Washington Supreme Court denies review of Pac-12

Red_Alert said:
Thru 2029/2030 Oregon is only getting $30 million (+$1 million/yr) from the Big 10.
That's less than half share.

They would have been better off 'distribution wise' going to the Big 12.
Click to expand...
No they wouldn’t have. They will get more media money from the Big Ten during that time period than they would from the Big 12
 
Deep Creek said:
Best question in a while. Answer, nuttin' because it is a math problem. P5-3=P2.
Click to expand...
Again, I don't know that this is true.

Said this yesterday on here and got no responses, but under the existing format P5 conferences got more base money from the CFP. People understand the basics of bowl/playoff disbursements, but there is also a base amount of money blanketly given to each conference. The P5's + indy (ND) each get some base amount and the G5's get a different amount. Even P5 teams that don't make a bowl game get money from these pools and P5 teams always earn more than G5's. Again, this is about the base money given, not the bowl payouts.

You and I have spoken over the years about how the CFP has served as the appeasement to the G5's to keep them afloat enough to maintain the P5/G5 model. This is the only part of college football where the title of P5 or G5 carries any real meaning just as a title.

To simplify - the Pac 2 (lol) might be entitled to more base money from the CFP for getting to retain that status for the next 2 years. Money that can help replace lost TV contract money and/or help further with buyouts to help attract other teams to leave their current conf/contracts.
 
Wizardhawk said:
Again, I don't know that this is true.

Said this yesterday on here and got no responses, but under the existing format P5 conferences got more base money from the CFP. People understand the basics of bowl/playoff disbursements, but there is also a base amount of money blanketly given to each conference. The P5's + indy (ND) each get some base amount and the G5's get a different amount. Even P5 teams that don't make a bowl game get money from these pools and P5 teams always earn more than G5's. Again, this is about the base money given, not the bowl payouts.

You and I have spoken over the years about how the CFP has served as the appeasement to the G5's to keep them afloat enough to maintain the P5/G5 model. This is the only part of college football where the title of P5 or G5 carries any real meaning just as a title.

To simplify - the Pac 2 (lol) might be entitled to more base money from the CFP for getting to retain that status for the next 2 years. Money that can help replace lost TV contract money and/or help further with buyouts to help attract other teams to leave their current conf/contracts.
Click to expand...

I don't think very much of what you posted is accurate.
The P5 "base" you are talking about is due to their autobid status with NY6 bowls. With that no longer around for the PAC, it's a really small slice of the pie.


For example, here is how things go under the 4 team format:

The following is a breakdown of the CFP revenue distribution:
  • For the 2023-24 academic year:
    1. Each conference will receive $300,000 for each of its schools when the school’s football team meets the NCAA’s APR for participation in a postseason football game. Each independent institution will also receive $300,000 when its football team meets that standard.
    2. A conference will receive $6 million for each team that is selected for a Playoff Semifinal. There will be no additional distribution to conferences whose teams qualify for the national championship game. A conference will receive $4 million for each team that plays in a non-playoff bowl under the arrangement.
    3. Each conference whose team participates in a Playoff Semifinal, Cotton, Fiesta, or Peach bowls, or in the national championship game, will receive $2.85 million to cover expenses for each game.
  • Based on calculations from the 2022-23 season, the following distributions were made in the spring of 2023 (Estimates for the 2023-24 season will be finalized following the 2024 CFP National Championship.):
    1. Each of the 10 conferences received a base amount. For conferences that have contracts for their champions to participate in the Orange, Rose, or Sugar bowls, the base combined with the full academic performance pool was approximately $79.41 million for each conference. The five conferences that do not have contracts for their champions to participate in the Orange, Rose or Sugar bowls received approximately $102.77 million in aggregate (full academic pool plus base). The conferences distribute these funds as they choose. Notre Dame received a payment of $3.89 million by meeting the APR standard; the other six independents shared $1.89 million.
    2. Certain conferences in the Football Championship Subdivision received approximately $3.08 million in aggregate.
Click to expand...
 
Wizardhawk said:
Again, I don't know that this is true.

Said this yesterday on here and got no responses, but under the existing format P5 conferences got more base money from the CFP. People understand the basics of bowl/playoff disbursements, but there is also a base amount of money blanketly given to each conference. The P5's + indy (ND) each get some base amount and the G5's get a different amount. Even P5 teams that don't make a bowl game get money from these pools and P5 teams always earn more than G5's. Again, this is about the base money given, not the bowl payouts.

You and I have spoken over the years about how the CFP has served as the appeasement to the G5's to keep them afloat enough to maintain the P5/G5 model. This is the only part of college football where the title of P5 or G5 carries any real meaning just as a title.

