|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Jun 27, 2024 9:28:29 GMT -8
By John Canzano. www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-washington-state-presidentHis most interesting statement: "I’m very committed to ensuring that we have a really great Division I conference — an all-sports conference — on the West Coast. I know some of the premier schools are in Midwest-based or East Coast-based conferences. But at the end of the day, I think the West Coast is going to want a premier conference. "Now, does that look like some merger or whatever? I don’t know yet. But I do think that’s still really important to me and I think it’s important to some of my colleagues on the West Coast. As you can imagine, lots of egos get in the way. We’ve got to be really careful about how we message."I think when we came out of the gate a year ago, there was a little bit of, ‘Hey, we’re just going to go cherry-pick whatever schools we want and everybody’s going to come running.’ I think we found out that we were behaving in a way that people said, ‘Hey, what was just done to you two schools… now you’re talking about doing the same to everybody else and it’s OK?!?’ I think we took a step backward and said, ‘Hey, let’s talk about maybe partnerships instead of acquisition.’"Also this: "I feel that in my conversations with (President) Jayathi Murthy at Oregon State, I think early in 2025, we’ve got to make a decision about where we’re going to be for the next four or five years. I don’t think we can continue having a foot in multiple conferences and hoping that something’s going to come our way.
"So I think we’re going to spend the fall planning, looking at our best options. And I think January-February, we’ve got to pick what we think is the best and aggressively move forward. So that’s where we are in the timeline.
"I know that supposedly we have more time than that with the NCAA and those things, but if we’re not careful, we’re going to keep kicking the can down the road. It’ll hurt recruiting, hurt coach retention, hurt our student-athletes. They want to know who they’re going to be competing against. And so that’s the timeline, at least I feel, is important for us to hold to." |
|
|
|
Post by machd56z on Jun 27, 2024 10:07:01 GMT -8
He makes some very good points. I am sorry to see him leave, but he deserves to leave on his terms.
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jun 27, 2024 11:08:42 GMT -8
He's really not saying anything that he hasn't said before.
Obviously, cherry picking of schools has been made much more difficult because of the price tag.
With the departure of 10 Pac-12 schools, the MWC became the "premier" West Coast conference by default. OSU and WSU joining it won't change that, just improve the overall conference strength some. It will not be a power conference.
It's pretty obvious that some sort of decision needs to be made sooner than later (2025). But interesting that he said for "the next four or five years." So even if they have to join the MWC in some capacity, it doesn't seem like they want to look at it as a long-term situation.
Again, everyone is waiting to see what will happen with the ACC.
|
|
|
|
Post by p8nted on Jun 27, 2024 11:59:24 GMT -8
Seems pretty obvious the PAC won't be paying any exit fees or paying the poaching penalties for any MWC teams, let alone an AAC team..
Set up the reverse merger with the MWC, include clauses of no exit fees for WSU and OSU and that we get to keep all PAC funds. Then we move on in a conference while we wait for something better to maybe happen. Staying semi-independent is not getting us anywhere
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jun 27, 2024 12:00:39 GMT -8
I will add that Gould says that the $65 million in settlement money has been set aside for "a possible rebuild, realignment..." And that pretty much would cover six MWC teams if they wanted to add that many from that conference.
IMO, the only way there's a viable Pac-12 rebuild is if the ACC falls apart and Cal and Stanford return to the fold. Then you build with those four as the foundation and maybe SMU as well.
And maybe (this is a big MAYBE) you have one or two other former Pac-12 schools come crawling back at some point later on.
