|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 3, 2024 22:09:14 GMT -8
If the part of Daschel's Q&A I saw on X was accurate, Barnes said he's been talking to Brett Yormark of the Big 12 and to the ACC as well.
Interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jan 3, 2024 22:29:24 GMT -8
If the part of Daschel's Q&A I saw on X was accurate, Barnes said he's been talking to Brett Yormark of the Big 12 and to the ACC as well. Interesting. Yep. Talking to both the ACC and Big Twelve. |
|
|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Jan 3, 2024 23:12:24 GMT -8
Talk is just that. Politicians and so called diplomats do it incessantly; most of the time, little comes of it. I would expect Barnes to be talking to people all over the country, but hopefully not too frequently with the ACC folks. But I would be very surprised if anything came out of it anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Jan 3, 2024 23:49:05 GMT -8
FBS Conference Presidents are a club of 10, and I bet they talk to each other frequently. One of those guys is essentially a lame duck and Barnes and Chun frankly are the contact men when it comes to the future of the Pac-12 conference - why wouldn't they be talking to the other conference leadership?
Still holding your breath that we will somehow be absorbed by the BIG-12 or ACC? I expect it to be a very very low priority, desire, or outcome, for either side.
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 4, 2024 0:10:42 GMT -8
FBS Conference Presidents are a club of 10, and I bet they talk to each other frequently. One of those guys is essentially a lame duck and Barnes and Chun frankly are the contact men when it comes to the future of the Pac-12 conference - why wouldn't they be talking to the other conference leadership? Still holding your breath that we will somehow be absorbed by the BIG-12 or ACC? I expect it to be a very very low priority, desire, or outcome, for either side. So you think a reverse merger with the MWC is the top prority? The Pac-2 is paying for a partial scheduling alliance not only to have teams in the region to play but to not give ground on additional concessions. And then there's the agreement with the WCC, not the MWC, for other sports. And now we know that Barnes is talking to the Big 12 and ACC. The timing? Not long after the legal issues have been wrapped up and the Pac-2's status is much more clear. IMO, Barnes is headed in exactly the direction he intended and that's getting the Beavers into a so-called power conference or as close a situation as possible |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 4, 2024 0:19:58 GMT -8
Not to mention that Barnes is talking to Yormark, who said the Big 12 was done with expansion - for now, back in August
A bunch of posters took this to be a definitive declaration that the Big 12 was done completely.
A few months later and Yormark was talking to Gonzaga.
Now we know he's at least talking to Oregon State.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Jan 4, 2024 1:18:10 GMT -8
FBS Conference Presidents are a club of 10, and I bet they talk to each other frequently. One of those guys is essentially a lame duck and Barnes and Chun frankly are the contact men when it comes to the future of the Pac-12 conference - why wouldn't they be talking to the other conference leadership? Still holding your breath that we will somehow be absorbed by the BIG-12 or ACC? I expect it to be a very very low priority, desire, or outcome, for either side. So you think a reverse merger with the MWC is the top prority? The Pac-2 is paying for a partial scheduling alliance not only to have teams in the region to play but to not give ground on additional concessions. And then there's the agreement with the WCC, not the MWC, for other sports. And now we know that Barnes is talking to the Big 12 and ACC. The timing? Not long after the legal issues have been wrapped up and the Pac-2's status is much more clear. IMO, Barnes is headed in exactly the direction he intended and that's getting the Beavers into a so-called power conference or as close a situation as possible I've said pretty much all along top priority is probably to take in the best of the MWC and the best we can get from elsewhere to rebuild a league that is stronger than the current MWC and maintain the possibility of remaining a P5 equivalent conference into the future. What I'll add now is that if FSU is successful in their lawsuit to overturn GOR, that's potentially a game changer. The Beavers and Cougs essentially own the Pac-12 name and could potentially bring in teams from all over if GOR agreements go away. I've also said consistently a reverse merger is the easiest and fastest "fix" to do. It's not as good as the other option, but I'd be ok with it. It could be done TOMORROW because the MWC has basically said they'd jump at the chance. It hasn't happened, so I highly doubt it's anything more than a fallback option if the first options fail. Both of the above options keep the competition regional and competitive and allow OSU and WSU to pretty much dictate the terms in the conference makeup. I look at joining the Big 12 or the ACC as the next option, and not a good one. They refused us entry already, have said they don't want us, would likely want a lower payout to us, add travel expenses, and now that Smith potentially has gutted us in the eyes of those conferences they might not even want us for free. I just think it is all around dumb to have it as a top priority under the current circumstances. Outright joining the MWC under its existing TV deal is basically the worst option short of shutting down sports. They have been talking to Yormark all along, but now that the lawsuits are over and OSU & WSU basically run the Pac-12, joining the Big 12 or ACC at this point is basically conceding all ambition in my opinion. Both Barnes and Murthy have repeatedly said they think the best path forward is rebuilding a competitive PAC-12, I'll take what they have said is the plan, is the plan. |
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Jan 4, 2024 6:14:10 GMT -8
Still the same fight on this board as to whether OSU joins another Power 4 or does the reverse merger with the MWC. I think that discussion is over for now, at least in Barnes' mind: "...we have a landing spot that is a really good fit for us right now. It’s super important in the short term. We’re thankful for that. The other option, we continue to talk about. But it’s important to keep the (Pac-12) brand and keep the assets." Of course Barnes is keeping his options open for whatever may arise. That much is clear, but he also thinks OSU is in a good spot right now, at least for the short run.
