|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Aug 23, 2023 19:30:59 GMT -8
Let's assume for purposes of discussion that Stanford and Cal are gone. That means that, come July 1 (I think?) of next year, only Washington State and Oregon State are left in the PAC 12. Here's what I would consider the smart thing to do:
(1) OSU and WSU should immediately announce that one will do nothing without the other.
(2) They should also announce that it is their intent that the PAC 12 will continue in 2024 and beyond, and that the conference will distribute payouts of the $420 million over 5 years to teams that are members in good standing during each of those years, but not to those who have voluntarily left.
(3) They should propose to the MWC that their conference be disbanded as of the end of the 2023 - 24 year, and that all their current members be offered an opportunity to join the PAC 12.
(4) As an enticement, for the first 5 years, they will receive 50% of the $84 million annual payout to be divided among their current member schools who come on board. (Note that this is exactly the share Cal and Stanford would have split if they stayed). Additionally, they would receive any such payouts they might have expected to receive as the MWC.
(5) All members of the new PAC 12 conference should agree to devote $2 million per year to upgrading the sport(s) where they currently are strong and which generate NCAA payouts to the conference based on schools making, and advancing in, the postseason.
(6) Simultaneously, all members should endeavor to establish and strengthen NIL organizations devoted to those specific sports.
(7) The new conference should vigorously pursue a deal with Apple, perhaps partnering with other 'have not' conferences in the West (the WAC) in this. If that is done, attempts should be made to develop intersectional rivalries in cooperation with Apple.
(8) The PAC 12 Network becomes a part of the deal.
(9) Rather rapidly, the traitor schools are going to have to come to grips with the fact that sending the non-revenue teams across the continent is killing them, and might wish to join a more regional conference in those sports. They should be told in no uncertain terms to go f&%#k themselves.
I don't see a better option. The new conference would be kidding themselves to think they could compete with the big boys in football, but if you emphasize, for example, women's basketball and throw money at it, you can have some great success. Do enough of that, and your conference becomes more valuable to Apple. When life deals you lemons, make the best lemonade you can.
|
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Aug 23, 2023 19:52:47 GMT -8
and from mr. dartboard..
Again, the latter is just a pure speculator, but it makes sense. ESPN is being cornered by Fox. If they could gut the MW and make it part of the AAC/PAC-2, then they'd own more West Coast inventory to counteract Fox.
Now, I'm REALLY on board with giving it all to Apple and just telling ESPN/Fox to talk a long walk off a short pier...
|
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Aug 23, 2023 20:01:39 GMT -8
Let's assume for purposes of discussion that Stanford and Cal are gone. That means that, come July 1 (I think?) of next year, only Washington State and Oregon State are left in the PAC 12. Here's what I would consider the smart thing to do: (1) OSU and WSU should immediately announce that one will do nothing without the other. (2) They should also announce that it is their intent that the PAC 12 will continue in 2024 and beyond, and that the conference will distribute payouts of the $420 million over 5 years to teams that are members in good standing during each of those years, but not to those who have voluntarily left. (3) They should propose to the MWC that their conference be disbanded as of the end of the 2023 - 24 year, and that all their current members be offered an opportunity to join the PAC 12. (4) As an enticement, for the first 5 years, they will receive 50% of the $84 million annual payout to be divided among their current member schools who come on board. (Note that this is exactly the share Cal and Stanford would have split if they stayed). Additionally, they would receive any such payouts they might have expected to receive as the MWC. (5) All members of the new PAC 12 conference should agree to devote $2 million per year to upgrading the sport(s) where they currently are strong and which generate NCAA payouts to the conference based on schools making, and advancing in, the postseason. (6) Simultaneously, all members should endeavor to establish and strengthen NIL organizations devoted to those specific sports. (7) The new conference should vigorously pursue a deal with Apple, perhaps partnering with other 'have not' conferences in the West (the WAC) in this. If that is done, attempts should be made to develop intersectional rivalries in cooperation with Apple. (8) The PAC 12 Network becomes a part of the deal. (9) Rather rapidly, the traitor schools are going to have to come to grips with the fact that sending the non-revenue teams across the continent is killing them, and might wish to join a more regional conference in those sports. They should be told in no uncertain terms to go f&%#k themselves. I don't see a better option. The new conference would be kidding themselves to think they could compete with the big boys in football, but if you emphasize, for example, women's basketball and throw money at it, you can have some great success. Do enough of that, and your conference becomes more valuable to Apple. When life deals you lemons, make the best lemonade you can. I really like this idea but... 1) I'd want to make sure OSU and WSU are getting more of a payout than the others. We could just as easily go to the AAC (with the exception of travel), and maybe even lure enough teams to form a Western pod. We're also the ones sitting on the pile of cash. 2) No one has yet determined how much money we'll have access to after everyone leaves. BTW, I've read some stories that suggest we could be a real **** to the other PAC-12 members and deny them money for anything this year and beyond AND seek damages for them leaving. I fully support that move  That would start 10 new rivalries. 3) I get the $2 million investment. I'd like to see the conference push a larger investment of $10-$15 million a year just in advertising. Get the word out, keep everyone in the public eye and, if an Apple deal, secure more subscriptions. 4) They'll have to move incredibly fast. I want to send out a special fu to Calford for taking all this time. They meet to discuss P5's future (and if the PAC is part of it) on August 30th. Finally, at the end of the day, I think everyone needs to take a step back and think about why we'd pursue the almighty dollar. So we can compete for a "national" championship that is stacked for the bigger schools? Are they afraid of competing at the same level as everyone else? If we decide to start a new conference, and we are targeted/screwed by the B1G/SEC, which we will be, I think we should just decide, per Chip Kelly's idea, on sponsoring a less than P4 championship and just refuse to recognize the P4 champion as the best team. |
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Aug 23, 2023 20:30:13 GMT -8
Sorry for the spam posting, but I found this quote interesting in a Yahoo Sports article...
