|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 11, 2023 11:47:50 GMT -8
I'm not sure we'll ever know the truth as to whether Kliavkoff presented the deal and the presidents rejected it or Kliavkoff presented the deal and added, "but I think/know we can get more." I don't know if the $30 million deal from ESPN was true; some media sources at the time said that ESPN had low-balled the Pca 12 to the tune of $20-$25 million/year. I don't know if we'll ever know if Kliavkoff lied to the presidents. It's very easier to blame the other guy when a deal falls apart and a huge loss is suffered and Canzano is citing his sources as Pac 12 insiders. I do know that some of Canzano's sources, especially the ones who (according to Canzano) told him that it would be a "slam dunk" that the Pac 12 would beat the Big 12 deal, were wrong. Dead wrong. The record as it stands right now looks like the sources outside of Wilner and Canzano appear to have had a firmer grasp on reality for the situation than those two. This is especially true on the matter that at least a few Pac 12 presidents would balk at a heavily streaming-laden deal. The President of UA said that publicly several times. We will likely never know the full truth. And we will likely never know the truth of the past decisions as well. Did conference presidents reject BYU for years? Did they reject expansion from Big 12 teams, including Texas and Oklahoma, in the early 2010s? Did they reject expansion from Big 12 teams when Texas and Oklahoma bolted to the SEC? Did they support Larry Scott even when his plan was falling apart? Did the Big 12 use a PR company to, amongst other things, attack the Pac 12 in the last year? Did Fox and/or ESPN try to sabotage the Pac 12 to increase bargaining power for their networks? Too many questions for which we'll likely never have complete answers. But for the demise of the Pac 12, I think there's plenty of blame to go around. So last summer there was a fairly well covered offer by EXPN of 24.5 million per team for "tier 1" PAC 12 games. Not sure exactly what that means, but it sounds as though it would be the "best" games each week and the league could still have inventory to negotiate with. This story said ESPN offered 30 a team late last fall or early winter and "they want it all" and walked away when the Pac said they should get 50. Wouldn't shock me if both are true. The first one is google-able, the second one is very similar to a story going around earlier this year on the podcasts, probably a grain of truth to this. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Aug 11, 2023 12:03:45 GMT -8
Part of the problem is that these deals are presented to the school presidents. It seems as if the deals should be presented to athletic directors and they would in turn lay it out for each school’s administrators. I’m sure there are presidents who have little interest in athletics and other who have very little knowledge. While they would have the final word, a better understanding of the landscape would help them make rational decisions George K was essentially a CEO - his leadership is what is relied upon. Reducing him to a messenger boy bringing it to the schools and flopping it out on the table for the presidents to make their choice is an intellectually limited view of how these things go down. Kliavkoff was there to bring the deal and then explain why it was a good deal and to get it done, that failure is on him. So you know it was his presentation that was too blame. As CEO he is at the whim of the board. That's how these things work. CEO presents... board decides no matter if CEO advisesfor of against. Again, that's how it works. In this case membership of this "board" may have had ulterior motives early on. It's pretty clear from day 1 (excluded LA schools) the CEO was lead to believe the board was "on board" and supportive. It was not. Board members mislead the CEO. The board set up the initial $50 mil offer, it's they who voted down the ESPN deal eventually presented. It's truly intellectually limiting way of thinking that a guy who has zero votes nixed the deal. Why? Because he didn't present it correctly? Because the powers that held the vote and hired him decided the course of action? Even if the CEO advised against said $30 mil per deal (zero evidence to suggest that) the board votes are the board's choice. Boards go against CEO advice all the time. In this case (8) board members left, leaving the CEO holding the bag. |
|
|
|
Post by beaver55to7 on Aug 11, 2023 14:21:54 GMT -8
George K was essentially a CEO - his leadership is what is relied upon. Reducing him to a messenger boy bringing it to the schools and flopping it out on the table for the presidents to make their choice is an intellectually limited view of how these things go down. Kliavkoff was there to bring the deal and then explain why it was a good deal and to get it done, that failure is on him. So you know it was his presentation that was too blame. As CEO he is at the whim of the board. That's how these things work. CEO presents... board decides no matter if CEO advisesfor of against. Again, that's how it works. In this case membership of this "board" may have had ulterior motives early on. It's pretty clear from day 1 (excluded LA schools) the CEO was lead to believe the board was "on board" and supportive. It was not. Board members mislead the CEO. The board set up the initial $50 mil offer, it's they who voted down the ESPN deal eventually presented. It's truly intellectually limiting way of thinking that a guy who has zero votes nixed the deal. Why? Because he didn't present it correctly? Because the powers that held the vote and hired him decided the course of action? Even if the CEO advised against said $30 mil per deal (zero evidence to suggest that) the board votes are the board's choice. Boards go against CEO advice all the time. In this case (8) board members left, leaving the CEO holding the bag. To add to what you are saying George K has been pretty tight lipped but when someone asked if he would resign after last Friday, he said something to the effect that there have been several opportunities in the last year to resign, but he has decided to forge on and do the best that he can for what remains of the conference. I think that means that several times the board went against his advice and he could have easily resigned when that happened with good conscience. |
|
|
|
Post by speakthetruth on Aug 11, 2023 14:28:29 GMT -8
You know maybe it didn't matter what "reasonable" offer ESpN made certain schools were looking for a way to leave.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Aug 11, 2023 14:32:57 GMT -8
You know maybe it didn't matter what "reasonable" offer ESpN made certain schools were looking for a way to leave. I believe that definitely true of Oregon. Once the SoCals left, they started doing everything they could behind the scenes so they could follow. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 11, 2023 15:01:15 GMT -8
Also to add to the mention that George K may have been misled. They also were potentially misleading leadership from other schools.
