|
|
Post by 93beav on Sept 12, 2024 10:43:26 GMT -8
I wouldn't count out Cal & Stanford or Arizona State. Cal and Stanford are hemorrhaging funds, Cal reportedly is $165 million in the red and Stanford not far behind, to make matters worse, Stanford and Cal, will be 30% of a whole ACC share for the next SEVEN years. Year 8 it goes to 70%, 75% in Year 9 and then full financial shares in the 10th year, that's a long time. I would completely count out Stanford. Cal maybe. I don't expect in my lifetime to see Stanford willingly agree to partner up with Boise St or Fresno St. I'd more expect Stanford to make some sort of independent arrangement if the ACC were to crumble, as they now have contacts in 4 conferences. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Sept 12, 2024 10:43:52 GMT -8
This seems like what ended up being the "last resort" or worst case scenario IMO. Nothing about this is going to excite any casual fans that are staying away this season after the Pac-12 implosion. I'm not really sure about any other way to look at it. It lets us maintain the PAC assets sure, but all that means is we use that money to pay for the MW schools since the scheduling agreement built those costs in to poach schools unless I'm mistaken. Sure it maybe allows an opportunity to expand again later and bring back some other West coast schools if the ACC implodes or other schools decide the travel isn't worth it in the B1G or B12, but I don't see much bright side here. Maybe we can get unequal revenue sharing and get 10-15M for us/WSU while the other MW schools stay close to their current figure and maybe a little more? I don't know, I've followed realignment some, but admittedly not enough to know all the ins and outs of our situation. Maybe someone more knowledgable than me can provide some more info on how this is a good thing but I just don't see how this is any different than just slapping the Pac-12 name on the MWC. Completely disagree. I absolutely HATED the idea of OSU groveling to be picked up by the Big 12 or ACC. I absolutely hated how OSU was treated poorly by the other schools in the former Pac-12. They had little to no voice and no control, and look what happened. I absolutely did not want them to go join a P4 conference in a disadvantaged state (i.e. unbalanced rev share). OSU is now in a position to lead instead of begging to be in the cliche. Yea, it may be G5 football, but I can and will support it. And I'm no longer embarrassed by how the university gets treated like some kind of 3rd class citizen by its own conference members. I still think the new Pac whatever will be a Power 5 league organization, if not in 2026, shortly thereafter. They'll probably need to be at 12+ teams with a good TV contract to get there though. If the new schools they are bringing in are committed to investing in athletics, there's a good chance they can't get on par athletically with the ACC or Big 12. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 12, 2024 10:44:01 GMT -8
First of all, this was about comparing CSU and UNLV. Stillwater is smaller than Fort Collins. So is Manhattan, Kansas. KSU and Oklahoma State are at a completely different level than CSU. None of that stuff really matters. Nobody watches CSU football unless it's against Colorado. The year before Deion showed up at CU, CSU was drawing more TV eyeballs than Colorado, ASU or any of the other MWC teams... and CSU was actually a pretty crummy team that year, they only won 3 games. They probably need to play competively to consistently draw more eyeballs. Last season they "averaged" over 900k a game, but that was very heavily influenced by the Deion factor and the 9 million plus that watched that matchup. Here's the numbers from 2022. medium.com/run-it-back-with-zach/which-college-football-programs-were-the-most-watched-in-2022-94eca4f6acbdColorado State played Michigan in 2022. That 900k plummets without the extremely high numbers from the Colorado game. I don't have a big problem with CSU joining but I'm hearing that UNLV has been very cautious and hesitant to join, which probably contributed to the decision to go ahead with CSU if true. |
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,837 
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on Sept 12, 2024 10:46:43 GMT -8