"The ACC would stand to earn about $72 million in new money with the three expansion shares. Cal and Stanford have agreed to each take about 30% of the $24 million share, or roughly $7-10 million."
They'll essentially leave for AAC money. IF, and that's a big IF, Apple offered the same deal across multiple schools & with PAC-4 leftover money, they'd easily have more than that.
|
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 23, 2023 20:59:32 GMT -8
And if Stanford and Cal are going to join the ACC for football and basketball, where are they going to play the rest of their games? I sure western conferences hold out and don't let them in. The problem is that we don't have the votes. The first eight schools are leaving with all sports. If California and Stanford now want to stay, except in basketball and football, we don't currently have the votes to get rid of them. And it may be a condition to admit other schools that California and Stanford stay. This may be how California and Stanford make up the money that they are losing on the ACC media deal, by taking a 70% share (let's say) of the money that the Pac-12 schools are leaving behind. So, like $247 million for Oregon State and Wazzu to split and the other $173 million for California and Stanford to split, something like that. Y'all are assuming that we have leverage that we simply do not have. Too many teams have left. Oregon State and Wazzu can't outvote California and Stanford, and unless the original Pac-12 Charter was written with something like this in mind, it is hard to know how exactly this all plays out. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 23, 2023 21:22:51 GMT -8
I will say, though, that SMU leaving the AAC makes it easier to try and absorb the teams that we want from the AAC. Charlotte, East Carolina, Florida Atlantic, Memphis, Rice, South Florida, Tulane, and UTSA. Maybe take two Mountain West teams after two years: San Diego State and UNLV. West: Oregon State, Rice, San Diego State, UNLV, UTSA, and Wazzu. East: Charlotte, East Carolina, Florida Atlantic, Memphis, South Florida, and Tulane. Trips to Houston, Las Vegas, Pullman, San Antonio, and San Diego every other year. And trips to Boca Raton, Charlotte, Greenville, Memphis, New Orleans, and Tampa every fourth year. Maybe the situation changes after six years. Otherwise:  |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 23, 2023 21:30:24 GMT -8
And if Stanford and Cal are going to join the ACC for football and basketball, where are they going to play the rest of their games? I sure western conferences hold out and don't let them in. The problem is that we don't have the votes. The first eight schools are leaving with all sports. If California and Stanford now want to stay, except in basketball and football, we don't currently have the votes to get rid of them. And it may be a condition to admit other schools that California and Stanford stay. This may be how California and Stanford make up the money that they are losing on the ACC media deal, by taking a 70% share (let's say) of the money that the Pac-12 schools are leaving behind. So, like $247 million for Oregon State and Wazzu to split and the other $173 million for California and Stanford to split, something like that. Y'all are assuming that we have leverage that we simply do not have. Too many teams have left. Oregon State and Wazzu can't outvote California and Stanford, and unless the original Pac-12 Charter was written with something like this in mind, it is hard to know how exactly this all plays out. By the same token, they cannot outvote us. It all depends on how the charter was written up, can a school actually leave the league in football and basketball and still be full voting members under the charter? I'd think they would have had to find a huge loophole to do so, I doubt it was written intended to be that way. |
|
|
|
Post by avidbeaver on Aug 23, 2023 22:08:49 GMT -8
The problem is that we don't have the votes. The first eight schools are leaving with all sports. If California and Stanford now want to stay, except in basketball and football, we don't currently have the votes to get rid of them. And it may be a condition to admit other schools that California and Stanford stay. This may be how California and Stanford make up the money that they are losing on the ACC media deal, by taking a 70% share (let's say) of the money that the Pac-12 schools are leaving behind. So, like $247 million for Oregon State and Wazzu to split and the other $173 million for California and Stanford to split, something like that. Y'all are assuming that we have leverage that we simply do not have. Too many teams have left. Oregon State and Wazzu can't outvote California and Stanford, and unless the original Pac-12 Charter was written with something like this in mind, it is hard to know how exactly this all plays out. By the same token, they cannot outvote us. It all depends on how the charter was written up, can a school actually leave the league in football and basketball and still be full voting members under the charter? I'd think they would have had to find a huge loophole to do so, I doubt it was written intended to be that way. Hard to believe that Cal and Stanford would have the same power as the other two if they were allowed to stay in the conference in non revenue sports. I wouldn't allow it if I was WASU or OSU. That would be a slap in the face in my opinion. Plus if it's true that Stanford and Cal are only taking around 10 mil a share, that money will be almost eaten up with travel even though it's only for the revenue sports. Essentially they will be joining for free. If the details reported in a tweet from a media member is true. If it happens we will obviously know the details. Anyway, I wouldn't let them stay in non revenue sports no matter what happens. Assuming WASU and OSU keep the Pac alive. |
