Larry Scott: Pac-12 in Great Shape

[Buffnik]

Weird. I always thought "status quo" meant basically sitting back and doing nothing. Apparently it now means doing anything with the exception of expansion.

It means continuing to do exactly what you are currently doing.

Edit: The problem seems to be that the assets aren't valuable enough so we've been in the following Catch-22... either get great distribution while making even less money by cutting the price of carrying PACN or continue to suffer from a situation of limited distribution at a premium price that still lags competitor conference as much as 40+% less revenue per school.

 

[sackman]

The PAC 12 brand isn't as valuable as is the SEC brand. That's reality. So instead of trying to make money the same way the SEC does, perhaps we should be looking at ways to capitalize on our assets.

Chasing SEC media money using the SEC model is a sure pathway to frustration.

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

The PAC 12 brand isn't as valuable as is the SEC brand. That's reality. So instead of trying to make money the same way the SEC does, perhaps we should be looking at ways to capitalize on our assets.

Chasing SEC media money using the SEC model is a sure pathway to frustration.

We aren't necessarily chasing SEC money, but instead the Big 10 and the ACC. Being last is this race is one thing. Being last by 40+% is frightening.

 

[Duff Man]

We aren't necessarily chasing SEC money, but instead the Big 10 and the ACC. Being last is this race is one thing. Being last by 40+% is frightening.

Being dead last is a good thing.

 

[sackman]

Being dead last is a good thing.

Shakes head, realizes nobody is actually paying attention to anything I'm saying. Gives up.

Yeah. Sure. Being last is great. Totally what I'm advocating. Let's do that. Great ****ing plan.

 

[Duff Man]

Shakes head, realizes nobody is actually paying attention to anything I'm saying. Gives up.

Yeah. Sure. Being last is great. Totally what I'm advocating. Let's do that. Great ****ing plan.

When this revenue gap was brought up two years ago, you basically said "What do the actions of other conferences have to do with the Pac-12?"

If that is not a head-in-the-sand approach to the problem, I do not know what is.

 

[DBT]

That's not my answer and it never has been. I've always said Scott need to be looking at ways to expand the exposure of the conference and open up new revenue streams. That's his job. Expanding the number of schools in the desperate hope that ESPN and DTV will magically find money heretofore lost and throw it our way is naive at best.

Waiting for the Chinese market to explode. 97% of households in China have television.

 

[sackman]

When this revenue gap was brought up two years ago, you basically said "What do the actions of other conferences have to do with the Pac-12?"

If that is not a head-in-the-sand approach to the problem, I do not know what is.

Conversely, when I bring up the fact that expansion neither guarantees nor even suggests additional revenue based on a variety of factors, you stubbornly stick YOUR head in the sand and claim that it does. ESPN is hemmoraging money, but you won't admit that adding teams to the PAC 12 will do nothing at all to bridge the revenue gap. I've been saying all along that we need to be taking a different approach here. Find different revenue streams. Be entrepreneurial in our approach. I say that and I get "fuh, fuh, fuh... we are in last place and you don't want to do anything about it". It's absurd. I'm angry at myself for allowing myself to get sucked into this conversation every time, somehow expecting that maybe this time it will finally get through.

 

[Duff Man]

The Pac-12 is in a tough spot and I acknowledge that expansion may not be a cure, but it does seem like the best option. If the Pac-12 successfully blows up the Big 12, there is money to be made, current status of ESPN be damned. Vague "entrepreneurial" approaches are not really a solution.

 

[sackman]

Ignoring economic reality by hoping that money might be made in spite of evidence to the contrary isn't a great plan, either.

 

[Duff Man]

I am not ignoring economic reality. I think blowing up a P5 conference and adding some select teams would instantaneously expand exposure and visibility for the Pac-12 beyond its current footprint while also taking out a competitor.

The worst case scenario for the Pac-12 is being beaten to the punch.

 

[onealcd]

There is always going to be money in live sports content, just because ESPN, ABC, FOX or CBS don't provide that doesn't mean it will just magically disappear.

 

[Highlander]

Ignoring economic reality by hoping that money might be made in spite of evidence to the contrary isn't a great plan, either.

Dude - you know neither the Big 12 targets nor the Pac 12 would agree to merging unless everyone was damn near positive through backroom discussions with media entities that more revenue would immediately be available for all involved. Please don't take the position that the Pac 12 would just blindly add schools and hope there is more revenue for all, but might be splitting the same pie more ways instead. You are smarter than that.

 

[onealcd]

I will say, there is incentive for the entire Pac-12, Texas, OU, OSU, TTU, Kansas, WVU and probably TCU to get this done sooner rather than later as I am sure it would trigger a renegotiation of the current deal.

Also interesting that the SEC has no exit fee for schools that want to leave (If I have that wrong please let me know) but would Missouri go to the Big-10 with Kansas if presented with the opportunity?

