Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Pac-12 expansion is now inevitable

MiamiBuffs said:
I get it that this is bad blood from the past. Texas carved their fiefdom out of the BigXII and assured that they dominated at the expense of the 11 others. But where has that gotten them? The departure of Nebraska, Missouri, and Colorado, all prominent teams. And the loss of in state rival A&M that allowed the SEC to get a foot hold into the large and lucrative Dallas and Houston TV markets. Next they added the Longhorn Network, a largely worthless venture outside of the state that gets them less eyeballs and a check from ESPN. But one that has further and further divided the remaining conference partners and frozen their negotiating power in a bad place.

Thus, Texas has already weakened its own position due to greed and self interest. And some of the administrators behind that initial hubris that created this mess have moved on. At some point the rest of the conference is likely going to implode because a. more partners will leave forcing Texas to the table with someone. Or b. Texas will leave first for someone with more money.

I suspect it will be a. because they cant set aside their ego. Once that LHN money dries up they have a problem; They will be getting far less revenue than their peers and they will be in a conference of angry have nots.

But at the end of the day, like it or not, engineering a 2 or 4 team expansion that includes UT and OU would financially benefit the Pac 12.
Click to expand...
And if Larry Scott's dealings with DTV have taught us anything it's that he doesn't like cutting sweetheart deals even if that means foregoing some revenue in the short term. I suspect Texas will get the DTV treatment: we'd love to have you, but you'll need to accept the same deal everyone else is getting. Whether Texas would accept those terms is another story.
 
if we are going to get involved in a university level schlong waving contest, i am pretty sure the cabal of ucla, usc, cal, stanford, and even the rest of us can control texassss.
 
im so sorry, baby. I didn't mean it. I'll change. I promise.

It's like a bunch of battered wives around here. "But I love him!"
 
sackman said:
im so sorry, baby. I didn't mean it. I'll change. I promise.

It's like a bunch of battered wives around here. "But I love him!"
Click to expand...

It's not his fault, the ex-'s just didn't understand him. "If they had been more understanding and helped him everything would have been fine".
 
Buffnik said:
To that point, Alabama just paid its strength coach over $500k a year. That's more than 10 of the MAC head coaches.

We will start seeing those types of differences between the SEC or B1G and the Pac-12 if something isn't done. When their coordinators are making more than our HCs and their position coaches are making more than our coordinators, it's going to be hard to compete. That's not far off right now.
Click to expand...
SEC coordinators will have to take a pay cut if they want to become a HC in another P5 conference. Haha
 
this is why Pac12 expansion some conference realignment is inevitable (because conference realignment has been taking place almost continuously since 1945).

NYT link
wiki link

that being said, I'm not convinced it's imminent for the Pac.
 
Didn't know whether to post this in an old Pac-12 DTV thread or here.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...ing_wp_cron=1466718036.9957458972930908203125

"How does the situation stand now? When the Big Ten’s new deal kicks in, the Pac-12 schools will received approximately 55 percent as much TV revenue as their peers.

...

*** In general, and not surprisingly, Scott’s view of the revenue gap is no different than his view of the state of the Pac-12 Networks:

He takes the long view.

'The most important thing,' he said at the outset of the conversation about the revenue gap, 'is to optimize the long-term value of our rights.'"
 
I think most Buff fans realize adding Texas would add more revenue, they just don't want anything to do with them. All I know is that I'd have an instant PAC team to hate which I'm having a hard time doing with most of the schools though Cal and ASU are trending in that direction.
 
bigskybuff said:
I think most Buff fans realize adding Texas would add more revenue, they just don't want anything to do with them. All I know is that I'd have an instant PAC team to hate which I'm having a hard time doing with most of the schools though Cal and ASU are trending in that direction.
Click to expand...

Uhm ...... whoregon ?
 
The argument that the "Pac-12 Culture" is one of "equality" is a very short-term viewpoint. Until Larry Scott (and Kevin Weiberg) were hired and began their march towards the symbiotic goals of Expansion/TV Contract renegotiation; the Pac-10 had disproportionate revenue sharing that was even more favorable for the top schools than the Big 12 had at the time.

