8 Pac schools (leave out WSU and OSU) create new conference with 8 ACC schools (UNC, NCState, UVA, VaTech, FSU, Miami, Clemson, Pitt). You play 7 vs your division and just 2 vs the other division (so travel is not a big deal). Division champs square off.
Both conferences get to dump their baggage, leaving a strong list of teams and locations.
The Pac 10 brings very little to the ACC and vice versa. The marquee matchups (UO v Clemson, UW v MIAMI) could be fun but nobody in their footprint wants to watch any Pac 10 school except maybe UO. How many West Coast fans want to watch ACC schools?
Part of the appeal of college sports is regional rivals. Maybe the Pac-12 should go it alone, let dust settle. Some big-time recruits will want no part of heading east. Sports is fickle. Smaller fish rise, shaking up scene. Ultimately, a 16-team playoff may result and, with it, room for all to win out. I think you are right about Knight. But again, the problem: corporate clubs that are above college institutions that used to be tied to state-government policies.
There is nothing in a 'loose partnership' with the ACC that appeals to me. Sounds like another version of The Alliance. If the Pac12 could lure KU, Houston, Baylor & TCU, I'll ride with that.
Why would the PAC take Baylor and TCU, even if those schools were willing to Go? The PAC has made it clear that they are superior to *gasp* religious schools and people.
I think you are either talking to the wrong sources or being played/used to promote their agenda or both. No one believes that most of the PAC (outside of OSU and Wazzu) s looking to stay together. It's every man for himself at this point.
Your assessment of who the PAC-12 should go after based on viewers is way off. TCU and Baylor are small schools and therefore have a small alumni base and student body. Texas Tech and OSU are much larger and a vast majority of alumni live in the largest markets. DFW and Houston.
I really don't see any more potential in a Pac/ACC partnership than what little a Pac/Big 12 partnership had to offer. Non-conference football scheduling opportunities are already few and far between with how far Power 5 teams contractually lock in these games in advance. Having conference champions meet up for a game is probably a no-go as far as the ACC is concerned (and I don't blame them). And I have a hard time understanding why the Pac would want their content on the branded network of another conference; talk about making yourself someone's red-headed stepchild.
I'm at the same place I've always been with this; the Pac's best option is to stick together as 10 and stay patient enough to reach the point where as many broadcasters as possible are able to submit their best offer. But it sounds like they are just going to take whatever crumbs ESPN throws at them, so hopefully that is enough to keep their top brands from being enticed into the Big 12.
John, most have cited the Bay Area market as 2.6 million. Why is it that Sacramento is not included? As you know, conventionally Sacramento has been considered, along with the Bay Area, a part of "Northern California"; and now with so many people moving from the Bay to Sacto, shouldn't the 1.4 million be added to result in 4.0 million? I'm surprised the TV execs don't seem to consider this math from what I've read. Appreciate all your reporting and insight in all this!
The problem with a potential Pac 12 - ACC merger is the SEC eventually will have their eyes on Clemson, Miami and FSU. Then we go through this all over again. Insanity prevails.
Sam Cooper of espn posted a similar story. Also talked about big conferences actively 'poaching' schools. “We will leave no stone unturned to drive value for the conference,” Yormark said at Big 12 media days. “Exploration and optionality is at the forefront of what we are focused on. Everything we do must create momentum for these [media rights] negotiations.”
John, I don't understand how the Pac-10 can undergo effective television negotiations in their current state of instability. Whatever "loose alliance" or partnership they make can only be short-term given the changing dynamics of college sports and the top school's (Oregon, Stanford, WA, Utah) reluctance to commit long-term to anything that jeopardizes their future options. Whatever the conference ends up looking like this year seems short-lived and "stop-gap." With that setup, why would ESPN be interested beyond a mere minimalist offer?
Lots of moving pieces here. Thanks for keeping track of them all. It is almost a full time job.