|
|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Aug 23, 2023 22:40:15 GMT -8
My post said to assume that Stanford and Cal are gone. If so, on July 1 next year, OSU and WSU have all the leverage, all the votes, and all the money. My premise was that OSU and WSU took 25% each of the money ($21 million per year) and gave the former MWC schools the remaining 50%. Truth, I wouldn't mind at all if we gave them more to make the deal work.
If Apple wanted to tie the AAC into their package, I'd be glad to see it. But I just cannot see how a conference consisting of a handful of west coast schools and a handful of east coast schools is viable.
Finally, I am now fully convinced that Stanford and Cal are leaving. If they had wanted to rebuild the PAC, I think a statement from all 4 schools would have been released by now. And OSU and WSU combined cannot rebuild the PAC into a P5 conference, nor can they find a home in any of the other power conferences. That ship has sailed.
|
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Aug 23, 2023 22:52:39 GMT -8
First... from how the California university system trustees voted to allow UCLA to leave, giving Cal "damages", I'm not sure they're going to allow Cal to leave. Cal is $420 mil in debt. The university is already funding the AD so it doesn't appear they are losing $16 mil more/year. How could the trustees allow Cal to take pocket change and go further in debt? And, certainly Cal would also lose the UCLA $ if they too are leaving?
Second, Stanford has a athletic endowment, but 75-80% of it is targeted. It was donated for specific reasons that can not be altered even by a vote. The other 20-25% is controlled by a trustee vote. It is not to be used to fund the AD in general terms without a vote. It is said that those votes for change are tough to come by.
Third, I'm not sure how the Pac12 SOPs are written, but in other conferences partial (affiliate) members do not have a vote on conference affairs. The Pac12 has affiliate members now in certain sports. They have no say in the day to day running of the conference. So, in leaving Cal & Stanford could ask to be affiliate members, but could not force their way in.
I'm guessing Apple holds the cards in what will eventually happen. And, that negotiation is what has been ongoing. Apple has to start their research all over and see what makes sense. The Pac4 or most likely 2 need to gain traction in adding potential schools. If Apple have significant interest in Pac2 or 4 merger with the MWC it will happen. With or without the Bay area schools. The Bay area is a big market, but those two do not draw a big set of eyes.
And, again a guess, what ever the initial setup is like it'll probably be tweaked again in a year or two.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 23, 2023 22:59:22 GMT -8
My post said to assume that Stanford and Cal are gone. If so, on July 1 next year, OSU and WSU have all the leverage, all the votes, and all the money. My premise was that OSU and WSU took 25% each of the money ($21 million per year) and gave the former MWC schools the remaining 50%. Truth, I wouldn't mind at all if we gave them more to make the deal work. If Apple wanted to tie the AAC into their package, I'd be glad to see it. But I just cannot see how a conference consisting of a handful of west coast schools and a handful of east coast schools is viable. Finally, I am now fully convinced that Stanford and Cal are leaving. If they had wanted to rebuild the PAC, I think a statement from all 4 schools would have been released by now. And OSU and WSU combined cannot rebuild the PAC into a P5 conference, nor can they find a home in any of the other power conferences. That ship has sailed. Hopefully Stanford and Cal make up their minds way way way before next summer. The actual date I think is August 1st of 2024, but as soon as the teams announce they are leaving they are out of the voting picture. We're down to 4 now, if it's going to be the Pac 2, I'd hope it happens immediately. If the Pac 2 is going to salvage the conference, it'd need to add 8 teams just to not have to scramble to find an extra OOC game or games. The longer that gets put off, the trickier it could become. |
|
|
|
Post by jimbeav on Aug 23, 2023 23:10:28 GMT -8
Stanford has decided to sacrifice money for conference prestige, and lock up a spot in a P4 conference as their absolute top priority, dollars be damned.
