Is Pac 12 slipping away?

[Insane_Pony_Posse]

College football expansion: Pac-12 running out of time on realignment, expert warns
The clock is running out on the Pac-12 to get a new deal in place to prevent the college football realignment process from moving further into its territory

By JAMES PARKS 11 HOURS AGO

The race is on for the Pac-12 to get a new media deal on the books soon in order to avoid having more of its members taken away by its competitors in the ongoing college football expansion and realignment process.

But so far, the Pac-12 is yet to find media partners that want to broadcast the games it has to offer, and according to one expert in the field, it may not.

Media consultant Jim Williams told CBS Sports recently that he believes the Pac-12 may not find partners to air more than half its games on broadcast or cable TV.

"Don't see how they get there"

"I'm at an absolute loss how NBC, CBS, ESPN, ABC, or Fox gets [Pac-12 football and other sports] to 50 [percent]," he said.

Williams, who has almost 50 years' experience building sports networks, added, "I don't know how anybody could sit there and assure you that, 'We're going to have that much on linear.' I don't see how they get there."

"Linear" in this case means those traditional TV networks you tune into to watch just about all college football and other sporting events, and which are still by far what makes the most money for conferences and their members.

There have been reports that the Pac-12 could move more into the streaming market, but its inability to attract interest from regular TV networks could signal that the conference is losing financial value.

Why that's important

In the midst of all the expansion and realignment talk around the Pac-12, the heads of the two Arizona schools have gone public in their loyalty to the conference.

The statements made by Arizona president Robert Robbins are notable in that he clearly expects more than half of the Pac-12's games to be shown on regular TV.

But his comments also seem to signal that his school remaining in the conference depend very strongly on the conference's ability to get TV interest.

In remarks made this offseason, Robbins told The San Jose Mercury News: “It’s heavily dependent on [Pac-12]commissioner George Kliavkoff] and his team negotiating a good media deal for us to stay competitive. I don’t think anybody wants to leave. Why would you move for a couple million dollars a year more?”

Big 12 in pursuit

The Big 12 has been public in its attempt to expand to the West Coast and increase its exposure in the Pacific media markets.

Reports connected the Big 12's interest to the two Arizona schools in addition to Utah and Colorado, the latter a former Big 12 member.

Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff took public issue with the Big 12's incursion into its territory, accusing that league of "trying to destabilize our remaining conference."

Big Ten also interested?

And it's not just the Big 12 that has been moving in.

Representatives from Oregon and Washington have already been in contact with Big Ten decision makers about a potential merger, though none of these interests have materialized into any formal offers as of yet.

Stanford has also figured into the Big Ten's speculated interest given the school's international academic prestige, its media market not just in the Bay Area but nationally, and its devoted sports following.

https://www.si.com/fannation/college/cf ... ut-of-time

[Statler]

https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-timing-is-everything-for

One of the top sports writers on PAC-12

Money quote:

Pac-12 sources remain confident the conference will eclipse the annual $31.6 million media rights distribution the Big 12 negotiated for its members. I’m not sure that distribution benchmark matters as long as the Pac-12 lands in range of that figure, but that’s what I’m being told by those in the room.

• Pac-12 expansion involves a pile of lawyers. This also feels like a contributing factor with the pace of things lately. Both San Diego State and SMU have had regular contact with the Pac-12, per multiple sources. Those schools have lawyers, too. I continue to view both San Diego State and SMU as viable Pac-12 expansion targets.

[ALEX LIFESON]

Billy Embody update from last night.

https://youtu.be/Wn8dxZlXamQ?t=12

[Topper]

The current deal ends in 15 months I believe. Per Billy Emobody a longer rope than some of the other conferences had to cut their deals. Most of what we hear in the blogosphere/vlogosphere is coming from people seeking clicks with end of the world prophecy or people tied to the Big 12 campaign to undermine the PAC so that it can poach the most lucrative schools. The most telling thing about all of this to me is that those in the discussions between the PAC schools and the potential media partners have been remarkably tight lipped. They are the only ones with any really valuable information, Froggie Fever notwithstanding. Their silence tells me that they have NDA constraints or otherwise professional standards that prevent these leaks. That is a good sign IMO.

[mustangxc]

Getting a great AD is much more important than conference affiliation. Tulane beat USC in the Cotton Bowl, Cincinnati made the college football playoffs, FAU and Houston made the final four, UConn won a national championship, etc. Getting in the PAC 12 with Rick Hart will keep us in the middle to bottom of the conference. Getting a great AD with a great track record to hiring coaches would get us back to winning big and help with attendance, which Hart singlehandedly destroyed in men's basketball. We'll be fine no matter what conference we are in as long as our alumni are engaged and hopefully sooner than later when Turner and Hart leave town.

[SMUstang]

Does anybody remember when the same things were said about Kenneth Pye and Jim Copeland? Steve Orsini didn't do much better either though he came from UCF and a winning program.

[peruna81]

The current deal ends in 15 months I believe. Per Billy Emobody a longer rope than some of the other conferences had to cut their deals. Most of what we hear in the blogosphere/vlogosphere is coming from people seeking clicks with end of the world prophecy or people tied to the Big 12 campaign to undermine the PAC so that it can poach the most lucrative schools. The most telling thing about all of this to me is that those in the discussions between the PAC schools and the potential media partners have been remarkably tight lipped. They are the only ones with any really valuable information, Froggie Fever notwithstanding. Their silence tells me that they have NDA constraints or otherwise professional standards that prevent these leaks. That is a good sign IMO.

