Larry Scott: Pac-12 in Great Shape

[SD Buff]

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

I am locked in on this. Would make me sick.

From a $$ point of view. Hard to imagine those schools would lift the boat. Rather they'd probably sink it.

Really don't see a single positive with that scenario. I haven't even read your other thread because the title made me so angry.

And if we or any other conference went to 16 - scheduling works best with a 3+2+2+2 format. Play everyone in conference at least twice every four years.

 

[Buffnik]

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?

It can't get that money. The only way for the Pac to get there is through UT and the domination of the Texas Triangle it brings. But do we want that?

The other option is to bet on growth in our region while keeping that growth from allowing the MWC to dilute our home markets. Just as the Pac-8 made a successful bet on UA/ASU and the Pac-10 made a successful bet on CU/UU. We're really not geographically or culturally an Okie-Tex conference anyway. And as things stand, the Pac-12 has to move first due to when our media deal is up at the end of the 2023-24 year. Other conference deals run through 2025 or longer. The move might very well be to own the western megaregions while crippling the MWC in the process. Financially, there's some advantage to taking G5s, too, since they wouldn't earn a full revenue share for years.

 

[SD Buff]

PAC is going to own the West regardless of the MWC. Hell, SDSU might end up dropping football if they can't figure out their lack of a place to play. SJSU almost dropped football a few years back. They are thinking of not even taking their TV rights to market b/c no one wants to pay them. I'm just not getting it. And yes, probably b/c I don't want to take the time to get it. Ha.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

PAC is going to own the West regardless of the MWC. Hell, SDSU might end up dropping football if they can't figure out their lack of a place to play. SJSU almost dropped football a few years back. They are thinking of not even taking their TV rights to market b/c no one wants to pay them. I'm just not getting it. And yes, probably b/c I don't want to take the time to get it. Ha.

Agreed. G5 in the footprint doesn't make sense and will never move the needle. Needs to be a Texas G5 or CTZ P5 to do anything.

 

[Buffnik]

PAC is going to own the West regardless of the MWC. Hell, SDSU might end up dropping football if they can't figure out their lack of a place to play. SJSU almost dropped football a few years back. They are thinking of not even taking their TV rights to market b/c no one wants to pay them. I'm just not getting it. And yes, probably b/c I don't want to take the time to get it. Ha.

I guess I'd ask if you still think of Louisville, Utah and TCU as jumped up G5 programs.

My perspective is that the country has changed a lot since it was established who the major conference teams are and where they are located.

Take a look at the rank of the largest US cities in 1950: https://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0027/tab18.txt

You'll see Phoenix at #99, Rochester (NY) being larger than Atlanta, St. Louis being about twice the size of Dallas, etc.

Demographic trends are still extremely favorable in the MTZ & PTZ. So I'm willing to bet on cities like Las Vegas, Albuquerque, Boise and, if we want to keep CA at 4 teams without considering Cal State programs, then Reno. There's too much growth and too much real estate in the west to ignore major population zones with the limited perspective that how it was in the past is how it's going to be in the future.

 

[Highlander]

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.)

Does adding BSU, SDSU, UNLV, and UNM add TV revenue $$ to the existing members? I believe the answer is no, so I don't understand why this is even a topic of conversation when the whole point was "Is the Pac 12 in great shape revenue wise compared to other P5 conferences."

 

[CUFan]

Central. Time. Zone.

This is the only expansion that will make a difference. We need a few teams in central time zone. We need more exposure. No ones sees our games partly due to time zone issues.

 

[Buffnik]

Does adding BSU, SDSU, UNLV, and UNM and TV revenue $$ to the existing members. I believe the answer is no, so I don't understand why this is even a topic of conversation when the whole point was "Is the Pac 12 in great shape revenue wise compared to other P5 conferences."

Because I'm trying to run with the @sackman approach: #NeverTexas and find a creative approach to increasing revenues. Enhancing regional rivalries, owning the west by securing all major metros, increasing volume, avoiding full shares with these expansion partners, reducing travel costs, betting on the future, and maintaining conference culture with a brand identity that's true to what we are.

I don't think it's a short-term solution. But I've seen short-term solutions before when the Big 8 merged with 4 SWC programs. That easy short-term money isn't necessarily what should be driving things.

