execute it. Initially, I wasn’t sure if we’d go to 14 or 16. I think 16 was kind of a dream scenario, candidly. So from our perspective, our focus now is to integrate the four incoming schools as quickly as we can. Get them comfortable. We feel really good about our future and what our membership composition looks like when you look at it in terms of where we were and where we are and where we’re going."

B1G is out
Big 12 is out
ACC is out

By NCAA rule you have to have at least 6 teams to be considered a conference so the PAC 4 teams have these options:
- Add teams quickly by 2024
- Merge with another conference
- Go independent
- Individually join other conferences

Honestly, I have no idea what is going to happen as none of those choices are great and pretty much all of them will bankrupt their programs or they will have to scale back considerably.

 

[Thiefery]

yesterday afternoon..on XM 84.. they had Brock Huard or something like that (works for FOX)..

man he was pissed.. he put all the blame on Stanford and Cal.. He said those two schools always looked down upon athletics and felt they never needed them. They were the reason why the conference fell apart.. they fought on everything when it came to expansion with schools who wanted to join. He was laughing on how Stanford turned down UT back in the early 90s and how Cal turned down UT and ou in 2011.

He feels bad for Oregon st (who have made a huge commitment to upgrading their stadium and facilities) and Wazzu.. Says those places always cared and now they seem to be at the mercy of the MWC

 

[Wild Turkey]

yesterday afternoon..on XM 84.. they had Brock Huard or something like that (works for FOX)..

man he was pissed.. he put all the blame on Stanford and Cal.. He said those two schools always looked down upon athletics and felt they never needed them. They were the reason why the conference fell apart.. they fought on everything when it came to expansion with schools who wanted to join. He was laughing on how Stanford turned down UT back in the early 90s and how Cal turned down UT and ou in 2011.

He feels bad for Oregon st (who have made a huge commitment to upgrading their stadium and facilities) and Wazzu.. Says those places always cared and now they seem to be at the mercy of the MWC

Right now from what I see the Mountain West distributes about 4mm a year plus there are bonuses like how many times you play on TV, Bowl money you get to keep and NCAABB Tournament but I think the most anyone makes is around 10mm. Oregon State and Washington State are going to have to cut back substantially and I imagine any construction projects that haven't started are going to come to halt and be canceled. Coaches that can get other jobs are going to be leaving.

 

[trojanfan12]

yesterday afternoon..on XM 84.. they had Brock Huard or something like that (works for FOX)..

man he was pissed.. he put all the blame on Stanford and Cal.. He said those two schools always looked down upon athletics and felt they never needed them. They were the reason why the conference fell apart.. they fought on everything when it came to expansion with schools who wanted to join. He was laughing on how Stanford turned down UT back in the early 90s and how Cal turned down UT and ou in 2011.

He feels bad for Oregon st (who have made a huge commitment to upgrading their stadium and facilities) and Wazzu.. Says those places always cared and now they seem to be at the mercy of the MWC

Yes and no on Stanford and Cal.

Yes, they don't really care about sports and, while they were somewhat resistant to expansion, it was mostly about which schools they would approve of. For example, they were against adding BYU because of the religion aspect. I believe they also opposed Boise when Boise was a hot commodity because of academics.

As for UT and Oklahoma, if I recall correctly, that fell apart because the PAC didn't want to allow UT to keep 100% of the revenue from the LHN.

Unless there is some rule that I am unaware of where changes require a unanimous vote, Stanford and Cal simply didn't have the power within the conference to stop anything the other schools truly wanted.

If there is "blame" to be laid at the feet of any schools, it would be USC and to a lesser extent, UCLA. USC has been unhappy with the PAC since at least, the Pete Carroll era for reasons that have nothing to do with Stanford and Cal. PAC leadership never did anything to repair that relationship.

From what I've heard, UCLA's athletic department was upside down financially and the revenue they will get from the B1G goes a long way towards correcting that.

 

[Thiefery]

Yes and no on Stanford and Cal.

Yes, they don't really care about sports and, while they were somewhat resistant to expansion, it was mostly about which schools they would approve of. For example, they were against adding BYU because of the religion aspect. I believe they also opposed Boise when Boise was a hot commodity because of academics.

As for UT and Oklahoma, if I recall correctly, that fell apart because the PAC didn't want to allow UT to keep 100% of the revenue from the LHN.

Unless there is some rule that I am unaware of where changes require a unanimous vote, Stanford and Cal simply didn't have the power within the conference to stop anything the other schools truly wanted.

If there is "blame" to be laid at the feet of any schools, it would be USC and to a lesser extent, UCLA. USC has been unhappy with the PAC since at least, the Pete Carroll era for reasons that have nothing to do with Stanford and Cal. PAC leadership never did anything to repair that relationship.

From what I've heard, UCLA's athletic department was upside down financially and the revenue they will get from the B1G goes a long way towards correcting that.

Stanford was the only school to nay the UT/aggy additions back in 1990. Rumor also has it that even when UT decided to stay in the Big12 because of LHN.. oklahoma and osu approached them about joining still, and they were told no, not without UT.