To simplify - the Pac 2 (lol) might be entitled to more base money from the CFP for getting to retain that status for the next 2 years. Money that can help replace lost TV contract money and/or help further with buyouts to help attract other teams to leave their current conf/contracts.
Click to expand...
I don't doubt any of what you are saying Wiz. But the real "differentiator" (for lack of a better) term is the media revenue difference between the B1G/SEC and the rest. That's been the difference between P5s and G5s for years. While there, the gap among the P5s hasn't been near as significant as it is going to be. Sans maybe FSU and Clem, all the attractive teams to the media are now concentrated in the big two. I don't think the G5s have had as big a spread in media revenue. They may in the future but I don't see the AAC really being much more attractive than any of the rest.
 
Red_Alert said:
I told you to Watch and Learn, pleeb.

The commish already outed that the main PAC contract overruled any sub-contracts, and that distribution penalties for USC/UCLA were in order..

Oregon was fine with that penalty.... Until they weren't.

There are only 2 now making decisions on PAC assets. The quackers ain't one of them.
Click to expand...

michaeljordan_fan said:
Link?
Click to expand...

LOL, you twit.

I gave you the link to Kliavkoff's public statements multiple times in the other thread.

Now that's there's a new thread you want to start over with the :lalala:

One more time for you until we get yet another thread so you can start over being an ignorant idiot in denial.

The Civil War is OVER

Oregon has just as many national titles as Oregon State. ZERO :dhd:
hooplanation.com

“USC and UCLA … were removed as Board representatives under the Constitution and Bylaws following their notice of withdrawal from the Pac-12,” Kliavkoff stated.

“Supplemental distributions expected: Subject to due process rights, the Pac-12 may reduce the anticipated $105M distributions to our departing members (Colorado, USC, and UCLA).

“— Pac-12 bylaws allow the Board to issue penalties against members who withdraw before August 1, 2024.

“— The Board is considering options, but we are contemplating seeking considerable financial damages against our departing members that could result in supplemental distributions to the remaining 9 universities.”

Again.... 'The board' being the remaining 10 teams once USC/UCLA gave notice to withdraw.
i.e. Oregon and the other 7 departing members were on-board with distribution penalties for USC/UCLA..... Before they weren't.

Kliavkoff was on-board with distribution penalties for USC/UCLA and divvying up there shares among the 10 remaining PAC teams. Until he wasn't.

Y'all are losing this case because of prior practice. Kliavkoff's statements and the board meetings once USC/UCLA were immediately banned from attending are a matter of record.
 
wazzu31 said:
Umm yeah, look who is on the board who votes to take away status
Click to expand...

1) Oregon St and Washington St are going to vote remove the other 8 departing members from the board. USC/UCLA were removed once they gave 'Notice of Withdrawal' in 2022.

Once they do that, they'll vote on distribution penalties for all 10 departing members and split it among themselves.

I'm guessing they also replace Kliavkoff.
 
michaeljordan_fan said:
I don't think very much of what you posted is accurate.
The P5 "base" you are talking about is due to their autobid status with NY6 bowls. With that no longer around for the PAC, it's a really small slice of the pie.


For example, here is how things go under the 4 team format:
Click to expand...
The part I don't think you get is near the end. The P5s got like 70m+ each conf, while the G5's split 102m split up across all 5 of them.

It's not a trivial difference.

Yes, it will be different with the new playoff and the Pac only having 2 teams will get some sort of prorated amount, but it will very likely be much higher than what they would get without retaining that status.

FTR, even a 2m difference per team would be big when they have already shed so much.

That was the point.
 
michaeljordan_fan said:
There are exit terms written within the contract, which each team has complied with.

In terms of remaining assets/liabilities, that isn't going to net out to very much.

The 2023-24 TV revenue must be paid out in accordance with the terms agreed upon in the contract; good luck finding anything that USC/UCLA were going to lose out on that revenue.
Click to expand...
Revenue from the current year will be reduced to cover the future costs of the implosion of the conference, caused by the departing teams. There are revenue and expenses for this year, but there are future costs associated with saving the conference or shutting it down, and future contingent liabilities that the departing teams contributed to but will no longer be around to pay for (e.g., House v. NCAA, the $50 million per team media partner overpayment, and likely others). No way the remaining teams will be obligated to give all the money to the departing teams and then end up holding the bag for future contingent liabilities.