 

[SD Buff]

I guess I'd ask if you still think of Louisville, Utah and TCU as jumped up G5 programs.

Pretty much, yes.

But all three >>> than UNLV, UNM, Boise State, etc. Again, those schools aren't going to lift the financial boat. So what's the point? They may encroach on the PAC dominating the West? Nah.
I am a snob and really dug in on this. We'll just agree to disagree.

 

[Deleted member 807]

To think outside the box, the P12 and Ivy League should form a sports TV consortium.

Brand names that add value to the P12 are Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Brown, Cornell, Penn, Dartmouth, and Columbia.

Those markets add TV sets in major markets. The P12/Ivy has more content with games from both conferences, giving exposure in the east and an incentive for the Ivy's to take a step towards big time athletics and TV money for better athletic facilities.

As part of the deal, scheduling is limited to 1 OOC game every 2 out of 3 years between PAC and Ivy members. Also a bowl tie in, plus lots of overlapping basketball.

That deal expand the market for both marque leagues and this deal doesn't mess up the regular conference schedule.

 

[Buffnik]

Pretty much, yes.

But all three >>> than UNLV, UNM, Boise State, etc. Again, those schools aren't going to lift the financial boat. So what's the point? They may encroach on the PAC dominating the West? Nah.
I am a snob and really dug in on this. We'll just agree to disagree.

Fair enough.

What's weird to me is that the west coast is known as so progressive, but when it comes to college football they're the biggest traditionalists around. I often get the impression that there are lots of folks who still see Zona & ASU as the new guys and that a lot of Pac-12 fans on the coast really couldn't give a **** about which 4 teams get added as long as 16 teams meant that the original Pac-8 could be its own division. And it's not just the old folks who grew up on Pac-8 football in the 50s, 60s and 70s who seem to feel that way.

 

[Big Jim]

Fair enough.

What's weird to me is that the west coast is known as so progressive, but when it comes to college football they're the biggest traditionalists around. I often get the impression that there are lots of folks who still see Zona & ASU as the new guys and that a lot of Pac-12 fans on the coast really couldn't give a **** about which 4 teams get added as long as 16 teams meant that the original Pac-8 could be its own division. And it's not just the old folks who grew up on Pac-8 football in the 50s, 60s and 70s who seem to feel that way.

Nah. USC fans love trips to Boulder.

 

[SD Buff]

State flagship. Academic profile. Important to the PAC. It would take a complete 180 for the PAC to consider the schools mentioned. If they're going to go that route, go ahead and take KjSU, Lite, Taco Tech.

 

[Buffnik]

State flagship. Academic profile. Important to the PAC. It would take a complete 180 for the PAC to consider the schools mentioned. If they're going to go that route, go ahead and take KjSU, Lite, Taco Tech.

UNLV is a state flagship (dual flagships in NV with the way they're organized) and likely Tier One research when the 2020 ratings come out. UNM is the state flagship of New Mexico and Tier One research. All Pac-12 schools are Tier One, but let's not pretend that they're all AAU or something.

So, if we're talking about Tier One research institutions that are flagships of western states when the Pac-12 looks toward its new media contracts in the early 2020s... what's your objection?

 

[MiamiBuffs]

Niks on the viagra binge again....

 

[patebuff]

The discussion started in regards to the Pac 12 being severely behind in conference revenues. The only thing that changes this will include Texas and some other Big 12 Schools.

I still haven't seen a great solution here and I have a feeling if they stand pat in regards to expansion, then the Pac will be drastically different in 10 or so years. Reaching in the G5 won't change a thing.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

The discussion started in regards to the Pac 12 being severely behind in conference revenues. The only thing that changes this will include Texas and some other Big 12 Schools.

I still haven't seen a great solution here and I have a feeling if they stand pat in regards to expansion, then the Pac will be drastically different in 10 or so years. Reaching in the G5 won't change a thing.

Severely behind who?

 

[SD Buff]

what's your objection?

Pretty much everything. That being said, not the least bit worried of it happening. So we're good.

 

[Buffnik]

Pretty much everything. That being said, not the least bit worried of it happening. So we're good.

Funny thing is - and the rest of the country would be shocked by this - the two schools (if they decided they wanted to spend the coin to be FBS/D1 schools) that would almost certainly be automatics with the vote of the presidents are UC Davis and UCSD.