 

[sackman]

Dude - you know neither the Big 12 targets nor the Pac 12 would agree to merging unless everyone was damn near positive through backroom discussions with media entities that more revenue would immediately be available for all involved. Please don't take the position that the Pac 12 would just blindly add schools and hope there is more revenue for all, but might be splitting the same pie more ways instead. You are smarter than that.

I'm not the one making that assumption. Quite the opposite, in fact.

 

[patebuff]

NM

 

[Buffnik]

I will say, there is incentive for the entire Pac-12, Texas, OU, OSU, TTU, Kansas, WVU and probably TCU to get this done sooner rather than later as I am sure it would trigger a renegotiation of the current deal.

Also interesting that the SEC has no exit fee for schools that want to leave (If I have that wrong please let me know) but would Missouri go to the Big-10 with Kansas if presented with the opportunity?

Yes. That's what Missouri wanted all along. That would be great for how things could break with the Big 12 dissolving, too. SEC would get aggressive.

 

[Deleted member 807]

I found this map of the US particularly useful to the discussion of choosing expansion with size of market being a major consideration.

It shows how the B1G is well situated, and how UNLV, Boise, and UNM don't move the needle.

It also shows a higher population density in the rural SEC with few giant markets.

The key to $$$ with the existing footprint is getting more passion and investment in Southern California.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

View attachment 22791 I found this map of the US particularly useful to the discussion of choosing expansion with size of market being a major consideration.

It shows how the B1G is well situated, and how UNLV, Boise, and UNM don't move the needle.

It also shows a higher population density in the rural SEC with few giant markets.

The key to $$$ with the existing footprint is getting more passion and investment in Southern California.

So it looks like the smart move is more California schools because nothing else out there is worth it. Which is kind of what ive been saying; There is no one in the footprint that moves the needle. The expansion options are all "functional" and "convenient" but do nothing for prestige.

I wonder if we could get Notre Dame?

 

[Deleted member 807]

So it looks like the smart move is more California schools because nothing else out there is worth it. Which is kind of what ive been saying; There is no one in the footprint that moves the needle. The expansion options are all "functional" and "convenient" but do nothing for prestige.

I wonder if we could get Notre Dame?

Spitballing an idea that involves scheduling instead of expansion.

Make one of the P12 schools play an away game every week in the New York Tri-State area. Play roadies at Rutgers, UConn and Army. Maybe throw in Princeton, too. Get it to a point that the P12 fan base is in NYC every weekend filling the streets showing the colors.

Negotiate Pac-12 television exposure as a weekly fixture of the east coast weekend prime time television schedule.

 

[Buffnik]

View attachment 22791 I found this map of the US particularly useful to the discussion of choosing expansion with size of market being a major consideration.

It shows how the B1G is well situated, and how UNLV, Boise, and UNM don't move the needle.

It also shows a higher population density in the rural SEC with few giant markets.

The key to $$$ with the existing footprint is getting more passion and investment in Southern California.

Great graphic!

I agree it knocks out Boise State.

But to see where to focus and where the future lies, I'd look at the following map in terms of the Pac-12 expansion:

Pac-12 owns 5 of these Megaregions (with 2 being huge ones - SoCal & NoCal). Our ideal situation is to solidify that while being the conference that takes ownership of the Texas Triangle.

What that shows me is that UNM can pair nicely with CU to own the Front Range Megaregion where we only have 1 program right now that's in the northern half and we need a partner in the southern half.

UNLV grows the Southern California Megaregion (our most important) while also extending it into Nevada and its 3M population that's growing fast.

That would leave us 2 schools that can deliver the lion's share of the Texas Triangle Megaregion. UT makes this happen. All they need is a partner. OU would be best. TT would be fine. UH would be fine. TCU would be fine.

Do this and the Pac-16 owns the west.

 

[Highlander]

I'm not the one making that assumption. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Then I'm not following what you believe is the right answer, but honestly it may not matter - probably a better conversation over a beer at Sackygate anyway!

 

[SD Buff]

Been saying from jump - the PAC needs OU/UT if we're going to compete $$$. Unfortunately, it appears we missed our window if OU/UT "insiders" are to be believed. They are all about the B1G, the CIC (or whatever its called now), Central/Eastern timezone vs. Mountain/Pacific. Or UT would be interested in the ACC and roll LHN. Blah blah blah.

Taking the Big 12 rejects (Taco Tech, KjSU, Bailer, etc.) more than likely doesn't fix our problem and they obviously don't fit the academic profile.

I still hope the end game is a collectively bargained TV contract with the sum of the parts being greater than the whole. Keep things sane. I love the PAC 12 as constituted. But very worried how this will all shake out in 2024. All this movement hasn't been good for the game.

 

[Buffnik]

Been saying from jump - the PAC needs OU/UT if we're going to compete $$$. Unfortunately, it appears we missed our window if OU/UT "insiders" are to be believed. They are all about the B1G, the CIC (or whatever its called now), Central/Eastern timezone vs. Mountain/Pacific. Or UT would be interested in the ACC and roll LHN. Blah blah blah.