Kevin Weiberg (who was former Big 12 commissioner) stated that this was the primary limiting factor on the Big 12's growth and ability to monetize on their conference revenue potential (ala a conference TV network) and so he helped Larry Scott convince the Pac-10 president's to follow the Big Ten model of equal shares. This was also a "checkmark" for CU when considering accepting the invitation to join.

Weiberg is now gone. Larry Scott is playing out his "hired gun" role of bringing the Pac-12 up to par with the other leagues and now seems to be hitting his plateau as commissioner.

I am NOT saying that means expansion; but it does mean the conference presidents (who care very much about "maintaining their status"; and not many of whom were in place when Scott was hired) will begin to consider their options. However, the opportunity that expansion creates for the Pac is that there is typically a clause to renegotiate the TV contracts due to expansion.

The Pac is always going to be playing catch-up to the Big Ten and SEC in sports revenue. But they don't want to fall so far behind that it isn't even close; and they don't want to fall below the ACC or Big 12. None of this has anything to do with on-the-field product; it is only access to revenue streams which makes sustainability in a budget-challenged future far more possible.

The ACC is in a somewhat strong position to maintain a 3rd/4th position with their national following in basketball, elite football programs like FSU and Clemson; link with Notre Dame and the potential expansion candidates available to them if ever they needed to. They still haven't dipped their toe in the conference network arena either.

The Big 12 however does pose a threat to the Pac-12 and an opportunity. The Big 12 is made up of "football crazy" hotbeds, with strong basketball programs, large alumi bases (at least among the flagship programs). The catch-22 with the Big 12 is that the "downfall" won't happen unless Oklahoma or Texas leave but OU/UT won't leave unless the Big 12 downfall is imminent. If OU/UT move to another conference (B1G or SEC), the Pac will never find programs to increase their brand (and therefore value) even within 60% of those programs.

The hurdle for the Big Ten to find suitable expansion candidates if ever they go to 16 just got raise tremendously. Only OU, Texas, Florida State, or maybe Clemson would add incremental value to their existing contracts.

The hurdle for adding Texas, is of course the LHN. If the LHN can be "purchased" from ESPN and rebrand it as the regional Pac network equivalent; then also include some type of broadcast deal from ESPN (Pac-12 Southwest for example). If the accretive value to adding Texas to the Pac creates enough value then the conference could pull that off. It might also instigate ESPN into partnering with the Pac on their conference networks to add distribution channels and share production costs. I guarantee that ESPN's contract with LHN allows for them to assign the rights to a potential "buyer". The caveat for Texas might be that they want a bigger share of the revenue from said channel rather than it going into the "shared pot". If this applied to just the regional network channel; then I could see how USC/UCLA and Stanford/Cal would also want to explore that idea as well for all Pac regional networks.
 
BehindEnemyLines said:
Uhm ...... whoregon ?
Click to expand...
I just don't have the hate for these schools like I did the Big 12. I love the West and find we have so much more in common. I like Helfrich and think Oregon got their once in a lifetime coach in Kelly and that they will be a good, sometimes really good program but nothing like they were under him. None of the PAC schools are trying dominate the conference either which a big reason I can't stand Texas.
 
Buffs35 said:
Didn't know whether to post this in an old Pac-12 DTV thread or here.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...ing_wp_cron=1466718036.9957458972930908203125

"How does the situation stand now? When the Big Ten’s new deal kicks in, the Pac-12 schools will received approximately 55 percent as much TV revenue as their peers.

...

*** In general, and not surprisingly, Scott’s view of the revenue gap is no different than his view of the state of the Pac-12 Networks:

He takes the long view.