Also from the interview i listened to yesterday... He doesn't think Stanford would ever associate themselves with the MWC.. they would most likely go independent with Football.. however they have to put all their other sports somewhere.. thinks Big12 makes the most sense for that.

As for Cal, he wouldn't be surprised if they just folded it's sports all together. He referenced how even Marshawn Lynch got on air and cussed them out a few seasons ago.. It was a home game and it wasn't even half full. The admin there don't care and they are gonna syphon money from UCLA move to the BiG.

 

[CorpRebel]

Yes and no on Stanford and Cal.

Yes, they don't really care about sports and, while they were somewhat resistant to expansion, it was mostly about which schools they would approve of. For example, they were against adding BYU because of the religion aspect. I believe they also opposed Boise when Boise was a hot commodity because of academics.

As for UT and Oklahoma, if I recall correctly, that fell apart because the PAC didn't want to allow UT to keep 100% of the revenue from the LHN.

Unless there is some rule that I am unaware of where changes require a unanimous vote, Stanford and Cal simply didn't have the power within the conference to stop anything the other schools truly wanted.

If there is "blame" to be laid at the feet of any schools, it would be USC and to a lesser extent, UCLA. USC has been unhappy with the PAC since at least, the Pete Carroll era for reasons that have nothing to do with Stanford and Cal. PAC leadership never did anything to repair that relationship.

From what I've heard, UCLA's athletic department was upside down financially and the revenue they will get from the B1G goes a long way towards correcting that.

Yep! That's how I've understood things over these past years. USC football has been considering going independent for quite awhile now and have always had it in the back of their minds.

PAC12 leadership has been a clusterfuck for so long that "moving out" became the ONLY choice for USC.

 

[trojanfan12]

Yep! That's how I've understood things over these past years. USC football has been considering going independent for quite awhile now and have always had it in the back of their minds.

PAC12 leadership has been a clusterfuck for so long that "moving out" became the ONLY choice for USC.

And for a while, USC just used the threat of going independent to get what they wanted in the conference. But, when the PAC started promoting Olympic sports at the expense of football and lagging behind in tv deals, those threats became a lot more serious.

Things like "PAC After Dark" were fine for most of the other programs but it didn't work for USC because USC recruits nationally but had to play several games a year when half the country was asleep.

I mean, could you imagine the SEC allowing Bama to play several games every year where half the country is asleep? Have them playing at 9am EST and promoting " Breakfast with the SEC". lol

 

[trojanfan12]

Stanford was the only school to nay the UT/aggy additions back in 1990. Rumor also has it that even when UT decided to stay in the Big12 because of LHN.. oklahoma and osu approached them about joining still, and they were told no, not without UT.

Also from the interview i listened to yesterday... He doesn't think Stanford would ever associate themselves with the MWC.. they would most likely go independent with Football.. however they have to put all their other sports somewhere.. thinks Big12 makes the most sense for that.

As for Cal, he wouldn't be surprised if they just folded it's sports all together. He referenced how even Marshawn Lynch got on air and cussed them out a few seasons ago.. It was a home game and it wasn't even half full. The admin there don't care and they are gonna syphon money from UCLA move to the BiG.

Yeah, neither school ever really committed to football or sports in general. Both struggled with attendance (Cal more than Stanford) even when they were good...attendance was non-existent when they weren't good (which has been for most of their existence).

I don't know as that either school would get rid of all sports...but it wouldn't surprise me to see them drop football and just concentrate on the Olympic sports. Especially Stanford who has traditionally done well in those sp;orts.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Stanford was the only school to nay the UT/aggy additions back in 1990. Rumor also has it that even when UT decided to stay in the Big12 because of LHN.. oklahoma and osu approached them about joining still, and they were told no, not without UT.

Also from the interview i listened to yesterday... He doesn't think Stanford would ever associate themselves with the MWC.. they would most likely go independent with Football.. however they have to put all their other sports somewhere.. thinks Big12 makes the most sense for that.

As for Cal, he wouldn't be surprised if they just folded it's sports all together. He referenced how even Marshawn Lynch got on air and cussed them out a few seasons ago.. It was a home game and it wasn't even half full. The admin there don't care and they are gonna syphon money from UCLA move to the BiG.

In what world do you think the Big 12 wants to be a dumping ground for PAC team non-football sports? That would be incredibly stupid for them to even consider doing that.

 

[Thiefery]

In what world do you think the Big 12 wants to be a dumping ground for PAC team non-football sports? That would be incredibly stupid for them to even consider doing that.

Stanford plays almost everything.. Their basketball programs are pretty solid as well.. Yormark is a CBB size queen

 

[OlyDuck]

Big 12 Commissioner Dumps Cold Water On Stanford And Cal

It sounds like Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark has no interest in adding Cal and Stanford. Will the conference expand further?

www.outkick.com

Brett Yormark's statement when asked about Cal and Stanford and the Big 12 is passing on adding them.

