Realignment Update

[ericdickerson4life]

https://www.outkick.com/oregon-and-washington-vetted-and-cleared-to-join-the-big-ten-according-to-new-report/

[EastStang]

This report comes through Brett McMurphy who is from OSU. Has some journalistic cred, but anyone with a Big 12 connection, I take with a huge grain of salt right now. Too much overt disinformation from the Big 12. Perfect kind of post to sew discord in the PAC-12. Big Ten hss a lot of mouths to feed. Do OR and WA increase the pie enough to pay for themselves? If not, they don't get invited, its that simple.

[redpony]

My experience has been when you have one or both parties who lack a sense of urgency the result is usually not good.
Aside from multiple media negotiations I am wondering if several of the schools are resisting a long-term GOR. Of course that just complicates matters.

[Topper]

I'm amazed at how tight the lid has been kept on these media negotiations. The truth is that no one outside the discussions can report anything solid. But the Big 12 spin on the story is mostly nonsense. The fact is that ESPN wants something better than the Mountain West for its late night package. It is also a fact that Amazon and Apple are engaged in the talks. They have a combined capitalization of something like $5 Trillion. And the PAC is the only available P5 conference without a deal right now. So how bad can the PAC bargaining position really be if these companies want in the college football media business?

[DC-Pony]

Concur.

And only time will tell what happens and what’s true. One thing that appears to be true is that the ‘Outkick’ website content is heavily B12 propaganda. Probably time for the Big12 conference to add the link to that site on their conference official homepage. Not possible to take “stories” on Outkick at all seriously.

[ponyboy]

Think about this for a minute. The PAC-12 is going to get a school in SMU which is right in the middle of Big 12 territory. The PAC will then secure an agreement to in effect merge with the ACC, leaving the Big 12 in clear fifth place as a P5 conference. No wonder the propaganda, as shameful as it is.

[ponyboy]

Tony Altimore
@TJAltimore

May 11
Nobody from the Pac wants to go to the XII, so it was nice to hear Adam Rittenberg tell it straight-up:

"There's a lot of bad info coming out of the Big 12.... I think this has been one of the dumbest stories in my career. It's just a dumb story. I look forward to us moving on.”

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

Honest question, why SMU? That's what I'm not convinced about. Why not, if the Pac gets a better TV deal than the Big 12, not just poach a couple of Big 12 schools like TCU and KU or something? Those are frankly better more established brands than SMU. I don't mean to sound negative, and I'm very hopeful for SMU. But I've also spent the last 25 years of my life since I graduated watching SMU get snubbed over and over by the big boys. So I have a major case of SMU PTSD.

I'm sorry if this post is a pisser-offer. Just an honest concern.

[WordUpBU]

Honest question, why SMU? That's what I'm not convinced about. Why not, if the Pac gets a better TV deal than the Big 12, not just poach a couple of Big 12 schools like TCU and KU or something? Those are frankly better more established brands than SMU. I don't mean to sound negative, and I'm very hopeful for SMU. But I've also spent the last 25 years of my life since I graduated watching SMU get snubbed over and over by the big boys. So I have a major case of SMU PTSD.

I'm sorry if this post is a pisser-offer. Just an honest concern.

1- The new Big 12 deal will have a grant of rights that has reportedly been signed by all 12 schools.
2- The Big 12 has an exit fee on top of that that's 2 years of revenue.

So even if they narrowly edge out the Big 12 on payout (looking really doubtful or else it'd likely be done and announced by now) it still would be completely stupid financially for any of the 12 to jump.

My take on it as an outside observer:

A- If the PAC 12 needs two schools SDSU & SMU get the call up. The only comparable or better television additions available would be schools like Boise or Memphis that PAC academics will put the kibosh on.

B- Whether they need two likely depends on broadcaster inventory needs. Their biggest selling point is "after dark" since other than CBS's prime time slot (which is rarely used except for monster matchups) ABC, ESPN, FOX, CBS, and NBC are all basically taken care of in the other spots. The PAC can't really help CBS or NBC at noon.

Assuming a high number of $4.12 per expected viewer (similar to what CBS paid in their blockbuster Big Ten deal based on their SEC avg in that afternoon window) that projects to 96M but if it's 4 per viewer it's just under 90M. That leaves around 200M to get close to the Big 12. Depending on what broadcaster mix is used for the rest the payout for added inventory could be huge or tiny. Depending on what rate they'd get for the rest determines whether they need SMU/SDSU if they keep everyone. If the rate for added inventory can't make every existing member whole (even with a phased in revenue share over time) it won't happen. If it's high enough that they can grow their revenue while giving the new members less.

