Not so fast, my friend ... (was: P12 finalizing details ....)

[Matt]

This is going to happen whether we like it or not I bet. Money talks at the end of the day and Texas and OU will bring A LOT of money. I think we just now have to start betting on how long it will take Texas to destroy and or completely own the Pac 16.

 

[Johnny Juzang]

Maybe I'm reading this incorrectly, but I think you all are mistaken. The premise (and that's all it is at this point) is that the Whorns get a minimum guarantee, just like USC and UClLA were promised, but if contractual revenue exceeds the minimum, then every member gets an equal share. I think the schools presidents and Larry Scott know the minimum will be exceeded. Therefore, Whorn gets the same slice as Washington State.

Obviously, there's a lot of supposition in this, but given the likelihood that this was gonna happen this proposed scenario isn't awful. We get 1) in a pod with ASU, Az, Utah. Guaranteed trips every year into NW, Cali, and Texas, 2) a crap load of cash per year...I mean disgusting money, 3) we will have two good recruiting grounds in both Cali and Texas plus Arizona and of course Colorado. There will be less division of Texas athletes as Baylor and KU, Missouri will be marginalized, and 4) the league offices and championship game ain't moving to Dallas.

I didn't want Texas but I can live with this possible outcome.

Very well put, and rep.

 

[Buffnik]

A Cal perspective (this thread may get interesting on our Boards given that it's Sunday):

http://bearinsider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47478

Sounds like Cal fans are not liking Texas arrogance at all. The attitude on the coast seems to be, "Step into line, son, and we'll all make a boatload of cash. Keep this **** up and you can rot in hell. We're equal partners in this conference."

Fair assessment?

 

[buff4bcs1985]

i think we are entitled to the 6.8 million texas made us pay to leave the big12 since it no longer exists

 

[LTbuff]

Maybe I'm reading this incorrectly, but I think you all are mistaken. The premise (and that's all it is at this point) is that the Whorns get a minimum guarantee, just like USC and UClLA were promised, but if contractual revenue exceeds the minimum, then every member gets an equal share. I think the schools presidents and Larry Scott know the minimum will be exceeded. Therefore, Whorn gets the same slice as Washington State.

Obviously, there's a lot of supposition in this, but given the likelihood that this was gonna happen this proposed scenario isn't awful. We get 1) in a pod with ASU, Az, Utah. Guaranteed trips every year into NW, Cali, and Texas, 2) a crap load of cash per year...I mean disgusting money, 3) we will have two good recruiting grounds in both Cali and Texas plus Arizona and of course Colorado. There will be less division of Texas athletes as Baylor and KU, Missouri will be marginalized, and 4) the league offices and championship game ain't moving to Dallas.

I didn't want Texas but I can live with this possible outcome.

1) I agree.

2) I don't know why but I found the "disgusting money" line quite hilarious. I chortled.

 

[tante]

i think we are entitled to the 6.8 million texas made us pay to leave the big12 since it no longer exists

yeah definitely got screwed over on that one.

 

[BuffsNYC]

Maybe I'm reading this incorrectly, but I think you all are mistaken. The premise (and that's all it is at this point) is that the Whorns get a minimum guarantee, just like USC and UClLA were promised, but if contractual revenue exceeds the minimum, then every member gets an equal share. I think the schools presidents and Larry Scott know the minimum will be exceeded. Therefore, Whorn gets the same slice as Washington State.

I think the article is Texas-centric BS, but it indicates that Texas would keep the LHN and all its revenue if the revenue surpasses 1/16 of the PAC's 3rd tier revenue. That's not the same as the promise made to USC and UCLA, which just set a minimum they would earn and if it was surpassed then they would get an equal share THE END.

The (alleged) deal with Texas seems to envision an ongoing agreement to allow them to keep all LHN revenue unless it amounts to less than 1/16 of PACs third tier 3 revenue. Ponder that for a second, it would mean Texas, alone among PAC 16 teams, gets a guaranteed minimum equal share and is the only program with the option of earning more based on the performance of its tier 3 offerings. That's why I call BS on the article--why in the world would any university agree to that deal, why wouldn't USC and UCLA demand the same for the Southern California PAC network? It doesn't work, it won't work, only a dumbass Texan leaking to a Texas newspaper would try to pretend that's it's a possibility.

 

[liverflukes]

Sounds like Cal fans are not liking Texas arrogance at all. The attitude on the coast seems to be, "Step into line, son, and we'll all make a boatload of cash. Keep this **** up and you can rot in hell. We're equal partners in this conference."

Fair assessment?

Fair. Although some Bears will disagree, most of us realize that the PAC's strength has always been in our equal revenue sharing model and that we listen to each conference partner before arriving at a decision. Times and conferences are rapidly changing but I don't see the need to fix what's not broken. Let's hope common sense prevails. Texas is poison...whatever pretty dress she's wearing on any given day.

 

[Darth Snow]

Fair. Although some Bears will disagree, most of us realize that the PAC's strength has always been in our equal revenue sharing model and that we listen to each conference partner before arriving at a decision. Times and conferences are rapidly changing but I don't see the need to fix what's not broken. Let's hope common sense prevails. Texas is poison...whatever pretty dress she's wearing on any given day.

Not to point something out to you, but saying "the pac's strength has always been in our equal revenue" is pretty ridiculous when the pac hasn't had a single year of equal revenue distribution in its history...

 

[Pale Ale]

No kidding, I had dinner with a Texas army dude the other night. Great guy actually, but Texas through and through. He said--in all seriousness--that if Texas joins the Pac, they should put an eastern HQ in Dallas, and also, they should play the Conference Championship in Jerryworld every year, and described it as "a good opportunity for the other teams".