|
|
|
|
Post by p8nted on Jun 27, 2024 12:02:06 GMT -8
I will add that Gould says that the $65 million in settlement money has been set aside for "a possible rebuild, realignment..." And that pretty much would cover six MWC teams if they wanted to add that many from that conference. IMO, the only way there's a viable Pac-12 rebuild is if the ACC falls apart and Cal and Stanford return to the fold. Then you build with those four as the foundation and maybe SMU as well. And maybe (this is a big MAYBE) you have one or two other former Pac-12 schools come crawling back at some point later on. you did read they were focusing on partnerships and not aquisitions? |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jun 27, 2024 12:21:38 GMT -8
I will add that Gould says that the $65 million in settlement money has been set aside for "a possible rebuild, realignment..." And that pretty much would cover six MWC teams if they wanted to add that many from that conference. IMO, the only way there's a viable Pac-12 rebuild is if the ACC falls apart and Cal and Stanford return to the fold. Then you build with those four as the foundation and maybe SMU as well. And maybe (this is a big MAYBE) you have one or two other former Pac-12 schools come crawling back at some point later on. you did read they were focusing on partnerships and not aquisitions? Yeah, I'm not saying they are actually going to use the money to bring in schools. Of course, partnerships cover anything from a reverse merger to joining the Big 12 or (IMO more likely) joining or (preferably) merging with the remains of the ACC. I do believe that if -- as I said in the previous post -- the ACC falls apart (within the time frame that the Pac-2 are still looking at options), that they might very well go for a Pac-12 rebuild as it would require bringing in probably just three MWC schools. But that whole scenario is fairly unlikely. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Jun 27, 2024 13:06:46 GMT -8
He's really not saying anything that he hasn't said before. Obviously, cherry picking of schools has been made much more difficult because of the price tag. With the departure of 10 Pac-12 schools, the MWC became the "premier" West Coast conference by default. OSU and WSU joining it won't change that, just improve the overall conference strength some. It will not be a power conference. It's pretty obvious that some sort of decision needs to be made sooner than later (2025). But interesting that he said for "the next four or five years." So even if they have to join the MWC in some capacity, it doesn't seem like they want to look at it as a long-term situation.Again, everyone is waiting to see what will happen with the ACC. The next round of important media contracts start running out at the end of 2029-2030 with more running out at the end of 2030-2031. 2026-2027 to 2029-2030 is four years, and 2026-2027 to 2030-2031 is five years. Leading up to 2029-2030 or 2030-2031, there may be an opportunity to make a move. But Oregon State is going to need a home from 2026-2027 to 2029-2030, if nothing comes along better before the end of 2026-2027. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jun 27, 2024 13:15:12 GMT -8
He's really not saying anything that he hasn't said before. Obviously, cherry picking of schools has been made much more difficult because of the price tag. With the departure of 10 Pac-12 schools, the MWC became the "premier" West Coast conference by default. OSU and WSU joining it won't change that, just improve the overall conference strength some. It will not be a power conference. It's pretty obvious that some sort of decision needs to be made sooner than later (2025). But interesting that he said for "the next four or five years." So even if they have to join the MWC in some capacity, it doesn't seem like they want to look at it as a long-term situation.Again, everyone is waiting to see what will happen with the ACC. The next round of important media contracts start running out at the end of 2029-2030 with more running out at the end of 2030-2031. 2026-2027 to 2029-2030 is four years, and 2026-2027 to 2030-2031 is five years. Leading up to 2029-2030 or 2030-2031, there may be an opportunity to make a move. But Oregon State is going to need a home from 2026-2027 to 2029-2030, if nothing comes along better before the end of 2026-2027. Yep. So again, everyone is watching the ACC in the meantime. A lot could and probably will happen within the next year. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Jun 27, 2024 15:48:13 GMT -8
I will add that Gould says that the $65 million in settlement money has been set aside for "a possible rebuild, realignment..." And that pretty much would cover six MWC teams if they wanted to add that many from that conference.IMO, the only way there's a viable Pac-12 rebuild is if the ACC falls apart and Cal and Stanford return to the fold. Then you build with those four as the foundation and maybe SMU as well. And maybe (this is a big MAYBE) you have one or two other former Pac-12 schools come crawling back at some point later on.
Do you think the continued buyout/acquire limited/certain teams is being confirmed in the above statement? Or more a merger?
Rebuild, realign is not "covering six MWC teams" ... if you believe the departing WSU President and not conflate Gould's words to match a particular bias.
|
|
|
|
Post by beaver55to7 on Jun 27, 2024 16:00:28 GMT -8
But at the end of the day, I think the West Coast is going to want a premier conference. "Now, does that look like some merger or whatever? I don’t know yet. But I do think that’s still really important to me and I think it’s important to some of my colleagues on the West Coast. As you can imagine, lots of egos get in the way. We’ve got to be really careful about how we message. Well, he seems to be implying that some of the departed may not be happy with being in a non-west coast based conference, doesn't it? I'm certain Utah and ASU were never happy leaving the West Coast, and I would imagine Cal and Stanford have administrators who see folly in their decision (no way USC, UCLA, whores and UW are ever coming back, too much b1g $$$). The egos in the way would be at Stanford and Cal? I am sure Utah and ASU always wanted to look west to California and to be tied with the great California Universities. Arizona probably doesn't care and may prefer the prestige basketball conference and looking east to Texas. Hard to figure out how to make that work for Utah and ASU when they are tied to the big12 for 4 or 5 years, and breaking up the MWC is apparently off the table. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jun 27, 2024 16:33:21 GMT -8
I will add that Gould says that the $65 million in settlement money has been set aside for "a possible rebuild, realignment..." And that pretty much would cover six MWC teams if they wanted to add that many from that conference.IMO, the only way there's a viable Pac-12 rebuild is if the ACC falls apart and Cal and Stanford return to the fold. Then you build with those four as the foundation and maybe SMU as well. And maybe (this is a big MAYBE) you have one or two other former Pac-12 schools come crawling back at some point later on.