8 Pac schools (leave out WSU and OSU) create new conference with 8 ACC schools (UNC, NCState, UVA, VaTech, FSU, Miami, Clemson, Pitt). You play 7 vs your division and just 2 vs the other division (so travel is not a big deal). Division champs square off.
Both conferences get to dump their baggage, leaving a strong list of teams and locations.
The Pac 10 brings very little to the ACC and vice versa. The marquee matchups (UO v Clemson, UW v MIAMI) could be fun but nobody in their footprint wants to watch any Pac 10 school except maybe UO. How many West Coast fans want to watch ACC schools?
The “100% about TV revenue” line is just killing me. None of this makes any sense at all. None.
Part of the appeal of college sports is regional rivals. Maybe the Pac-12 should go it alone, let dust settle. Some big-time recruits will want no part of heading east. Sports is fickle. Smaller fish rise, shaking up scene. Ultimately, a 16-team playoff may result and, with it, room for all to win out. I think you are right about Knight. But again, the problem: corporate clubs that are above college institutions that used to be tied to state-government policies.
There is nothing in a 'loose partnership' with the ACC that appeals to me. Sounds like another version of The Alliance. If the Pac12 could lure KU, Houston, Baylor & TCU, I'll ride with that.
Why would the PAC take Baylor and TCU, even if those schools were willing to Go? The PAC has made it clear that they are superior to *gasp* religious schools and people.
I think you are either talking to the wrong sources or being played/used to promote their agenda or both. No one believes that most of the PAC (outside of OSU and Wazzu) s looking to stay together. It's every man for himself at this point.
You are delusional...
Your assessment of who the PAC-12 should go after based on viewers is way off. TCU and Baylor are small schools and therefore have a small alumni base and student body. Texas Tech and OSU are much larger and a vast majority of alumni live in the largest markets. DFW and Houston.
Facts, Facts and more facts. Very interesting how the landscape continues to change.Thanks for all your archaeologist digs.
I really don't see any more potential in a Pac/ACC partnership than what little a Pac/Big 12 partnership had to offer. Non-conference football scheduling opportunities are already few and far between with how far Power 5 teams contractually lock in these games in advance. Having conference champions meet up for a game is probably a no-go as far as the ACC is concerned (and I don't blame them). And I have a hard time understanding why the Pac would want their content on the branded network of another conference; talk about making yourself someone's red-headed stepchild.
I'm at the same place I've always been with this; the Pac's best option is to stick together as 10 and stay patient enough to reach the point where as many broadcasters as possible are able to submit their best offer. But it sounds like they are just going to take whatever crumbs ESPN throws at them, so hopefully that is enough to keep their top brands from being enticed into the Big 12.
John, most have cited the Bay Area market as 2.6 million. Why is it that Sacramento is not included? As you know, conventionally Sacramento has been considered, along with the Bay Area, a part of "Northern California"; and now with so many people moving from the Bay to Sacto, shouldn't the 1.4 million be added to result in 4.0 million? I'm surprised the TV execs don't seem to consider this math from what I've read. Appreciate all your reporting and insight in all this!
The problem with a potential Pac 12 - ACC merger is the SEC eventually will have their eyes on Clemson, Miami and FSU. Then we go through this all over again. Insanity prevails.
Sam Cooper of espn posted a similar story. Also talked about big conferences actively 'poaching' schools. “We will leave no stone unturned to drive value for the conference,” Yormark said at Big 12 media days. “Exploration and optionality is at the forefront of what we are focused on. Everything we do must create momentum for these [media rights] negotiations.”
John, I don't understand how the Pac-10 can undergo effective television negotiations in their current state of instability. Whatever "loose alliance" or partnership they make can only be short-term given the changing dynamics of college sports and the top school's (Oregon, Stanford, WA, Utah) reluctance to commit long-term to anything that jeopardizes their future options. Whatever the conference ends up looking like this year seems short-lived and "stop-gap." With that setup, why would ESPN be interested beyond a mere minimalist offer?