|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 5, 2024 22:31:36 GMT -8
Funny how there was no mention of talks with the Big Ten or SEC.
|
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jan 5, 2024 22:36:34 GMT -8
Funny how there was no mention of talks with the Big Ten or SEC. We already have B10 games past, future. And everyone knows the SEC plays only directional schools in NC. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 5, 2024 22:39:20 GMT -8
Or it could be because there is virtually no chance that the Pac-2 would get the opportunity to join those conferences.
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 5, 2024 22:53:24 GMT -8
Also from the Barnes Q&A:
Q: How much are you paying attention to the Florida State situation, and how it could change your situation?
Barnes: I believe that any of the chaos or any of the dynamics in college athletics that are happening now, all could be potential opportunities for us. From the way the market is shifting, from Charlie Baker’s comments about a new subdivision, to what’s going on in the ACC, any number of things. Yes, we’re watching.
|
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jan 5, 2024 23:31:28 GMT -8
The ACC was mentioned last year as a potential new partner for NC football. Also of interest is Cal & Furd being able to maybe leave if the FSU court gives them some sort of legal exit?
The B10 is the nearest possibility to have baseball schedule lots of high quality NC games depending on what happens with conference affiliation.
But... speculation is just that.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Jan 6, 2024 0:56:03 GMT -8
If the intent by the Pac-2 is to take 6-7 teams, there may not be the votes to let it expire. Why would the remaining teams do so? My thinking is, if everyone wants the reverse merger, they could quietly have an agreement in principle by 10 am or so tomorrow morning and start looking for a new media deal before making it official. Asking only a portion of the teams to is likely why it takes a year and there would be buyouts. The only ways I see no buyouts is take them all, which they could do right now, or set those who would be left behind up with replacement schools so the MWC remains whole. Why would we destroy a conference? OSU isn't getting 6-7 teams to do anything different without a media deal. And, there will be no media deal that's that different with the top 6-7, over the entire MWC. In fact the entire league offers a better media base. The current agreement could in fact be because they are working on a media deal(s) and needed a schedule set. Said MWC agreement could be part of the transition giving both parties time and an "out" if need be. It gives a year of games to give a media partner(s) some real data. Whatever happens I'm going to interpret Barnes and Murthy's words as there will be a Pac2+. Meaning the ACC and B12 talks are about future NC ties in every sport. To me that means media deal + MWC in some form. I'm still thinking the goal is taking the "best" of the MWC and the best AAC or other G5 schools to make a 12 or so team PAC-12. This potentially should drive a higher media deal than just a reverse merger alone would. The MWC actually has the heaviest buyout price in the G5 from what I've read. Supposedly SMU and a couple others were very interested in jumping to the Pac before it all fell apart. It might be fairly easy to get a couple of them to join. I'm pretty sure Murthy and Barnes have both skirted the issue of a merger and instead have said they want to build the best conference possible. I think there is near ZERO desire to join the Big 12 or ACC on their part. The whole relegation idea I think came out in an effort to build this new conference strong enough to keep the Pac-2+ a "power" conference and maintain the MWC as a conference and somehow blend the two to some extent on media deals. The goal would be to get the Pac-12 as strong as possible, and identify strong candidates to join the MWC and keep it viable (that's why the 2 Dakota schools had been mentioned) rather than destroy it. The media deal(s) is something I'd bet Barnes is working on right now, one to cover the next year or two, and further probing/discussions to get a relationship going towards a bigger deal for '26 and beyond... quite possibly deals that would benefit both future conferences. I suspect they will have a tentative long term media agreement in their back pocket before any announcement about '26 and beyond is made, and I think there will be some strong movement at some point before the 2025-26 school year/season if buyouts are part of the deal. I'm perfectly fine with a full reverse merger, but they literally could have openly announced going that way the day after the Traitorous 10 settlement. I think they are trying to do better for the Pac-2+ AND maintain the MWC. If the Pac-2+ can get the best of the MWC and a few the best of other G5 conferences, and at the same time help the remaining MWC schools bring in the Dakota schools and a few other G5 schools to keep the MWC viable, it could be a win-win for both conferences. As low as the MWC media deal is now, other G5 conferences have lower $ media deals and a few schools might be happy to jump to the MWC if the price is right, even if it is not as high as the Pac's. I keep thinking back to the relegation conversation and the idea of creating 2 conferences with some synergy/excitement with cooperation and mabe some movement between the two, with the Pac being the stronger of the two conferences. The Pac media deal is wide open for negotiation now and the MWC is opening soon. Most other conferences are locked in longer, but some of the G5 conferences have relatively low buyout clauses. For all we know, maybe Apple has alluded that they would be interested in having 2 conferences join their streaming services in '26. I personally think the idea some have about joining the BIG 12 or ACC is a bad one, I don't think a full reverse merger is the only option that could benefit both conferences. For all we know something that hasn't been discussed on the board could happen. It will be interesting to see where it goes, but I think we'll have an idea of which way it's heading within 15-20 months from now. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 6, 2024 10:35:55 GMT -8