Do you think the continued buyout/acquire limited/certain teams is being confirmed in the above statement? Or more a merger?
Rebuild, realign is not "covering six MWC teams" ... if you believe the departing WSU President and not conflate Gould's words to match a particular bias.
No. See my response to P8nted. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jun 27, 2024 16:37:44 GMT -8
But at the end of the day, I think the West Coast is going to want a premier conference. "Now, does that look like some merger or whatever? I don’t know yet. But I do think that’s still really important to me and I think it’s important to some of my colleagues on the West Coast. As you can imagine, lots of egos get in the way. We’ve got to be really careful about how we message. Well, he seems to be implying that some of the departed may not be happy with being in a non-west coast based conference, doesn't it? I'm certain Utah and ASU were never happy leaving the West Coast, and I would imagine Cal and Stanford have administrators who see folly in their decision (no way USC, UCLA, whores and UW are ever coming back, too much b1g $$$). The egos in the way would be at Stanford and Cal? I am sure Utah and ASU always wanted to look west to California and to be tied with the great California Universities. Arizona probably doesn't care and may prefer the prestige basketball conference and looking east to Texas. Hard to figure out how to make that work for Utah and ASU when they are tied to the big12 for 4 or 5 years, and breaking up the MWC is apparently off the table. Utah and ASU were the two schools I was hinting at earlier in the thread. I think all things being equal they would just as soon be a part of a major West Coast conference. But that no longer exists and things are far from equal. Many people think Utah is eyeing the Big Ten as a future landing spot anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Jun 27, 2024 17:08:37 GMT -8
"I think when we came out of the gate a year ago, there was a little bit of, ‘Hey, we’re just going to go cherry-pick whatever schools we want and everybody’s going to come running.’ I think we found out that we were behaving in a way that people said, ‘Hey, what was just done to you two schools… now you’re talking about doing the same to everybody else and it’s OK?!?’ I think we took a step backward and said, ‘Hey, let’s talk about maybe partnerships instead of acquisition.’"
Do you think the continued buyout/acquire limited/certain teams is being confirmed in the above statement? Or more a merger?
Rebuild, realign is not "covering six MWC teams" ... if you believe the departing WSU President and not conflate Gould's words to match a particular bias.
No. See my response to P8nted. Also, to clarify, that $65 million would cover most of the cost (I believe it would be about $67 million) to pay for six MWC teams. She used the term rebuild as part of her statement, BTW. And SHE is the current Pac-12 commissioner. Not an outgoing school president. But no, I don't think the Pac-2 wants to spend all or most of that money to rebuild the Pac-12. |
|
|
|
Post by darthbeavs on Jun 28, 2024 13:47:18 GMT -8
I will add that Gould says that the $65 million in settlement money has been set aside for "a possible rebuild, realignment..." And that pretty much would cover six MWC teams if they wanted to add that many from that conference.IMO, the only way there's a viable Pac-12 rebuild is if the ACC falls apart and Cal and Stanford return to the fold. Then you build with those four as the foundation and maybe SMU as well. And maybe (this is a big MAYBE) you have one or two other former Pac-12 schools come crawling back at some point later on.
Do you think the continued buyout/acquire limited/certain teams is being confirmed in the above statement? Or more a merger?
Rebuild, realign is not "covering six MWC teams" ... if you believe the departing WSU President and not conflate Gould's words to match a particular bias.
Great question. It's still 50/50 in my head (lack of detailed info). I also wonder what happens to Cal/Stanford in the next couple of years. From "Damn, that's a lot of travel money!", to the ACC imploding like the Pac-12 and the SEC and Big10 consolidating. Would they be looking to join a west coast league? Could bring in 4 MW teams with them instead of 6, save a little cashola. Maybe Utah doesn't like the Big12 footprint? Question: Does Or St/Wa St need to keep the Pac-12 conf/brand alive until all tournament/bowl payouts are completed in order to keep the old schools from making a claim of the $, or is that all a done deal and they have zero ability to make a claim? |
|