Over the past year some saw the MWC commissioner as one smart person. Still feel that way? Yes, absolutely. She just (probably) overplayed her hand. She most likely knew the Pac-2 was looking to rebuild as one option and arranged a variety of severe penalties around it to at least make it a very unattractive option. No one still knows whom is going to pay the $17 million per departing school. She also had stiff penalties for leaving that kept her group intact through the first round. We might not know for quite awhile about all the machinations that went on behind closed doors. There must have been some pretty bad blood that erupted to force this, though. The interesting thing to me (and we may never know) is - was there ever conversation of just having the current MWC dissolve and form the Pac-12 or was there resistance to that thought in the Pac-2 ? To be fair, that is what I was hoping for, but I don't know if that makes sense or was even a thought...... Go Beavers! |
|
|
|
Post by larbeav on Sept 12, 2024 10:47:07 GMT -8
On the do unto others thing... one could look at it as the Pac 2 isn't raiding the MWC, the Pac 2 is optioning in on a negotiated buyout that Nevarez insisted upon. The remaining schools have been getting 3-3.5 million a year each from their TV contract. Now the Pac will pay the league 40+ million, and the schools that are leaving will apparently pay the league a combined 68 million. The MWC will be well compensated, without having to go through months to years of the unknown involved in court (if it chooses to do so). The MWC is sitting flush. They probably will be on the phone with 2 Dakota schools and maybe a Montana school shortly, if they haven't been already. It's only somewhat remotely like what happened in our case. the Dakota schools & whoever from Montana do not have the financial resources to join the pac 12. Take a look at their Athletic Department Spending and revenue streams 40 - 50 million dollars short & Iam not convinced they need the Headaches in recruiting and budget concerns. # not probably going to happen. They got really good competitive teams at the FCS level without all the BS . |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Sept 12, 2024 10:47:08 GMT -8
I wouldn't count out Cal & Stanford or Arizona State. Cal and Stanford are hemorrhaging funds, Cal reportedly is $165 million in the red and Stanford not far behind, to make matters worse, Stanford and Cal, will be 30% of a whole ACC share for the next SEVEN years. Year 8 it goes to 70%, 75% in Year 9 and then full financial shares in the 10th year, that's a long time. Stanford is in NO way hemorrhaging $. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Sept 12, 2024 10:49:07 GMT -8
I wouldn't count out Cal & Stanford or Arizona State. Cal and Stanford are hemorrhaging funds, Cal reportedly is $165 million in the red and Stanford not far behind, to make matters worse, Stanford and Cal, will be 30% of a whole ACC share for the next SEVEN years. Year 8 it goes to 70%, 75% in Year 9 and then full financial shares in the 10th year, that's a long time. The big problem is they signed a GOR agreement with the ACC on day one. FSU and Baylor are currently suing the ACC to get out of the agreement because the buyout is in the 300 MILLION dollar range. That's a lot of scratch, even if Cal and Stanford's buyout is lower because they're getting paid less. IF the GOR agreements become a non-issue, I'd bet there's a good chance of buyer's remorse and a few schools wanting back in. Til then, I'm not holding my breath. |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Sept 12, 2024 10:56:53 GMT -8
This seems like what ended up being the "last resort" or worst case scenario IMO. Nothing about this is going to excite any casual fans that are staying away this season after the Pac-12 implosion. I'm not really sure about any other way to look at it. It lets us maintain the PAC assets sure, but all that means is we use that money to pay for the MW schools since the scheduling agreement built those costs in to poach schools unless I'm mistaken. Sure it maybe allows an opportunity to expand again later and bring back some other West coast schools if the ACC implodes or other schools decide the travel isn't worth it in the B1G or B12, but I don't see much bright side here. Maybe we can get unequal revenue sharing and get 10-15M for us/WSU while the other MW schools stay close to their current figure and maybe a little more? I don't know, I've followed realignment some, but admittedly not enough to know all the ins and outs of our situation. Maybe someone more knowledgable than me can provide some more info on how this is a good thing but I just don't see how this is any different than just slapping the Pac-12 name on the MWC. Completely disagree. I absolutely HATED the idea of OSU groveling to be picked up by the Big 12 or ACC. I absolutely hated how OSU was treated poorly by the other schools in the former Pac-12. They had little to no voice and no control, and