My favorite part and the most relevant part of the article/interview is this:
"Q: We have a sense as to what the next two years – 2024-25, 2025-26 – look like. What about 2026-27?
Barnes: I think we have to have a pulse. You have to be thinking about what may transpire, like different media contracts and movement in the industry. You have to have your eye on that while you’re taking care of the next two years. Prior to Christmas, we got everything we wanted done. Now we have a lot more to do, including in January two priorities. Media agreements and bowl agreements for next year. We’re working on those. Right now, we’re working on getting ‘24 settled, but you’re also thinking longer term.
Q: When you say media for next year, is that the home football games?
Barnes: Not just football, but everything we have. We have our rights for all home football games, but also our other sports, what we’re doing with the WCC inside and out. What opportunities the Pac-12 Network holds in the future. All those things.
Q: Will you have some finality about media for 2024-25 in January?
Barnes: I don’t know that we’ll have anything codified in January. We’ve already started, but after the holidays, we’ll start to get some of the answers in terms of what our go-forth plan is, with football driving the circumstances. I don’t know that we’ll get it done in January, but certainly we want to be way down the road.
Q: What are options for bowls in 2024 and 2025?
Barnes: We currently hold all the current (Pac-12) contracts, and there are two years left on this contract. We’re starting to have conversations, on what priorities we will have, and a pecking order, and what those agreements could look like, coupled with the expansion of the CFP.
Q: If Oregon State wins at least six games next season, there will be a bowl somewhere?
Barnes: Yes, absolutely."
The bold emphasis is mine. It stuns me how little OSU's short-term media rights and bowl tie-ins are discussed on this board. I've always assumed that Barnes (along with WSU's representation) is working at getting media deals going, but it's good to see comments directly from Barnes regarding the issue, with an emphasis on a desire to get media coverage for a lot of sports, not just football. That is good news, as is the news of bowl tie-ins.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Jan 4, 2024 8:24:41 GMT -8
Barnes is talking to the ACC and Big 12 is the takeaway from this Q and A, that's my understanding from the posts and tweets. OK.
Could he be talking to those conferences to find a spot for Wrestling and Baseball for 2025? Most likely.
My point is his "talks" may have zero to do with football.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigorangebeaver on Jan 4, 2024 8:51:20 GMT -8
So you think a reverse merger with the MWC is the top prority? The Pac-2 is paying for a partial scheduling alliance not only to have teams in the region to play but to not give ground on additional concessions. And then there's the agreement with the WCC, not the MWC, for other sports. And now we know that Barnes is talking to the Big 12 and ACC. The timing? Not long after the legal issues have been wrapped up and the Pac-2's status is much more clear. IMO, Barnes is headed in exactly the direction he intended and that's getting the Beavers into a so-called power conference or as close a situation as possible I've said pretty much all along top priority is probably to take in the best of the MWC and the best we can get from elsewhere to rebuild a league that is stronger than the current MWC and maintain the possibility of remaining a P5 equivalent conference into the future. What I'll add now is that if FSU is successful in their lawsuit to overturn GOR, that's potentially a game changer. The Beavers and Cougs essentially own the Pac-12 name and could potentially bring in teams from all over if GOR agreements go away. I've also said consistently a reverse merger is the easiest and fastest "fix" to do. It's not as good as the other option, but I'd be ok with it. It could be done TOMORROW because the MWC has basically said they'd jump at the chance. It hasn't happened, so I highly doubt it's anything more than a fallback option if the first options fail. Both of the above options keep the competition regional and competitive and allow OSU and WSU to pretty much dictate the terms in the conference makeup. I look at joining the Big 12 or the ACC as the next option, and not a good one. They refused us entry already, have said they don't want us, would likely want a lower payout to us, add travel expenses, and now that Smith potentially has gutted us in the eyes of those conferences they might not even want us for free. I just think it is all around dumb to have it as a top priority under the current circumstances. Outright joining the MWC under its existing TV deal is basically the worst option short of shutting down sports. They have been talking to Yormark all along, but now that the lawsuits are over and OSU & WSU basically run the Pac-12, joining the Big 12 or ACC at this point is basically conceding all ambition in my opinion. Both Barnes and Murthy have repeatedly said they think the best path forward is rebuilding a competitive PAC-12, I'll take what they have said is the plan, is the plan. FSU is going to have to prevail in the courtroom numerous times--In FL and NC on the initial go-round, then in appeals court X 2, then (maybe) in the US Supreme Court X 2. Along the way, though, their QB will be hurt, they will be left out of the CFP, and they will have to stay in the ACC after all. [That first part was- allegedly-factual on my part; I am no attorney. That second part was made up, but is not out of the realm of possibility in our Brave New World of college football.] |