'The most important thing,' he said at the outset of the conversation about the revenue gap, 'is to optimize the long-term value of our rights.'"
Click to expand...
I always laugh when people hang on every word a public figure states officially.
 
bigskybuff said:
I just don't have the hate for these schools like I did the Big 12. I love the West and find we have so much more in common. I like Helfrich and think Oregon got their once in a lifetime coach in Kelly and that they will be a good, sometimes really good program but nothing like they were under him. None of the PAC schools are trying dominate the conference either which a big reason I can't stand Texas.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think you nailed it on the cultural differences that also made it easier to hate the NUs and OUs of the world. Texas fits thats mold.
 
iirc, when the Pac-12 was looking at expansion the last time around the schools it looked at were Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas and Houston (with an acceptance that if the conference could get UT and OU that it would take whichever 2 others it had to in order to make them happy).

Houston is sitting there with the #15 recruiting class in the nation right now per Rivals. Nation's #10 media market. 2 year old stadium that seats 40k and can be expanded to 60k. 3rd largest university in Texas. Tier One research ranking by Carnegie Foundation.

Would be a great move for the Pac-12, but need another school to come with them. It would almost have to be Oklahoma to make it work.
 
Buffnik said:
iirc, when the Pac-12 was looking at expansion the last time around the schools it looked at were Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas and Houston (with an acceptance that if the conference could get UT and OU that it would take whichever 2 others it had to in order to make them happy).

Houston is sitting there with the #15 recruiting class in the nation right now per Rivals. Nation's #10 media market. 2 year old stadium that seats 40k and can be expanded to 60k. 3rd largest university in Texas. Tier One research ranking by Carnegie Foundation.

Would be a great move for the Pac-12, but need another school to come with them. It would almost have to be Oklahoma to make it work.
Click to expand...
The combo of OU, UT and Houston would bring two top 10 media markets in Dallas and Houston and three mid size markets in Austin (39), San Antonio (32) and Oklahoma City (43). Anything on top of that is just gravy IMO and obviously Kansas would be the most desirable but if the Raiders end up moving to LV and they build that huge indoor stadium for UNLV I could see that being viable as well.
 
Woah http://www.chron.com/sports/cougars...rector-Hunter-Yurachek-meets-with-8385031.php

University of Houston athletic director Hunter Yurachek recently met with the commissioner of the Pac-12 Conference, a source close to the university told the Houston Chronicle on Monday.

The meeting between Yurachek and Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott was held in San Francisco in June. The source did not disclose the nature of the talks, but it is believed that one of the topics was conference expansion.
Click to expand...
 
Guess it's about time to think about welcoming our Texas overlords (again)
 
Skidmark said:
Guess it's about time to think about welcoming our Texas overlords (again)
Click to expand...

Would Tex-ass be a no-brainer? I would think TT and Baptist-hypocrites would make a stink if Texas left them in the cold. And why would they give up the longhorn network? It probably makes more than the Pac-12 network.
 
Buffnik said:
I would 100% support the addition of Houston to the Pac-12. The question would be who came in with them. Quite the flyover between Phoenix or Denver and Houston.
Click to expand...
I think the number one goal from a conference revenue standpoint is to put as much pressure on UT as possible to come alone. The best way to do that IMO is to try and add Houston and OU.
 
No-Meme-The-Office-03.jpg
 
onealcd said:
I think the number one goal from a conference revenue standpoint is to put as much pressure on UT as possible to come alone. The best way to do that IMO is to try and add Houston and OU.
Click to expand...

Yes, but UT is looking for a conference that allows it to have its own revenue deal rather than be an equal partner. Any more, given academics and revenue splits, I think that UT would join the ACC with Notre Dame if it ever had to leave for a new conference. Until that day, it prefers to be in a conference it can dominate. Frankly, they could replace Oklahoma with Cincinnati in the Big 12 (10) and it wouldn't impact UT's ability to qualify for the football playoff, appear on national tv, make more money than just about any other school, and run its other athletics programs at one of the highest levels.

I think we should forget about UT.

But, yeah, Houston + Oklahoma would be the best possible scenario for a Pac-14.
 
Buffnik said:
I would 100% support the addition of Houston to the Pac-12. The question would be who came in with them. Quite the flyover between Phoenix or Denver and Houston. Maybe SMU if we know that UT is never going to happen? Adding the Dallas and Houston markets for media, recruiting and road trip destinations wouldn't suck at all.
Click to expand...
SMU? NO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top