 

[SD Buff]

I know UCSD has no interest and the San Diego stadium saga took another turn for the worse today. What a mess. Just sad. But yeah, even though they're in California, agreed.

 

[AeroBuff99]

What will move the needle on conference revenue is ratings. The reason why the SEC commands the $$$$ is not their huge TV markets, it is because every local yokal is tuned in to see Bama, or dem Gators, or the Dawgs, regardless of the actual affiliation with the school. It does no good to have the largest TV markets if those markets are not interested in watching the product. Much of the population rise in the west is also coming from those areas and they are still going to watch their product not the PAC product. So what is the answer? The PAC has two choices, maintain the status quo or look east to capture a football market. Looking inside the footprint, no matter how much we would like, is not going to increase the per school revenue and will likely dilute the per school value.

To increase PACNet payouts they need to cut costs. Drop the regional networks. Go to a national + alternate channel(s) model Football and Basketball. Push the olympic sport production onto the schools themselves as academic programs, PACNet can still provide oversight, assistance, and announcers. Go to a streaming model and make Olympic events available thru that or cable on demand services. Renegotiate the carrier deals to get the network in more markets (basic tiers) by lowering per subscriber fees in exchange for greater carriage (assure a zero sum deal). Increased carriage gets higher ad revenue. There are other things that can be done as well (scheduling comes to mind) but I think we should accept reality for what it is.

 

[patebuff]

Severely behind who?

SEC and Big 10.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

SEC and Big 10.

Were we ahead of the B1G until they re-did their rights last year? We get the chance again I think in 2020 or 2022. And then we will know. Until then were under contract.

 

[White_Rabbit]

pretty sure there's no chance in hell, but could we roll in Notre Dame somehow?

We need a big time program (other than USC) and we don't want Texas, and the only other one that makes sense is Oklahoma and they aren't going anywhere without Texas so...

 

[Buffnik]

pretty sure there's no chance in hell, but could we roll in Notre Dame somehow?

We need a big time program (other than USC) and we don't want Texas, and the only other one that makes sense is Oklahoma and they aren't going anywhere without Texas so...

Notre Dame did a deal with the ACC that if they opt to join a conference for football it must choose the ACC. That goes through 2035 or 2039 or something. So, unfortunately, not gonna happen.

 

[cowe6453]

Wow. The level of smugness and arrogance in your posts is unreal. I bet you enjoy smelling your own farts too, huh?

Hate to break it to you, but as witty and brilliant as you may think you are, no one is impressed by "ennui" or any of the other gibberish you spew.

Really, you just sound like a douche.

 

[WasianCU]

Wow. The level of smugness and arrogance in your posts is unreal. I bet you enjoy smelling your own farts too, huh?

Hate to break it to you, but as witty and brilliant as you may think you are, no one is impressed by "ennui" or any of the other gibberish you spew.

Really, you just sound like a douche.

Who are you even referring to?

 

[cowe6453]

The problem with BPD is that you waste your manic phase blubbering about a beat-to-death topic (like this one) to people who are so bored and likely unemployed that they have nothing better to do than beat said topic.

Probably unlike you, I actually have an extended, SEC loving family that lives in the YellowHammer state and its just not possible to convey the level of ennui, envious ridicule and self-parody behind my little bon-bon.

Anyhow...please move on.

^Meant to be a reply to this

 

[patebuff]

Were we ahead of the B1G until they re-did their rights last year? We get the chance again I think in 2020 or 2022. And then we will know. Until then were under contract.

Pac 12 will never surpass those two conferences in conference revenues unless something drastic happens. However, the gap is getting bigger and bigger. Eventually, as stated above, these conferences will be able to pay their assistant coaches more than Pac 12 head coaches.

 

[onealcd]

Pac 12 will never surpass those two conferences in conference revenues unless something drastic happens. However, the gap is getting bigger and bigger. Eventually, as stated above, these conferences will be able to pay their assistant coaches more than Pac 12 head coaches.

Yup. Only part I disagree with is the short and long term goal of the Pac-12. Short-term should be to keep the gap from getting bigger and even lower it by a little bit and then try and close that gap over time with the growth that is coming to the Pac-12 footprint.