|
|
|
Post by beavs6 on Jan 4, 2024 8:55:15 GMT -8
Barnes is talking to the ACC and Big 12 is the takeaway from this Q and A, that's my understanding from the posts and tweets. OK. Could he be talking to those conferences to find a spot for Wrestling and Baseball for 2025? Most likely.My point is his "talks" may have zero to do with football.Agreed- And, IMO, probably mostly with the Big 12. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 4, 2024 10:00:48 GMT -8
Barnes is talking to the ACC and Big 12 is the takeaway from this Q and A, that's my understanding from the posts and tweets. OK. Could he be talking to those conferences to find a spot for Wrestling and Baseball for 2025? Most likely. My point is his "talks" may have zero to do with football. He absolutely could be talking to the Big 12 about wrestling and baseball. I seriously doubt that he's talking to the ACC about those sports. And IMO he wouldn't limit discussions with Yormark to just wrestling and baseball scheduling. |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Jan 4, 2024 10:18:28 GMT -8
The ACC does sponsor wrestling. Could you imagine if the ACC commissioner asked North Carolina, "hey, what do you think about adding Oregon State for baseball only in the conference?"
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 4, 2024 10:31:08 GMT -8
So you think a reverse merger with the MWC is the top prority? The Pac-2 is paying for a partial scheduling alliance not only to have teams in the region to play but to not give ground on additional concessions. And then there's the agreement with the WCC, not the MWC, for other sports. And now we know that Barnes is talking to the Big 12 and ACC. The timing? Not long after the legal issues have been wrapped up and the Pac-2's status is much more clear. IMO, Barnes is headed in exactly the direction he intended and that's getting the Beavers into a so-called power conference or as close a situation as possible I've said pretty much all along top priority is probably to take in the best of the MWC and the best we can get from elsewhere to rebuild a league that is stronger than the current MWC and maintain the possibility of remaining a P5 equivalent conference into the future. What I'll add now is that if FSU is successful in their lawsuit to overturn GOR, that's potentially a game changer. The Beavers and Cougs essentially own the Pac-12 name and could potentially bring in teams from all over if GOR agreements go away. I've also said consistently a reverse merger is the easiest and fastest "fix" to do. It's not as good as the other option, but I'd be ok with it. It could be done TOMORROW because the MWC has basically said they'd jump at the chance. It hasn't happened, so I highly doubt it's anything more than a fallback option if the first options fail. Both of the above options keep the competition regional and competitive and allow OSU and WSU to pretty much dictate the terms in the conference makeup. I look at joining the Big 12 or the ACC as the next option, and not a good one. They refused us entry already, have said they don't want us, would likely want a lower payout to us, add travel expenses, and now that Smith potentially has gutted us in the eyes of those conferences they might not even want us for free. I just think it is all around dumb to have it as a top priority under the current circumstances. Outright joining the MWC under its existing TV deal is basically the worst option short of shutting down sports. They have been talking to Yormark all along, but now that the lawsuits are over and OSU & WSU basically run the Pac-12, joining the Big 12 or ACC at this point is basically conceding all ambition in my opinion. Both Barnes and Murthy have repeatedly said they think the best path forward is rebuilding a competitive PAC-12, I'll take what they have said is the plan, is the plan. If nothing ever comes of joining a "power" conference, then I've always said that a new Pac with some MWC teams and others would be the best fallback. If the ACC falls apart at some point, then things change. Either OSU and WSU could be part of a coast to coast "PACC" or at the very least Cal, Stanford and SMU could join a new Pac (though Stanford might just go independent). IMO, if the Pac adds just MWC and other G5 teams, the chances are extremely high that it will be considered as just another G5 (G6?) conference. And with the high chance that there will be more realignment upheaval coming to college football, that very well could leave the G5-6 as a new third tier behind the Big Ten and SEC as the top tier and the Big 12/ACC remnants as the second tier. I've also heard talk of eventually squeezing the G5 out of the CFP entirely. All speculation, of course, but something to consider. As for Murthy and Barnes saying that they want to rebuild the Pac-12, they had to in order to keep that status for the near future and collect the money. IMO, actually adding non-power conference teams to rebuild the Pac has always been a plan of last resort but one that has to be on the table. |
|
|
|
Post by castorcanadensis on Jan 4, 2024 11:01:45 GMT -8
Could it be that we stand pat because of August 2024 pac-12 contract? After this August we can have more options and take our money with us. Maybe Big-12 in a year or 2...
|
|
