|
|
Post by nuclearbeaver on Sept 12, 2024 11:23:51 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. Seems pointless to argue about. It's a game of greed to stay on the raft. No one cares except the aggrieved party, we know that we'll enough. College sports have been made into a business, these are business decisions and in this segment of the economy it's essentially unregulated capitalism. |
|
|
|
Post by jimbeav on Sept 12, 2024 11:38:55 GMT -8
This makes a lot of sense as far as why the Pac-12 would make this move now... Yep, I had this same thought. The House settlement hangup was huge. Barnes said that chaos was our friend, and that settlement was going to cause massive chaos. But if it's going to trial, or even if they have to go back to the drawing board with a new settlement, then that chaos is pushed out years. And we don't have years, so it's time to act and go with the best option under our control. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Sept 12, 2024 11:39:56 GMT -8
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. I'm thinking a 15-18 million dollar deal is quite possible. Right now it's estimated Cal is only getting 8-10 million a year out of the ACC deal for the next 7 years, and they're spending most of it on travel. What Cal does might depend on the GOR system going away... they're supposedly really hurting for money. If GOR goes away, they may have decisions to make. As far as TV deals go, we will never know what the potential is until a deal is made. In my fantasy world, I'm hoping when I read the "There will be two bites of the apple" quote in Canzano's article, his unknown source was playing a foreshadowing game and actually said "two bites of the Apple" without Canzano catching the hint. I just took a moment to look at how Apple's major league soccer deal has been going.... They offered MLS 250 million a year to do the exclusive, apparently with the ability of MLS to back out if they wanted and revenue sharing after reaching a certain subscribership level. That was essentially the same deal the Pac 9 was offered, and 2 schools backed out on overnight the day it all fell apart. MLS took the deal. According to the article I just read, MLS sources were saying that subscriber levels were already approaching the revenue sharing level as of the middle of last year. I don't know if they've topped it yet, but that was fast. awfulannouncing.com/apple/mls-subscription-threshold-share-revenue-season-pass.html -At which point the question is, How badly does Apple want to get into the College Football game? If they do, the MWC and the Pac whatever are the only major/mid-major conferences that aren't currently locked into long term TV deals, and the MWC just blew up this morning. I'm not saying Apple will pony up a quarter billion dollars up front to the league to make it happen, but if they want into the college football game, they are sitting on a ton of cash and have the ability to make a very attractive offer. It'll be very interesting to see where this all goes. |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Sept 12, 2024 11:40:45 GMT -8
This makes a lot of sense as far as why the Pac-12 would make this move now... I think this is 1000% right. They just can't count on an ACC collapse. They just can't wish upon a star for that Big12 invite that may or may not happen and if it did it would probably be predicated on the movement of a ACC collapse and whatever reforms happened there based on wherever FSU and Clemson went (the SEC, and did anybody leave, etc, etc, etc...) |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Sept 12, 2024 12:01:11 GMT -8
First phase.....My guess is they're counting on ACC implosion, and adding Cal and Stanford. Although I can't imagine the stodgy high brow Stanford elites going for that. Yeah. I can see Cal wanting to. I just can't see Stanford. and then in turn, I can't see Cal doing something different then Stanford. Stanford? Never. Too arrogant academically. Cal? It's a public school. At some point athletics has to keep hemorrhaging money, caused in part by paying outrageous travel costs to compete in Massachusetts, Central New York, Western Pennsylvania, Florida, etc. I can see their chancellor saying, "enough," and making them join a more-regional league if the opportunity arises. I have no desire to be in a league with directional schools like UTSA or UNT, far-flung Tulane, horrible football schools like Tulsa or Ricep, or perennial NCAA-cheater Memphis. Stay regional. UCLA gets a full Big Ten share of $70 million and another $20 mil or so from the CFP. It's not going anywhere, doomed to irrelevance in the Big Ten. |
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,837 
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on Sept 12, 2024 12:02:42 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 12, 2024 12:09:18 GMT -8
Looking like it's pretty unlikely that more MWC schools will be added.
Maybe UNLV has a shot.
It becomes more of a financial drain the more that are added and you start watering down the level of conference you're trying to build.