The ACC was mentioned last year as a potential new partner for NC football. Also of interest is Cal & Furd being able to maybe leave if the FSU court gives them some sort of legal exit? The B10 is the nearest possibility to have baseball schedule lots of high quality NC games depending on what happens with conference affiliation. But... speculation is just that. I doubt that Barnes is talking to the ACC about what might happen if the conference breaks up. More likely the ACC could be interested in adding the Pac-2 in some capacity to strengthen its West Coast presence. But yes, when FSU is able to break away, that could enable other teams to leave and the possibility that Cal and Stanford (and SMU) might join a new Pac. And yes, Barnes is probably talking to the Big 12 (I assume that's what you mean, not the Big 10) about a baseball schedule. I believe he's not limiting the talks to just that one subject. But, as you said, it is just speculation. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 6, 2024 10:46:11 GMT -8
Why would we destroy a conference? OSU isn't getting 6-7 teams to do anything different without a media deal. And, there will be no media deal that's that different with the top 6-7, over the entire MWC. In fact the entire league offers a better media base. The current agreement could in fact be because they are working on a media deal(s) and needed a schedule set. Said MWC agreement could be part of the transition giving both parties time and an "out" if need be. It gives a year of games to give a media partner(s) some real data. Whatever happens I'm going to interpret Barnes and Murthy's words as there will be a Pac2+. Meaning the ACC and B12 talks are about future NC ties in every sport. To me that means media deal + MWC in some form. I'm still thinking the goal is taking the "best" of the MWC and the best AAC or other G5 schools to make a 12 or so team PAC-12. This potentially should drive a higher media deal than just a reverse merger alone would. The MWC actually has the heaviest buyout price in the G5 from what I've read. Supposedly SMU and a couple others were very interested in jumping to the Pac before it all fell apart. It might be fairly easy to get a couple of them to join. I'm pretty sure Murthy and Barnes have both skirted the issue of a merger and instead have said they want to build the best conference possible. I think there is near ZERO desire to join the Big 12 or ACC on their part. The whole relegation idea I think came out in an effort to build this new conference strong enough to keep the Pac-2+ a "power" conference and maintain the MWC as a conference and somehow blend the two to some extent on media deals. The goal would be to get the Pac-12 as strong as possible, and identify strong candidates to join the MWC and keep it viable (that's why the 2 Dakota schools had been mentioned) rather than destroy it. The media deal(s) is something I'd bet Barnes is working on right now, one to cover the next year or two, and further probing/discussions to get a relationship going towards a bigger deal for '26 and beyond... quite possibly deals that would benefit both future conferences. I suspect they will have a tentative long term media agreement in their back pocket before any announcement about '26 and beyond is made, and I think there will be some strong movement at some point before the 2025-26 school year/season if buyouts are part of the deal. I'm perfectly fine with a full reverse merger, but they literally could have openly announced going that way the day after the Traitorous 10 settlement. I think they are trying to do better for the Pac-2+ AND maintain the MWC. If the Pac-2+ can get the best of the MWC and a few the best of other G5 conferences, and at the same time help the remaining MWC schools bring in the Dakota schools and a few other G5 schools to keep the MWC viable, it could be a win-win for both conferences. As low as the MWC media deal is now, other G5 conferences have lower $ media deals and a few schools might be happy to jump to the MWC if the price is right, even if it is not as high as the Pac's. I keep thinking back to the relegation conversation and the idea of creating 2 conferences with some synergy/excitement with cooperation and mabe some movement between the two, with the Pac being the stronger of the two conferences. The Pac media deal is wide open for negotiation now and the MWC is opening soon. Most other conferences are locked in longer, but some of the G5 conferences have relatively low buyout clauses. For all we know, maybe Apple has alluded that they would be interested in having 2 conferences join their streaming services in '26. I personally think the idea some have about joining the BIG 12 or ACC is a bad