I hope you are right, Topper..the alternative is that 'nothing is being done' which would be a gut-shot to SMU

[Dukie]

Getting a great AD is much more important than conference affiliation. Tulane beat USC in the Cotton Bowl, Cincinnati made the college football playoffs, FAU and Houston made the final four, UConn won a national championship, etc. Getting in the PAC 12 with Rick Hart will keep us in the middle to bottom of the conference. Getting a great AD with a great track record to hiring coaches would get us back to winning big and help with attendance, which Hart singlehandedly destroyed in men's basketball. We'll be fine no matter what conference we are in as long as our alumni are engaged and hopefully sooner than later when Turner and Hart leave town.

Both conference and personnel are important but there is no doubt that conference is far more so. Primarily because a better conference gives you the money and the exposure to attract better personnel as needed. Tulane will struggle to sustain what they’ve got going. UCONN!!! is bankrupt.

Edit: SMU’s overall and AD leadership are absolutely inept, except for university fundraising, and in need of replacement.

[Topper]

Getting a great AD is much more important than conference affiliation. Tulane beat USC in the Cotton Bowl, Cincinnati made the college football playoffs, FAU and Houston made the final four, UConn won a national championship, etc. Getting in the PAC 12 with Rick Hart will keep us in the middle to bottom of the conference. Getting a great AD with a great track record to hiring coaches would get us back to winning big and help with attendance, which Hart singlehandedly destroyed in men's basketball. We'll be fine no matter what conference we are in as long as our alumni are engaged and hopefully sooner than later when Turner and Hart leave town.

We can beat UAB, FAU, Charlotte, etc season after season and no one will show up to watch because Dallas doesn't like small time football. Neither do recruits and we are being shortsighted to believe that just because we have some great NIL programs that the P5 programs that we will need to beat to be ranked won't be matching or exceeding ours.

[SMUstang]

Whatever conference we end up in, we need to do better than we did in the SWC. The teams we played regularly, TCU, BU, UH, TT, UT, TAMU, had a huge winning percentage over us. And our attendance was greatly helped by the visiting fans also. You're right, Dallas does not like small time football, but they also appreciate winning football.

[Topper]

Whatever conference we end up in, we need to do better than we did in the SWC. The teams we played regularly, TCU, BU, UH, TT, UT, TAMU, had a huge winning percentage over us. And our attendance was greatly helped by the visiting fans also. You're right, Dallas does not like small time football, but they also appreciate winning football.

Another reason being in a major conference is so important is that it will help retain coaches and staff. Our marginally successful coaches bail for greener pastures which means we are constantly re-building and failing to maintain steady recruiting momentum.

[PerunaPunch]

Just to set the record straight, for the teams that were in the SWC for 10 years or more the breakdown is as follows:

By Conference Championships
1. Texas: 27 conference championships
2. TAMU: 17 conference championships
3. Arkansas: 14 conference championships
4. SMU: 10 conference championships
5. TCU: 9 conference championships
6. Rice: 7 conference championships
7. Baylor: 6 conference championships
8. Houston: 4 conference championships
9. Tech: 2 conference championships
10. OK St: 0 conference championships

By Winning Percentage in-conference
1. Texas: 69.1%
2. Arkansas: 55.2%
3T. TAMU: 53.2%
3T. Houston 53.2%
5. Tech: 48.1%
6T. SMU: 46.9%
6T. Baylor 46.9%
8. TCU: 43.2%
9. Rice: 37.2%
10. Okie St.: 21.7%

So yeah, clearly the University of Texas at Austin was the best team in the SWC.

Arkansas and TAMU were consistently the second tier.

Then you'd have to say SMU, TCU, Houston and Baylor were the 'best of the rest' and probably in that order by virtue of them all being consistently middle of the road, but with SMU and TCU having the edge by having more championship level seasons where they were able to knock off the those Top3 programs. Without those stats being skewed by the post-DP years, you'd probably have SMU being the clear #4 program in the SWC, which is remarkable considering that UT, TAMU and ARK are all humongous state schools.

The Pac-12, ESPN, Fox, Apple, Amazon and whoever else ought to factor that into their decision making if they were smart. Translation: When SMU wasn't wandering in the wilderness of post-DP and the string of stinky little conferences, they brought more firepower to the SWC than any of the current Big12 schools. I imagine those older donors at Baylor and TCU recall this.

[PerunaPunch]

According to my spreadsheet, SMU's winning percentage in the SWC prior to the Death Penalty was 52.2%. So, that pretty much confirms what I said in the previous post.

[mtrout]

Billy Embody update from last night.

https://youtu.be/Wn8dxZlXamQ?t=12

He said not to worry until it gets to the end of next football season.

[orguy]

Getting a great AD is much more important than conference affiliation. Tulane beat USC in the Cotton Bowl, Cincinnati made the college football playoffs, FAU and Houston made the final four, UConn won a national championship, etc. Getting in the PAC 12 with Rick Hart will keep us in the middle to bottom of the conference. Getting a great AD with a great track record to hiring coaches would get us back to winning big and help with attendance, which Hart singlehandedly destroyed in men's basketball. We'll be fine no matter what conference we are in as long as our alumni are engaged and hopefully sooner than later when Turner and Hart leave town.

Why would Turner leave? Lifetime appointment courtesy of our good ole boy board of T.
School has regressed in all those "academic" areas a president with vision would have
solved long ago. If we do get invited to the PAC it will be in spite of Turner. Our high dollar
alums seem to understand how important football is to the overall perception of SMU
nationally. If SMU wants AAU status then it is of paramount importance we are able to
attract the type of students and world class faculty that are necessary.


BTW; SMU bb was doomed after the Larry Brown fiasco. SMU found a way to destroy
a good thing. Par for the course. If the Pac invite happens then better days ahead for HOOP.