There is talk that Nevarez is working to end it here as well as no desire by the Pac-12 to leave the MWC with fewer teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Sept 12, 2024 12:13:12 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 had an endowment of $36.5 billion endowment as of Aug. 31, 2023. It has all the money it needs to either stay independent or buy its way into the Big Ten or Big 12 if the ACC implodes. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Sept 12, 2024 12:15:41 GMT -8
Looking like it's pretty unlikely that more MWC schools will be added. Maybe UNLV has a shot. It becomes more of a financial drain the more that are added and you start watering down the level of conference you're trying to build. There is talk that Nevarez is working to end it here as well as no desire by the Pac-12 to leave the MWC with fewer teams. There are a lot of rumors that UNLV will not come without UNR and we do not want UNR. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Sept 12, 2024 12:25:48 GMT -8
Yeah. I can see Cal wanting to. I just can't see Stanford. and then in turn, I can't see Cal doing something different then Stanford. Stanford? Never. Too arrogant academically. Cal? It's a public school. At some point athletics has to keep hemorrhaging money, caused in part by paying outrageous travel costs to compete in Massachusetts, Central New York, Western Pennsylvania, Florida, etc. I can see their chancellor saying, "enough," and making them join a more-regional league if the opportunity arises. I have no desire to be in a league with directional schools like UTSA or UNT, far-flung Tulane, horrible football schools like Tulsa or Ricep, or perennial NCAA-cheater Memphis. Stay regional. UCLA gets a full Big Ten share of $70 million and another $20 mil or so from the CFP. It's not going anywhere, doomed to irrelevance in the Big Ten. What would you think of a league that had 6-8 western schools, playing a round robin every year, and 6-8 mid-west/eastern schools doing the same, with a conference championship at the end? |
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Sept 12, 2024 12:39:08 GMT -8
Looking like it's pretty unlikely that more MWC schools will be added. Maybe UNLV has a shot. It becomes more of a financial drain the more that are added and you start watering down the level of conference you're trying to build. There is talk that Nevarez is working to end it here as well as no desire by the Pac-12 to leave the MWC with fewer teams. There are a lot of rumors that UNLV will not come without UNR and we do not want UNR. I want UNR! Why wouldn't we want to lock up Nevada? |
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Sept 12, 2024 12:39:31 GMT -8
Yeah. I can see Cal wanting to. I just can't see Stanford. and then in turn, I can't see Cal doing something different then Stanford. Stanford? Never. Too arrogant academically. Cal? It's a public school. At some point athletics has to keep hemorrhaging money, caused in part by paying outrageous travel costs to compete in Massachusetts, Central New York, Western Pennsylvania, Florida, etc. I can see their chancellor saying, "enough," and making them join a more-regional league if the opportunity arises. I have no desire to be in a league with directional schools like UTSA or UNT, far-flung Tulane, horrible football schools like Tulsa or Ricep, or perennial NCAA-cheater Memphis. Stay regional. UCLA gets a full Big Ten share of $70 million and another $20 mil or so from the CFP. It's not going anywhere, doomed to irrelevance in the Big Ten. Agree it's hard asses how "good" this expansion is until we see who the other 2+ schools coming in are. As it is, I very much prefer this scenario to being a partial share member of a 20 team megaconference where the odds of competing for a conference championship are pretty small even if you are on equal footing. Your UCLA point is also a good one, and you could point to Texas A&M I think as well - all that money, and has it improved or enhanced their relevance or success? In the 12 seasons A&M has been in the SEC, they've finished ranked in the AP Poll at the end of the year four times, two of which they had Johnny Manziel and were their first two seasons in the SEC. Since he left, they've only won 9 games twice. They've had a winning conference record 3 times in 12 seasons, and one of those was 2020 when nothing was normal. Maybe all the money makes it worth it....but we aren't getting SEC or B1G money, and if we were to join the Big XII or ACC (should it survive), it'd probably be a decade before we even got that level of money. From a fan standpoint, I like the way we've positioned ourselves right now: Games on an easy to find channel with game times known months in advance, a bunch of similar institutions where a decision for some likely makes sense for all (unlike when SC and Stanford were throwing their weight around in the Pac-12), etc. If that's financially viable long term probably depends on the schools that are added in the future, and that could upend the equal power dynamics we seem to have now, but right now at this moment I'm satisified with the decision and the direction. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Sept 12, 2024 12:42:12 GMT -8
Looking like it's pretty unlikely that more MWC schools will be added. Maybe UNLV has a shot. It becomes more of a financial drain the more that are added and you start watering down the level of conference you're trying to build. There is talk that Nevarez is working to end it here as well as no desire by the Pac-12 to leave the MWC with fewer teams. There are a lot of rumors that UNLV will not come without UNR and we do not want UNR. Nevada has only been a Mountain West member since 2012. The issue with the two Nevadas is that they have a combined Board of Regents. Everyone might be waiting to see how the elections turn out in a couple of weeks. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Sept 12, 2024 12:46:07 GMT -8
There are a lot of rumors that UNLV will not come without UNR and we do not want UNR. I want UNR! Why wouldn't we want to lock up Nevada? They don't add much and their football stadium is a s%#thole? As Wilky mentioned, they have the same governing body as UNLV, so it's probably either both or neither one of them. |
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Sept 12, 2024 12:54:01 GMT -8
There are a lot of rumors that UNLV will not come without UNR and we do not want UNR. Nevada has only been a Mountain West member since 2012. The issue with the two Nevadas is that they have a combined Board of Regents. Everyone might be waiting to see how the elections turn out in a couple of weeks. I'm tellin you, from a fan standpoint, having both NV schools would be fun. Their rivalry is great. The elevated conference status could be a nice boost for their sports programs. UNR has been strong in mens hoops recently as well. They had a good football program under Chris Ault. They've just had a hard time keeping anyone around.....first sign of success and they get poached. Reno will continue to grow, and it's in a great location. Hop, skip, and jump to the central valley of Cali. Nice , easy little airport. You've got the casino thing. You've got Tahoe. |
|