I can't make this **** up. He was 100% serious, and was incapable of understanding my objection.

I am often incapable of understanding anything coming from you. I feel his pain.

 

[Buffnik]

Not to point something out to you, but saying "the pac's strength has always been in our equal revenue" is pretty ridiculous when the pac hasn't had a single year of equal revenue distribution in its history...

True. Even in the Pac-12 configuration, doesn't Utah come in as a lesser partner for a short period of time?

 

[CarolinaBuff]

True. Even in the Pac-12 configuration, doesn't Utah come in as a lesser partner for a short period of time?

Yes but that was only because they were coming from a non-AQ conference.

 

[Dark Bohner]

If this is inevitable, then I hope Larry Scott is basically packaging the LHN as the regional network for UT/Tech and pulling the USC/UCLA thing where if we don't hit a certain metric, they get to keep the excess, but when we do it is all equal. Plus it HAS to be pods, period.

 

[dio]

If this is happening, Larry Scott better be getting UT in here as an equal member in all facets. Anything less spells conference ruin.

 

[liverflukes]

Not to point something out to you, but saying "the pac's strength has always been in our equal revenue" is pretty ridiculous when the pac hasn't had a single year of equal revenue distribution in its history...

True...I need to clarify that as I was thinking to the future for revenue and thinking of the present in terms of how we treat each other. How's this edit...

"one of the PAC's strengths has always been its proclivity to to treat its members in a more fair and meaningful manner despite variances in performance on an annual basis. Additionally, the recent PAC 12 television agreement and projected revenue sharing exemplifies the conference's desire to treat its members as equals at the dinner table."

While the projected distribution is not perfect (due to bringing more members on board recently as well as the guarantees for the So. Cal schools) it is closer to equal than other conferences.

 

[sackman]

I'll believe it when I see it. F**k Texas. If Larry Scott is really doing this, he just got pwned. This is the beginning of the end. Too bad, we haven't even played our first Pac 12 game yet and the clock is already ticking on it's demise. I'd give the Pac 16 (if this really comes to pass) about 10 years. Maybe less if Scott decides to retire before then.

 

[dio]

True...I need to clarify that as I was thinking to the future for revenue and thinking of the present in terms of how we treat each other. How's this edit...

"one of the PAC's strengths has always been its proclivity to to treat its members in a more fair and meaningful manner despite variances in performance on an annual basis. Additionally, the recent PAC 12 television agreement and projected revenue sharing exemplifies the conference's desire to treat its members as equals at the dinner table."

While the projected distribution is not perfect (due to bringing more members on board recently as well as the guarantees for the So. Cal schools) it is closer to equal than other conferences.

Not for long. Pac just let in a 4-team voting bloc from the get-go

 

[sackman]

I really have a hard time believing this. Do these people not remember the sh*t UT pulled last year? My God, people. Wake the eff up.

 

[Darth Snow]

one advantage of this compared to UT coming in last year is that UT is coming in with only a 4 strong voting block. UU being in the conference instead of A&M could be very important down the line.

 

[Sexton Hardcastle]

I really have a hard time believing this. Do these people not remember the sh*t UT pulled last year? My God, people. Wake the eff up.

Money talks, bull**** walks.

 

[Buffnik]

I really have a hard time believing this. Do these people not remember the sh*t UT pulled last year? My God, people. Wake the eff up.

In the famous words of Bobby Knight: I think that if rape is inevitable, relax and enjoy it.

 

[dio]

I'm very curious to see if we squeeze anything out of this. We've had a tough financial year because of the cash we had to pay on exit.

 

[JimmyBuff]

This kills whatever mojo we had going to the Pac 12. Really kills it.

 

[BuffsNYC]

This kills whatever mojo we had going to the Pac 12. Really kills it.

I disagree. Sure, Texas is a conference killer, yada yada yada. But from a football perspective, we get to be in a relatively easy pod with Utah and the Arizona schools and we get regular trips to California and the odd visit to Texas for recruiting. That's not a bad setup (for the X years before the conference implodes because of Texas.)

 

[JimmyBuff]

I disagree. Sure, Texas is a conference killer, yada yada yada. But from a football perspective, we get to be in a relatively easy pod with Utah and the Arizona schools and we get regular trips to California and the odd visit to Texas for recruiting. That's not a bad setup (for the X years before the conference implodes because of Texas.)

We went from playing UCLA and USC every year to playing them once maybe every two years. Lame.

 

[Darth Snow]

sigh. I really liked where we were. Ugh.

 

[BuffSurveyor]

I disagree. Sure, Texas is a conference killer, yada yada yada. But from a football perspective, we get to be in a relatively easy pod with Utah and the Arizona schools and we get regular trips to California and the odd visit to Texas for recruiting. That's not a bad setup (for the X years before the conference implodes because of Texas.)

That is assuming the event plays out as "reported" or "gossiped" about. If it plays out as reported, it would be the best situation possible for CU considering. But it would still suck to be in any conference with the whorns stirring in the pot.

 

[CUBUFF80]

According to the Cal board, the NCAA forbids pods, not sure why, but if it's illegal how is it an option?

 

[Buffnik]

We went from playing UCLA and USC every year to playing them once maybe every two years. Lame.

But we gain games in Texas and Oklahoma. That's significant for us. CU recruiting hinges on both California and Texas. Oklahoma puts out about what Colorado does, maybe a bit more.

 

[Buffnik]

According to the Cal board, the NCAA forbids pods, not sure why, but if it's illegal how is it an option?

NCAA rules used to forbid conference championship games until the members said they wanted them. The NCAA does not decide this thing. The conferences will tell the NCAA what they want.