"Right now we’re done. We had a vision. We had a strategy and effectively we’ve been able to execute it. Initially, I wasn’t sure if we’d go to 14 or 16. I think 16 was kind of a dream scenario, candidly. So from our perspective, our focus now is to integrate the four incoming schools as quickly as we can. Get them comfortable. We feel really good about our future and what our membership composition looks like when you look at it in terms of where we were and where we are and where we’re going."

B1G is out
Big 12 is out
ACC is out

By NCAA rule you have to have at least 6 teams to be considered a conference so the PAC 4 teams have these options:
- Add teams quickly by 2024
- Merge with another conference
- Go independent
- Individually join other conferences

Honestly, I have no idea what is going to happen as none of those choices are great and pretty much all of them will bankrupt their programs or they will have to scale back considerably.

its 8 teams and they have 2 years to make it happen

 

[Thiefery]

Did Cal and Stanford even reach out to the Big12? I know GK asked in the final days if everyone could come over except wazzu and osu.. But did Cal and Stanford ask?

 

[Thiefery]

 

[Wild Turkey]

its 8 teams and they have 2 years to make it happen

It's actually 7.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Stanford plays almost everything.. Their basketball programs are pretty solid as well.. Yormark is a CBB size queen

You don't consider economics in anything you post, do you?

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

I would argue the ACC has done well considering. The issue is that in the future with the portal, NIL, 2 dominant conferences the talent more than likely will flow to the B1G and SEC and the playoff won't be competitive. It might take a decade or it might be half of that before it doesn't make any real sense to include other conferences and the P2 will be hungry for a money grab.

Basically, both could field a 4 team conference playoff with a champion and then have the champions play each other for the trophy. That would be an 8 team playoff with 4 games and they don't have to share the revenue.

The idea of excluding large swaths of fans of a sport somehow making it better has never made sense to me. If you want your sport to grow, figure out how to make more teams relevant. It's not an easy ask ... it might be an impossible ask. But simply assuming you could have an only B1G/SEC CFP that includes 34 teams would somehow make CFB better makes no sense to me.

You say they get all the revenue, but that revenue would shrink when half the country doesn't give a damn. You want to grow your sport, not shrink it.

[sorry for the delayed post, but I was on vacation for 12 days]

 

[Wild Turkey]

The idea of excluding large swaths of fans of a sport somehow making it better has never made sense to me. If you want your sport to grow, figure out how to make more teams relevant. It's not an easy ask ... it might be an impossible ask. But simply assuming you could have an only B1G/SEC CFP that includes 34 teams would somehow make CFB better makes no sense to me.

You say they get all the revenue, but that revenue would shrink when half the country doesn't give a damn. You want to grow your sport, not shrink it.

[sorry for the delayed post, but I was on vacation for 12 days]

You are not wrong but I don't think the powers that be care because as you have pointed out everything is based on ratings and markets don't factor as much anymore.

The national championship game is pulling around 20 to 25mm viewers and it doesn't seem to matter if it's just SEC teams in that game. I really don't see those dropping substantially or at all because most of your hardcore college football fans are following those conferences anyway. I also don't see those numbers going up substantially if more teams are included and honestly think they will stay stable regardless so they won't care.

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

My god, it's going to be fun to watch the Buffs get their asses handed to them.

“I don’t care about culture. I don’t even care if they like each other, I want to win,” Sanders proclaimed at the Buffaloes’ annual fall sports media day Friday. “I have been on some teams where the quarterback didn’t like the receiver but they darn sure made harmony when the ball was snapped. And we’re not like that, trust me, these kids are very fond of one another.”

 

[WhosYourDawggy]

You are not wrong but I don't think the powers that be care because as you have pointed out everything is based on ratings and markets don't factor as much anymore.

The national championship game is pulling around 20 to 25mm viewers and it doesn't seem to matter if it's just SEC teams in that game. I really don't see those dropping substantially or at all because most of your hardcore college football fans are following those conferences anyway. I also don't see those numbers going up substantially if more teams are included and honestly think they will stay stable regardless so they won't care.

Check out the NC ratings when it was 2 SEC teams. Lowest in years.

Again, I am not sure what you do. You can't make kids go to certain schools. You can't make certain schools spend more on CFB. But wi the 12 team CFP you have a chance with AQs to at least have every fanbase with some level of access, even if remote.

 

[Wild Turkey]

Check out the NC ratings when it was 2 SEC teams. Lowest in years.

Again, I am not sure what you do. You can't make kids go to certain schools. You can't make certain schools spend more on CFB. But wi the 12 team CFP you have a chance with AQs to at least have every fanbase with some level of access, even if remote.

2021 Georgia vs Alabama had 5 mm more viewers than 2022 Georgia vs TCU

It also beat 2020 Alabama vs Ohio State



When you factor in that more than likely FSU, Clemson, USC, Oreagon, Washington, and probably ND will also be either the B1G or SEC at some point in the future there isn't a draw anywhere else in the country.