one, I don't think a full reverse merger is the only option that could benefit both conferences. For all we know something that hasn't been discussed on the board could happen. It will be interesting to see where it goes, but I think we'll have an idea of which way it's heading within 15-20 months from now. I think that Murthy and Barnes understand that a full reverse merger with the MWC will put them at a distinct financial disadvantage and making that move will only happen if every other option is closed. I think a new Pac with the "best" MWC teams and other G5 schools is viewed in the same way. Although preferable as far as potential strength of the conference. However, if the ACC winds up falling apart like the Pac-12, then there would be the opportunity for the Pac-2 to add Stanford, Cal and SMU. Maybe Stanford doesn't go for it but adding Cal and SMU along with some MWC teams would make for a much better conference. Maybe add UTSA and Tulane to the mix. If Stanford agrees to join, then you're talking about a conference that has a real chance at a decent media deal. |
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Jan 6, 2024 11:07:28 GMT -8
Barnes and WSU AD are smart to take their time and see how things play out. The ACC is going to lose a few schools. At that point ESPN either ends its ACC contract and opens the purse strings for the Big 12 (not the other way around), or conceivably, Fox tries to facilitate some sort of back door negotiations with whatever is left to cobble together.
We won't know until it happens but I don't see just FSU leaving the ACC, and I can't see ESPN paying the ACC leftovers without the football elites.
So decent chance Cal-Ho and Stanford-Ho come crawling back west, or perhaps even realign in some newly formed bi-coastal 16 team conference, maybe call it the Pac Atlantic.
Given how bad EDPN has s%#t on OSU and WSU...don't we would ever be invited to Big 12. But who knows.
Edit. The end game in all this is a new Football division...when that happens is anyone's guess. At that point conference realignment will be a tidal wave of f%#*all...but I imagine regional in nature for all non football sports.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Jan 6, 2024 11:22:04 GMT -8
If the ACC implodes and FSU, Clemson, UNC and Virginia league, the leftovers will be worse than the Big 12, which won't have a nationally-recognized big-name powerhouse once Texas and Oklahoma leave.
I want nothing to do with playing conference football games east of the Rockies, and especially with playing conference games east of the Appalachians.
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 6, 2024 12:43:19 GMT -8
If the ACC implodes and FSU, Clemson, UNC and Virginia league, the leftovers will be worse than the Big 12, which won't have a nationally-recognized big-name powerhouse once Texas and Oklahoma leave. I want nothing to do with playing conference football games east of the Rockies, and especially with playing conference games east of the Appalachians. If the ACC breaks up to that degree it allows for the possibility that the remainders would want to create an east-west PACC, which would allow Cal and Stanford (and probably SMU) to join with OSU and WSU to form a pod. Additional teams would be added. The Big 12 isn't as strong without Texas and Oklahoma but it would clearly be the No. 3 conference and easily above the MWC. An ACC breakup might trigger more additions. That could include OSU and WSU. Or the ACC loses a few teams but stays intact and the Big 12 adds WSU and OSU. The Big 12's media deal runs through 2031. The conference most likely won't have the same level of bargaining power in negotiations but making some key additions would probably help as more and more media money gets targeting at the top. I get that you want to only play games west of the Rockies. It's where most of the MWC is, after all. But the MWC or a potential Pac-MWC or whatever you want to call it is not where the money is going to land. Playing in an ACC pod would alleviate the money problem to a higher degree and allow for reasonable travel. But I still would go to the Big 12 in a hot second if given the chance. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jan 6, 2024 14:16:11 GMT -8
The ACC was mentioned last year as a potential new partner for NC football. Also of interest is Cal & Furd being able to maybe leave if the FSU court gives them some sort of legal exit? The B10 is the nearest possibility to have baseball schedule lots of high quality NC games depending on what happens with conference affiliation. But... speculation is just that. B12... was indeed my meaning... |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jan 6, 2024 14:30:21 GMT -8
I do love the speculation that any reverse merger is a deadly to OSU/WSU and/or puts them in some financial disadvantage when they currently have no media deal, leverage, and $0 coming in. It seems for some that $0 is better than some media deal that adds $ to the Pac12 revenue coming in over the next few years. Barnes has already stated that the revenue "won" is not enough to sustain OSU. So, in the next two years ANY media deal/$ is better than the current deal. And, in that negotiation (which purported to be in process for home football and other sports) it is pretty simple to have it be short term until future conference issues are known. I'd also guess the Pac12 network assets will somehow be involved to create inventory and help with whatever media deal(s) are made for the next 2+ seasons.