look what happened. I absolutely did not want them to go join a P4 conference in a disadvantaged state (i.e. unbalanced rev share). OSU is now in a position to lead instead of begging to be in the cliche. Yea, it may be G5 football, but I can and will support it. And I'm no longer embarrassed by how the university gets treated like some kind of 3rd class citizen by its own conference members. I kind of agree/disagree at the same time. Part of me is like "pride cometh before the fall" a P4 conference is undeniably better and more secure than not. More money, prestige and security in these uncertain times. But part of me is like you said. Screw 'em. The top is only going to keep getting squeezed. Literally every year. what security in P4 football is there really? the TV networks still aren't going to be happy with 80 teams. they want that number down to more like 30 teams, maybe 40 teams. they want the NFL at the college level. a small manageable group of elite teams that they force you to focus on every year. keep it lean, and efficient to squeeze every penny out of you. nice and distributed across the nation. Eventually all the excess is getting trimmed anyways. it is only a matter of time. Greed be the death of us all. Might as well establish our own path now. we will have to do it eventually. The college bubble is going to pop. There is no way this keeps up. There is no way these million dollar NIL deals keep getting thrown around like this, when you get end up getting some of the players that you end up getting for the money. Florida State (and this is NOT about one guy in particular) spent something like 12 million in total on NIL to go 0-2 so far... Look at the hot disaster of Colorado! s%#t that coach is apparently telling the band to not play the fight song so the stadium can play his kids rap song instead? for real? All of this to say, there is a reckoning coming in college football. someday, someway. somehow I think. It is not sustainable. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Sept 12, 2024 10:58:17 GMT -8
Over the past year some saw the MWC commissioner as one smart person. Still feel that way? Yes, absolutely. She just (probably) overplayed her hand. She most likely knew the Pac-2 was looking to rebuild as one option and arranged a variety of severe penalties around it to at least make it a very unattractive option. No one still knows whom is going to pay the $17 million per departing school. She also had stiff penalties for leaving that kept her group intact through the first round. We might not know for quite awhile about all the machinations that went on behind closed doors. There must have been some pretty bad blood that erupted to force this, though. My wild guess is the schools leaving the conference will pay the 17 million buyouts, with the hope/expectation that any future TV deal and Pac whatever payout is substantially higher than what the MWC is doing for them or will be doing for them in the future. |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Sept 12, 2024 10:59:56 GMT -8
I wouldn't count out Cal & Stanford or Arizona State. Cal and Stanford are hemorrhaging funds, Cal reportedly is $165 million in the red and Stanford not far behind, to make matters worse, Stanford and Cal, will be 30% of a whole ACC share for the next SEVEN years. Year 8 it goes to 70%, 75% in Year 9 and then full financial shares in the 10th year, that's a long time. The big problem is they signed a GOR agreement with the ACC on day one. FSU and Baylor are currently suing the ACC to get out of the agreement because the buyout is in the 300 MILLION dollar range. That's a lot of scratch, even if Cal and Stanford's buyout is lower because they're getting paid less. IF the GOR agreements become a non-issue, I'd bet there's a good chance of buyer's remorse and a few schools wanting back in. Til then, I'm not holding my breath. No way the new Pac-whatever we are media will be enough though. We will be a world better than the MWC, but I doubt we get to what we use to get in the Pac. Maybe OSU/WSU command old Pac money alone. but We can't give Cal $35+ million a year in media with this group of teams. we are looking at a $15Mish type deal. if we are lucky. One thing going for us is we will be pretty darn strong in basketball too. so that will be nice. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Sept 12, 2024 11:02:31 GMT -8