This is different than how you would react to two teams like TX and OU leaving the B12, but leaving behind a fully functional conference. The fact that the departing teams so badly damaged the conference to basically cause it to collapse created many large contingent liabilities with no way to pay for them. The surviving members of the conference have every right to hold back money to pay for that.
 
michaeljordan_fan said:
There are exit terms written within the contract, which each team has complied with.

In terms of remaining assets/liabilities, that isn't going to net out to very much.

The 2023-24 TV revenue must be paid out in accordance with the terms agreed upon in the contract; good luck finding anything that USC/UCLA were going to lose out on that revenue.
Click to expand...

No they haven't complied. Complying would be following the by-laws and going away silently.

FALSE. The by-laws specifically state that remaining members control all assets. They go on to specifically state the remaining members (i.e. Now the PAC 2) can retain "all media rights". i.e. Their distributions.

4. Dissolution.
In the event of the dissolution or final liquidation of the Conference, all of the remaining assets and property of the Conference shall, after paying or making provision for the payment of all of the liabilities and obligations of the Conference and for necessary expenses thereof, be distributed to the members of the Conference so long as they are then qualified as a tax-exempt organization under Code Section 501(c)(3), or to such organization or organizations organized and operated exclusively for charitable or educational purposes as shall at the time qualify as an exempt organization or organizations under Code Section 501(c)(3) as the CEO Group shall determine. In no event shall any of the assets or property be distributed to any director or officer, or any private individual.

3. Withdrawal.
No member shall deliver a notice of withdrawal to the Conference in the period beginning on July 24, 2011, and ending on August 1, 2024; provided, that if any member does deliver a notice of withdrawal prior to August 1,2024, in violation of this chapter, the Conference shall be entitled to an injunction and other equitable relief to prevent such breach, and if a court of competent jurisdiction shall deny the Conference such injunctive relief, the Conference shall be entitled to retain all the media and sponsorship rights in the multi-player video distribution (MPVD) and telecommunications/wireless categories of the member purporting to withdraw through August 1, 2024, even if the member is then a member of another conference or an independent school for some or all intercollegiate sports competitions. Additionally, if a member delivers notice of withdrawal in violation of this chapter, the member’s representative to the CEO Group shall automatically cease to be a member of the CEO Group and shall cease to have the right to vote on any matter before the CEO Group. (6/10, 10/10, 7/11).


That's why you got your whiney dicks kicked in by the judge that granted the original TRO, then the Supreme Court that sided with said judge.

You make unfounded statements without ever providing links, yet constantly demand others to provide links. When links are provided to you MULTIPLE TIMES, you continue to :lalala:
 
WSU and OSU are in sole control of over $ Half-billion in media rights.

They've already blocked mid-season payouts.

frontofficesports.com

Pac-12 Schools Missing Out on $61M Revenue Distribution

As Oregon State and Washington State fight for control of a Pac-12, the two remaining schools have blocked traditional midseason payouts.
frontofficesports.com frontofficesports.com

ray-liotta-laughing.gif
 
Wizardhawk said:
The part I don't think you get is near the end. The P5s got like 70m+ each conf, while the G5's split 102m split up across all 5 of them.

It's not a trivial difference.

Yes, it will be different with the new playoff and the Pac only having 2 teams will get some sort of prorated amount, but it will very likely be much higher than what they would get without retaining that status.

FTR, even a 2m difference per team would be big when they have already shed so much.

That was the point.
Click to expand...
Did you look at how the payouts are calculated?

How is osu/wsu going to get money?
 
In theory couldn't both OSU and WSU schedule all their games against non conference teams and both end up undefeated?

On a side note, it might be a safe bet if Oregon and Washington don't fair well in B1G local kids might go to OSU and WSU.

The departure of the other ten teams will lead to teams migrating to the PAC that will bring money to their respective programs.
 
Red_Alert said:
WSU and OSU are in sole control of over $ Half-billion in media rights.

They've already blocked mid-season payouts.

frontofficesports.com

Pac-12 Schools Missing Out on $61M Revenue Distribution

As Oregon State and Washington State fight for control of a Pac-12, the two remaining schools have blocked traditional midseason payouts.
frontofficesports.com frontofficesports.com
Click to expand...
Lol @ you being dumb enough to think the 23-24 revenue will all be kept by osu/wsu
 
michaeljordan_fan said:
Did you look at how the payouts are calculated?

How is osu/wsu going to get money?
Click to expand...

Well, there is enough money that the departing teams still want a piece of the pie, or they wouldn't have appealed the ruling.
 
Fog said:
Well, there is enough money that the departing teams still want a piece of the pie, or they wouldn't have appealed the ruling.
Click to expand...
I'm talking about cfp payouts.

Osu/wsu aren't going to get much at all from that after this year
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top