It will not be Pac12 $, but a media deal offers exposure and revenue that is more than nothing. That is not a disadvantage at this stage. It is a necessity. And, I trust Barnes and Murthy to structure a new deal so it is indeed not a disadvantage in future dealings... conference or media. There will be a media deal over the next two+ seasons and it will not be because of the ACC or B12. OSU/WSU will figure out how to keep future revenue and add to it until a time where conference issues are settled.
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jan 6, 2024 14:58:39 GMT -8
I do love the speculation that any reverse merger is a deadly to OSU/WSU and/or puts them in some financial disadvantage when they currently have no media deal, leverage, and $0 coming in. It seems for some that $0 is better than some media deal that adds $ to the Pac12 revenue coming in over the next few years. Barnes has already stated that the revenue "won" is not enough to sustain OSU. So, in the next two years ANY media deal/$ is better than the current deal. And, in that negotiation (which purported to be in process for home football and other sports) it is pretty simple to have it be short term until future conference issues are known. I'd also guess the Pac12 network assets will somehow be involved to create inventory and help with whatever media deal(s) are made for the next 2+ seasons. It will not be Pac12 $, but a media deal offers exposure and revenue that is more than nothing. That is not a disadvantage at this stage. It is a necessity. And, I trust Barnes and Murthy to structure a new deal so it is indeed not a disadvantage in future dealings... conference or media. There will be a media deal over the next two+ seasons and it will not be because of the ACC or B12. OSU/WSU will figure out how to keep future revenue and add to it until a time where conference issues are settled. Yes, any media deal is better than none. But Barnes has been working on next year and even 2025. Football will get a deal or deals for sure. There WILL be something agreed to. It might involve multiple broadcast outlets. There is absolutely no way Barnes and WSU went and set football schedules without believing 100 percent that a media deal will be made. And for good reason. Football is in high demand among broadcasters. The Big Sky has a media deal. So the broadcasters will want to make a deal but I wouldn't expect huge numbers to be thrown around. The teams in the WCC will share in its media rights deal per the WCC website. This is all temporary. But almost everything is a go for next year and the next if needed. He is still working on a few sports (baseball, wrestling and gymnastics, I believe) and has said that a couple might compete in some sort of "Pac-12" if no other place is found. The Pac-2 is extremely unlikely to make a move of any kind until after next year and most likely after the two years are up. |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Jan 6, 2024 15:58:40 GMT -8
I do love the speculation that any reverse merger is a deadly to OSU/WSU and/or puts them in some financial disadvantage when they currently have no media deal, leverage, and $0 coming in. It seems for some that $0 is better than some media deal that adds $ to the Pac12 revenue coming in over the next few years. Barnes has already stated that the revenue "won" is not enough to sustain OSU. So, in the next two years ANY media deal/$ is better than the current deal. And, in that negotiation (which purported to be in process for home football and other sports) it is pretty simple to have it be short term until future conference issues are known. I'd also guess the Pac12 network assets will somehow be involved to create inventory and help with whatever media deal(s) are made for the next 2+ seasons. It will not be Pac12 $, but a media deal offers exposure and revenue that is more than nothing. That is not a disadvantage at this stage. It is a necessity. And, I trust Barnes and Murthy to structure a new deal so it is indeed not a disadvantage in future dealings... conference or media. There will be a media deal over the next two+ seasons and it will not be because of the ACC or B12. OSU/WSU will figure out how to keep future revenue and add to it until a time where conference issues are settled. I imagine these guys will be making a bid. Whether their needs and our needs match up, who knows? northwest.rootsports.com/ |
|