Completely disagree. I absolutely HATED the idea of OSU groveling to be picked up by the Big 12 or ACC. I absolutely hated how OSU was treated poorly by the other schools in the former Pac-12. They had little to no voice and no control, and look what happened. I absolutely did not want them to go join a P4 conference in a disadvantaged state (i.e. unbalanced rev share). OSU is now in a position to lead instead of begging to be in the cliche. Yea, it may be G5 football, but I can and will support it. And I'm no longer embarrassed by how the university gets treated like some kind of 3rd class citizen by its own conference members. I still think the new Pac whatever will be a Power 5 league organization, if not in 2026, shortly thereafter. They'll probably need to be at 12+ teams with a good TV contract to get there though. If the new schools they are bringing in are committed to investing in athletics, there's a good chance they can't get on par athletically with the ACC or Big 12. OOPS - "can get on par" |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Sept 12, 2024 11:03:21 GMT -8
On the do unto others thing... one could look at it as the Pac 2 isn't raiding the MWC, the Pac 2 is optioning in on a negotiated buyout that Nevarez insisted upon. The remaining schools have been getting 3-3.5 million a year each from their TV contract. Now the Pac will pay the league 40+ million, and the schools that are leaving will apparently pay the league a combined 68 million. The MWC will be well compensated, without having to go through months to years of the unknown involved in court (if it chooses to do so). The MWC is sitting flush. They probably will be on the phone with 2 Dakota schools and maybe a Montana school shortly, if they haven't been already. It's only somewhat remotely like what happened in our case. the Dakota schools & whoever from Montana do not have the financial resources to join the pac 12. Take a look at their Athletic Department Spending and revenue streams 40 - 50 million dollars short & Iam not convinced they need the Headaches in recruiting and budget concerns. # not probably going to happen. They got really good competitive teams at the FCS level without all the BS . He didn’t sat they would join the Pac12. He was saying the MWC, but yes, it is a much bigger financial commitment |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 12, 2024 11:06:04 GMT -8
I wouldn't count out Cal & Stanford or Arizona State. Cal and Stanford are hemorrhaging funds, Cal reportedly is $165 million in the red and Stanford not far behind, to make matters worse, Stanford and Cal, will be 30% of a whole ACC share for the next SEVEN years. Year 8 it goes to 70%, 75% in Year 9 and then full financial shares in the 10th year, that's a long time. The big problem is they signed a GOR agreement with the ACC on day one. FSU and Baylor are currently suing the ACC to get out of the agreement because the buyout is in the 300 MILLION dollar range. That's a lot of scratch, even if Cal and Stanford's buyout is lower because they're getting paid less. IF the GOR agreements become a non-issue, I'd bet there's a good chance of buyer's remorse and a few schools wanting back in. Til then, I'm not holding my breath. Yeah, as Rgeorge said, Stanford has no money issues at all. In fact, even though I tend to lump Stanford in with Cal as possibly joining the Pac-12 at some point, I believe there's a very good chance Stanford would go independent with designs on getting into the Big Ten. IMO, Cal would have no choice but to join. Even if Stanford does go indy, that most likely benefits the Pac-12 in a way because it would make Stanford's teams readily available for scheduling. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 12, 2024 11:20:09 GMT -8
This makes a lot of sense as far as why the Pac-12 would make this move now...
|
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Sept 12, 2024 11:20:48 GMT -8
As for Cal folks focus on the their media revenue deal... approximately 67% will be returned to the ACC over the first (7) seasons, 30% in year 8, 25% in year 9, then they get to keep 100% in year 10. Or something along those lines.
BUT... that is just media $. The ACC also gets a nice size lump some to split from the CFP, and always get nice size NCAA tourney payouts. Call will get a full share of those, yet the details of those payouts were not settled or released the last I read anything.
However, Cal's Econ department (and many others against the move have said it will cost $8-10+ million in extra travel, not counting unforeseen costs due to additional insurance, travel stipends, and size of travel parties allowed, etc. I'm guessing it will take a season, maybe two, but it will eventually effect recruiting... some players also want to go to school, have a social life, have friends and family attend games regularly.
I guess we'll see how it all plays out.
|
|