There probably were some very disappointed school leadership present when UW and uo pulled the no show for the granting of rights meeting with the other 7 schools Friday morning. 7 showed up, apparently ready to sign, 2 didn't. Barnes mentioned his dissatisfaction publicly, and I bet he was sugar coating it as tactfully as he could.
|
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Aug 11, 2023 18:10:57 GMT -8
Also to add to the mention that George K may have been misled. They also were potentially misleading leadership from other schools. There probably were some very disappointed school leadership present when UW and uo pulled the no show for the granting of rights meeting with the other 7 schools Friday morning. 7 showed up, apparently ready to sign, 2 didn't. Barnes mentioned his dissatisfaction publicly, and I bet he was sugar coating it as tactfully as he could. This. UW has said they were following along with what Whoregon was doing. They have had three Presidents in the last year. So maybe they have been adrift somewhat. The current pres is John Scholz. He started July 1 (this year) and was named on March 13. Nearly his entire career has been at U of Wisconsin and their system. The interim President was Jamie Moffitt. She was named interim on March 13. Her schooling was Harvard and she had been in Oregon since 2001. Before Moffitt was Michael Schill. He left in 2022 to become the President at Northwestern University. He is an Ivy leaguer who came to Eugene from the University of Chicago. Even AD Rob Mullens got his degrees at the West Virginia and came to Eugene from U of Kentucky. I don't know how involved Phil Knight is now with the university's decisions. I think he is 86 or 87 now. If he is not actively giving directions, no one from their brain trust has any Oregon ties. They think they are going back home. And who really cares about student-athletes, alumni, rivalries, relationships and so on. They clearly did not. |
|
|
|
Post by qbeaver on Aug 11, 2023 18:56:09 GMT -8
It’s the presidents who decide this …not George. He is the presenter of what the presidents want. He has no vote. Stop blaming him for this.
|
|
|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Aug 11, 2023 19:24:22 GMT -8
If George were fired right now, who could the conference possibly get to take the job? What passes for the PAC 12 is in total disarray in August, will be even more so in September, and will continue further down that road every month through July, 2025. And then the whole thing ends, and everybody in the office loses their job - except there won't be too many there since they all started looking for another job 2 weeks ago.
The bad blood cannot possibly be limited to boards like this. In any dealings going forward, the 4 remaining schools are just going to be hellbent for leather to thwart the traitors at every opportunity. No decisions will be taken "for the overall good of the conference" and nobody's going to "take one for the team." It's not going to be pretty.
|
|
|
|
Post by ee1990 on Aug 11, 2023 19:56:21 GMT -8
It all seems irrelevant at this point. The power broker programs were never going to stay for 30 million a year. Maaaaaybe if we sign that deal the Pac-10 sticks together until the next expansion window, but that's just kicking the grenade down the road.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt90 on Aug 11, 2023 19:58:49 GMT -8
I am sincerely wondering if we will be able to have baseball and softball tournaments. Who will be around the conference offices to organize all of that. Anybody who is there now that could do it will surely be gone by then. I am sure all of the tournaments will be impacted. And marketing, and who is going to be still working at the network, in front or behind the cameras?
|
|
|
|
Post by ee1990 on Aug 11, 2023 19:58:57 GMT -8
At the end of the day Fox and ESPN are the ultimate culprits Too bad the universities wouldn't stand together against these monsters.....instead they take the money and leave scorched earth behind. What would you do? Come on, keep it real. Also, what's the alternative here, federal regulation? The universities will take the money and fund law schools and lacrosse teams. Everyone is the monster, all of us. |
|
|
|
Post by ee1990 on Aug 11, 2023 20:44:47 GMT -8
It’s the presidents who decide this …not George. He is the presenter of what the presidents want. He has no vote. Stop blaming him for this. ffs. His job is literally to sell the conference to people who want to give us money for bobble heads and television rights. |
|
|
|
Post by qbeaver on Aug 12, 2023 9:52:42 GMT -8
It’s the presidents who decide this …not George. He is the presenter of what the presidents want. He has no vote. Stop blaming him for this. ffs. His job is literally to sell the conference to people who want to give us money for bobble heads and television rights. Does the conference deserve more than 30 million a year minus the Los Angeles schools? I don’t think so. I don’t know how many osu fans have ever gone to a game in the $EC or Big 10,and the interest isn’t anywhere close at osu versus those schools. The networks aren’t stupid. It’s all about eyeballs. I 100% blame the school presidents. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Aug 12, 2023 10:09:35 GMT -8
I am sincerely wondering if we will be able to have baseball and softball tournaments. Who will be around the conference offices to organize all of that. Anybody who is there now that could do it will surely be gone by then. I am sure all of the tournaments will be impacted. And marketing, and who is going to be still working at the network, in front or behind the cameras? Losing those unnecessary tournaments wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. The championship banners they hand out are going to be pretty useless as well. To answer the previous poster, Northwestern is a Big Ten school. I've been to a football game at Northwestern, several in fact, and at Minnesota too. Electric isn't the descriptor that immediately springs to mind. |
|