Personally, I think this is a sound strategy. I believe we should do everything we possibly can to follow suit.
I'm convinced this realignment is the beginning of the end of equal conference distribution. Too many schools have now shown a willingness to sacrifice dollars to not be left standing when the music stops, and we should get used to that as a small market school.
It's time to accept less money, but still play worthy competition.
If we are only going to net $10 million in any Pac West or Pac American Conference, I would rather approach both the B!G and Big12 and ask for membership with that same $10 million payout. All while making very subtle gestures to the army of lawyers waiting on the sidelines ready to pounce if we aren't taken care of.
Joining either conference would give it a 6-team western pod, which should be something that either conference would find valuable, to make travel costs more manageable.
A guy can dream, anyway....
|
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Aug 23, 2023 23:40:49 GMT -8
And if Stanford and Cal are going to join the ACC for football and basketball, where are they going to play the rest of their games? I sure western conferences hold out and don't let them in. The problem is that we don't have the votes. The first eight schools are leaving with all sports. If California and Stanford now want to stay, except in basketball and football, we don't currently have the votes to get rid of them. And it may be a condition to admit other schools that California and Stanford stay. This may be how California and Stanford make up the money that they are losing on the ACC media deal, by taking a 70% share (let's say) of the money that the Pac-12 schools are leaving behind. So, like $247 million for Oregon State and Wazzu to split and the other $173 million for California and Stanford to split, something like that. Y'all are assuming that we have leverage that we simply do not have. Too many teams have left. Oregon State and Wazzu can't outvote California and Stanford, and unless the original Pac-12 Charter was written with something like this in mind, it is hard to know how exactly this all plays out. I agree that we don't have the leverage for votes; we can't dictate the terms of the Pac. It's a 2-2 tie. Still...what is Stanfornia going to do for the non-revenue sports? If they hold out in the Pac 12 and OSU and WSU leave, they have nowhere to play. That's not a thing you can just solve in a month or two. That would be a self-defeating strategy. |
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Aug 24, 2023 7:10:22 GMT -8
Stanford has decided to sacrifice money for conference prestige, and lock up a spot in a P4 conference as their absolute top priority, dollars be damned. Personally, I think this is a sound strategy. I believe we should do everything we possibly can to follow suit. I'm convinced this realignment is the beginning of the end of equal conference distribution. Too many schools have now shown a willingness to sacrifice dollars to not be left standing when the music stops, and we should get used to that as a small market school. It's time to accept less money, but still play worthy competition. If we are only going to net $10 million in any Pac West or Pac American Conference, I would rather approach both the B!G and Big12 and ask for membership with that same $10 million payout. All while making very subtle gestures to the army of lawyers waiting on the sidelines ready to pounce if we aren't taken care of. Joining either conference would give it a 6-team western pod, which should be something that either conference would find valuable, to make travel costs more manageable. A guy can dream, anyway.... I'm sure all these avenues have been explored.....at the end of the day we just didn't make the cut. We are being relegated to the MW. It's that simple. |
|
|
|
Post by jrbeavo on Aug 24, 2023 8:52:50 GMT -8
And if Stanford and Cal are going to join the ACC for football and basketball, where are they going to play the rest of their games? I sure western conferences hold out and don't let them in. The problem is that we don't have the votes. The first eight schools are leaving with all sports. If California and Stanford now want to stay, except in basketball and football, we don't currently have the votes to get rid of them. And it may be a condition to admit other schools that California and Stanford stay. This may be how California and Stanford make up the money that they are losing on the ACC media deal, by taking a 70% share (let's say) of the money that the Pac-12 schools are leaving behind. So, like $247 million for Oregon State and Wazzu to split and the other $173 million for California and Stanford to split, something like that. Y'all are assuming that we have leverage that we simply do not have. Too many teams have left. Oregon State and Wazzu can't outvote California and Stanford, and unless the original Pac-12 Charter was written with something like this in mind, it is hard to know how exactly this all plays out. Not sure I understand how this would all work. If Stanford and Cal could leave for FB and BB, and stay for all other sports (thereby retaining voting rights in this scenario) then how in the world did at least USC/UCLA/UO/UW not pursue this option? It is the Chip Kelly idea manifest. |
|
That would start 10 new rivalries.