Taking the Big 12 rejects (Taco Tech, KjSU, Bailer, etc.) more than likely doesn't fix our problem and they obviously don't fit the academic profile.

I still hope the end game is a collectively bargained TV contract with the sum of the parts being greater than the whole. Keep things sane. I love the PAC 12 as constituted. But very worried how this will all shake out in 2024. All this movement hasn't been good for the game.

If the ship has sailed on OU & UT, then I think the move is to go to 14 to solidify our 5 Megaregions and move Utah to the North.

 

[SD Buff]

If the ship has sailed on OU & UT, then I think the move is to go to 14 to solidify our 5 Megaregions and move Utah to the North.

Yeah. I just couldn't disagree more. If the choice is staying at 12 or adding G5 schools - 100% stay at 12. What the other Power conferences do is on them. But I don't want to see a cluster **** of a schedule, odd number divisions and seeing our conference less to add G5s. Would really make me sick.

 

[onealcd]

Yeah. I just couldn't disagree more. If the choice is staying at 12 or adding G5 schools - 100% stay at 12. What the other Power conferences do is on them. But I don't want to see a cluster **** of a schedule, odd number divisions and seeing our conference less to add G5s. Would really make me sick.

BYU and Houston would be fine just not sure about the last two spots. It would be nice if we could somehow snag TCU and Texas tech along with Houston to complete the 16 team conference.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Yeah. I just couldn't disagree more. If the choice is staying at 12 or adding G5 schools - 100% stay at 12. What the other Power conferences do is on them. But I don't want to see a cluster **** of a schedule, odd number divisions and seeing our conference less to add G5s. Would really make me sick.

Without seeing any numbers, I agree. It seems like there would be not much regional or national interest when UNM or UNLV play each other or square off against an unranked Wazzou, Oregon State, Utah, Arizona or Colorado.

To get ratings and the money, the P12 needs an established powerhouse or access to a big market, not another development project.

 

[Buffnik]

Yeah. I just couldn't disagree more. If the choice is staying at 12 or adding G5 schools - 100% stay at 12. What the other Power conferences do is on them. But I don't want to see a cluster **** of a schedule, odd number divisions and seeing our conference less to add G5s. Would really make me sick.

What about going to 16 as a conference that maintains its identity of the 5 western megaregions while strengthening domination of each?

Let's say, for example, that UNLV, SDSU, Boise State and UNM were added.

We'd have the following setup (Pods for scheduling purposes only):

Pac-16 North
Pod A - UO, OSU, UW, WSU
Pod B - Cal, Stan, BSU, Utah

Pac-16 South
Pod A - UCLA, USC, SDSU, UNLV
Pod B - UA, ASU, CU, UNM

To maintain rivalries focused within the demographic megaregions, each Pod plays the other 3 teams in its Pod every year. Then, the other 6 games are 2 games against each of the other 3 Pods every year.

Personally, I like this much better as a fan than expanding outside our region. I also like the representation of the entire MTZ-PTZ areas of the US as our footprint and culture. And, I much prefer 16 teams with Pod scheduling over the wonky 14-team scheduling models.

(And, as has been mentioned, it's likely that the Big 12 will expand east to strengthen presence in the Great Lakes, Piedmont Atlantic, Gulf Coast and Florida megaregions because it's much more valuable to get a piece of those than to try to get a piece of the Front Range or a major outlier like BYU. So I believe we'd end up having our areas without P5 competition.)

 

[Deleted member 807]

What about going to 16 as a conference that maintains its identity of the 5 western megaregions while strengthening domination of each?

Let's say, for example, that UNLV, SDSU, Boise State and UNM were added.

We'd have the following setup (Pods for scheduling purposes only):

Pac-16 North
Pod A - UO, OSU, UW, WSU
Pod B - Cal, Stan, BSU, Utah

Pac-16 South
Pod A - UCLA, USC, SDSU, UNLV
Pod B - UA, ASU, CU, UNM

To maintain rivalries focused within the demographic megaregions, each Pod plays the other 3 teams in its Pod every year. Then, the other 6 games are 2 games against each of the other 3 Pods every year.

Personally, I like this much better as a fan than expanding outside our region. I also like the representation of the entire MTZ-PTZ areas of the US as our footprint and culture. And, I much prefer 16 teams with Pod scheduling over the wonky 14-team scheduling models.

(And, as has been mentioned, it's likely that the Big 12 will expand east to strengthen presence in the Great Lakes, Piedmont Atlantic, Gulf Coast and Florida megaregions because it's much more valuable to get a piece of those than to try to get a piece of the Front Range or a major outlier like BYU. So I believe we'd end up having our areas without P5 competition.)

It could be a viable plan if money weren't the issue. How would this setup allow an expanded Pac16 to earn SEC or B1G money?

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Central. Time. Zone.