C- The most likely scenario for the PAC taking SMU is if they lose 2-4 to the Big 12 and the Big Ten decides not to move. That creates urgency for inventory regardless of whether it's priced ideally.

Hoping the best for you guys. Always like having the old SWC schools on the schedule.

[mustangxc]

The Big XII is not poaching the PAC-12 unless the BIG poaches Washington and Oregon.

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

[quote="mustangxc"]The Big XII is not poaching the PAC-12 unless the BIG poaches Washington and Oregon.[/quote]

Yes, another thing that worries me.

[1983 Cotton Bowl]

[quote="WordUpBU"][quote="1983 Cotton Bowl"]Honest question, why SMU? That's what I'm not convinced about. Why not, if the Pac gets a better TV deal than the Big 12, not just poach a couple of Big 12 schools like TCU and KU or something? Those are frankly better more established brands than SMU. I don't mean to sound negative, and I'm very hopeful for SMU. But I've also spent the last 25 years of my life since I graduated watching SMU get snubbed over and over by the big boys. So I have a major case of SMU PTSD.

I'm sorry if this post is a pisser-offer. Just an honest concern.[/quote]

1- The new Big 12 deal will have a grant of rights that has reportedly been signed by all 12 schools.
2- The Big 12 has an exit fee on top of that that's 2 years of revenue.

So even if they narrowly edge out the Big 12 on payout (looking really doubtful or else it'd likely be done and announced by now) it still would be completely stupid financially for any of the 12 to jump.

My take on it as an outside observer:

A- If the PAC 12 needs two schools SDSU & SMU get the call up. The only comparable or better television additions available would be schools like Boise or Memphis that PAC academics will put the kibosh on.

B- Whether they need two likely depends on broadcaster inventory needs. Their biggest selling point is "after dark" since other than CBS's prime time slot (which is rarely used except for monster matchups) ABC, ESPN, FOX, CBS, and NBC are all basically taken care of in the other spots. The PAC can't really help CBS or NBC at noon.

Assuming a high number of $4.12 per expected viewer (similar to what CBS paid in their blockbuster Big Ten deal based on their SEC avg in that afternoon window) that projects to 96M but if it's 4 per viewer it's just under 90M. That leaves around 200M to get close to the Big 12. Depending on what broadcaster mix is used for the rest the payout for added inventory could be huge or tiny. Depending on what rate they'd get for the rest determines whether they need SMU/SDSU if they keep everyone. If the rate for added inventory can't make every existing member whole (even with a phased in revenue share over time) it won't happen. If it's high enough that they can grow their revenue while giving the new members less.

C- The most likely scenario for the PAC taking SMU is if they lose 2-4 to the Big 12 and the Big Ten decides not to move. That creates urgency for inventory regardless of whether it's priced ideally.

Hoping the best for you guys. Always like having the old SWC schools on the schedule.[/quote]


Good answer. Thanks

[WordUpBU]

The Big XII is not poaching the PAC-12 unless the BIG poaches Washington and Oregon.

Depends on payout and exposure as to whether I agree.

If they have only 20M per school and awful exposure where maybe 1-2 games per week are on ESPN or similar? Poaching realistic. If you're CU, AZ, etc (not Oregon & UW) you have low $ and low chances of being visible.

If they have 29M with plenty of exposure the B12 would be more money but I doubt anyone bolts then.

If they have good or better money but no well known linear channels and almost all streaming? Probably poaching.

[EastStang]

As always, it depends on what the TV suits want. If they want 4 PAC 12 schools to go to the Big XII, it will happen. If they want UO and WU to go to the B1G it will happen. None of the PAC 12 schools are pining to leave. They like their conference. So, its in the hands of the suits. What's sad is then they'll come up with some other weird scenario down the line to move Texas and OU to the PAC 12 after they crap out in the SEC.

[Topper]

Honest question, why SMU? That's what I'm not convinced about. Why not, if the Pac gets a better TV deal than the Big 12, not just poach a couple of Big 12 schools like TCU and KU or something? Those are frankly better more established brands than SMU. I don't mean to sound negative, and I'm very hopeful for SMU. But I've also spent the last 25 years of my life since I graduated watching SMU get snubbed over and over by the big boys. So I have a major case of SMU PTSD.

I'm sorry if this post is a pisser-offer. Just an honest concern.

Nobody is changing conferences for 1 or 2 $M more. And if TCU went to the PAC- SMU would be in the B12 the next day. They need a team in this market.