What's new
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!

  • Are you enjoying the start of the season as as much as the administrators at Allbuffs? Do you want to commiserate with felow Buff fans ? Then 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 Losing USC and UCLA - "Everybody talking out of their ass"

SINKRATZ

PhD in Analogy
Club Member
also, i doubt it, but imagine if ucla already signed the GoR with the big. now we are talking nuclear ****ing outcomes for everyone. malpractice, multiple law suits and years of uncertainty. i would definitely be down for the absolute carnage.
If they did all that and just didn’t bother to get BOR approval then they deserve everything that’s coming to them.
 

hokiehead

Gobbler on the Mountain
Club Member
I’m hoping (against hope) that the BOR blocks the move for many reasons, not the least of which is the situation it would create for USC. **** those guys.
I'm not following.

what's the big deal with the potential "situation" it would create for USC? seems if UCLA doesn't go B1G, it's more a problem for the current members of the B1G (specifically w/ travel expenses) than it is for USC.
 

PAC MAN

Retired Sports Fan.
Club Member
Liking what is going on now since it increases the likehood that Stanford goes to the B1G in place of UCLA.

PAC can stay at 10 for awhile.
 

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member
Liking what is going on now since it increases the likehood that Stanford goes to the B1G in place of UCLA.

PAC can stay at 10 for awhile.
We would not stay at 10. Also, if we lost USC & Stanford we'd need to add a private school for financial disclosure protections. That likely means SMU.
 

Not Sure

Sets low bar, barely exceeds it.
Club Member
We would not stay at 10. Also, if we lost USC & Stanford we'd need to add a private school for financial disclosure protections. That likely means SMU.
DU. Would be epic. Sure, they don’t have a football team, but that means we would get an automatic win when we play them. Make it happen, George.
 

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member
I don't understand why that is important
I'm not an accountant or financial attorney, but as I understand it there would be full public disclosure mandated for a conference if all members were public universities. With a private college in the mix, they have a right to keep their books confidential and that then extends to the conference of which they're a member.
 

Jayne Cobb

One Damn Dirty Ape
Club Member

just read this and it has some really interesting tidbits i hadn't seen before.

it seems ucla will have to pay a breakup fee to the big of 15mm if the deal doesn't go through. this is going to be fun.
The article also says that the Pac-12 has agreed to pay that $15mil if UCLA breaks the agreement and remains in the Pac. And to give UCLA a higher percentage of revenue than the other schools. Both of which I really, really hate.
 

Jayne Cobb

One Damn Dirty Ape
Club Member
I'm not an accountant or financial attorney, but as I understand it there would be full public disclosure mandated for a conference if all members were public universities. With a private college in the mix, they have a right to keep their books confidential and that then extends to the conference of which they're a member.
I don't see how that can be. The PAC-12 is not a state agency, so it is not subject to public records laws like Colorado's CORA. On the other hand, all of the state universities are. So, anyone can file a CORA request for CU for any Pac-12 related records in the possession of CU, and CU's response would not depend on whether some other entity is a private or public institution. There are numerous news stories where reporters have used public records laws to get communications related to the Pac from public universities, for instance regarding the commissioner and regarding UCLA leaving. So I don't see that there is any benefit disclosure-wise to having a private university as a member of the conference. I think it may be an urban legend.
 

skibum

Did not pee on the Alamo.
Club Member
So, anyone can file a CORA request for CU for any Pac-12 related records in the possession of CU, and CU's response would not depend on whether some other entity is a private or public institution.
Except that CORA (and all records disclosure laws) have explicit exceptions, where government agencies can withhold records that contain private business information or trade secrets.

So, if any CU official had emails about what the potential distributions to the school is from a current media distribution offer, that record is protected because by disclosing it, CU would be disclosing a trade secret of a private party (Stanford and USC). OTOH, if all members of the pac-12 are public entities, then it's hard to argue that any piece of financial information (unless it relates to individually identifiable people) is a private trade secret.

There are probably other exceptions that could apply, but in practice they would necessitate a higher standard of proof by the university to deny handing over the record, whereas the courts in this country generally bend over backwards to protect private financial information.
 

PAC MAN

Retired Sports Fan.
Club Member
I'm not an accountant or financial attorney, but as I understand it there would be full public disclosure mandated for a conference if all members were public universities. With a private college in the mix, they have a right to keep their books confidential and that then extends to the conference of which they're a member.

We didn't have that issue back in the Big 8 with all the schools being public. The original plan for the Big 12 didn't include TT and Baylor. That is probably a SEC fable since they have Vandy.
 

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member
We didn't have that issue back in the Big 8 with all the schools being public. The original plan for the Big 12 didn't include TT and Baylor. That is probably a SEC fable since they have Vandy.
Might be. Big 8 is a good point. All the other conferences have at least that 1 private member and I did read something about the SEC favoring Miami over FSU due in part to private school advantages for the conference.

Anyway, if I'm right about this being a thing there are other options (like inviting Gonzaga as a non-football member).
 

Liver

modded mod
Club Member
Junta Member
The article also says that the Pac-12 has agreed to pay that $15mil if UCLA breaks the agreement and remains in the Pac. And to give UCLA a higher percentage of revenue than the other schools. Both of which I really, really hate.
i don't hate it as much as i used to... ucla gets a chance to finally not be in the shadow of big daddy usc, and we get to keep access to the la market. sdsu draws a reduced share... it isn't perfect. but, here is the thing--- for everyone other than usc, the easiest path to the playoff is by staying in the pac.

this would also include the likes of stanford, who have been able to be sometimes relevant in the pac and would be worse than northwestern in the big.

if the remaining 10 agree to stick together and ucla gets held and sdsu gets added, it sounds like from reports are that the per school distribution in the pac will be significantly higher than the b12 and while lower than the big or sec, still a big enough jump to stay relevant... maybe.

and, i also think it very likely that whatever is left of the pac will do a streaming first deal. long term, this should be a good thing. short term it might suck for some viewers...

so many moving parts and so many words (from me) saying we still don't know **** and are still talking out of our asses.
 

Alfred91

9th Degree Black Belt
Club Member
This whole dance feels more like a negotiation than a decision.

My thought is that Cal wants to be reimbursed for UCLA leaving them in the dust, and UCLA is going to come back with a counter.
 

buff4bcs1985

Hope Poisons the Soul
Club Member

Read the next tweet in the chain....



come on people....
Tom Delonge Wtf GIF
 

Liver

modded mod
Club Member
Junta Member
amzn will not overpay. but if they get all tiers, they are going to investment spend on this.

the number is bull **** but the idea is not.

also: twitter sucks dead donkey balls.
 

patebuff

Club Member
Club Member
amzn will not overpay. but if they get all tiers, they are going to investment spend on this.

the number is bull **** but the idea is not.

also: twitter sucks dead donkey balls.
I could see them overpaying to get into college football. Their NFL deal looks awful right now but they can absorb that for a bit.

If they do overpay, it won’t be much of a difference though
 

Liver

modded mod
Club Member
Junta Member
I could see them overpaying to get into college football. Their NFL deal looks awful right now but they can absorb that for a bit.

If they do overpay, it won’t be much of a difference though
i could see some creative ways for amazon to go big.... online retail needs spokespeople. entertainment needs spokespeople. how about a big ass NIL collective to pac 12 players side by side with the tv contract?

it could change the college football landscape.
 
Top