Sep 20, 2022·edited Sep 20, 2022Liked by John Canzano
fascinating podcast with great questions!
I think the best point you brought up was that the CFP Championship expansion changes everything. That alone would cause any school to think long and hard about moving to the SEC or Big 10.
When you asked him about the 4 corners schools possibly looking at the BIG12 as a landing spot he said that he has spoken with all the Presidents and ADs from those schools and that they have said they are not considering this option. Kliavkoff said he was taking them at their word but I think he took Kevin Warren (conference 'alliance') USC and UCLA at their words too......
I thought his response to your question about the hundreds of millions of dollars apart from a media deal with ESPN was too rehearsed and his laugh seemed forced. Did anybody else have the same reaction? Or am I reading too much into it.
Again, great podcast and I agree with you that Kliavkoff comes off as very confident. He is a front-line General The fact that he traveled to Atlanta, Madison and Seattle for key games shows he is vested in the PAC 12 and he is showing solid leadership.
Fascinating about UCLA. Curiously, living in LA, I'm seeing very little written about how UCLA fans feel. None of my friends who are UCLA alums like the idea. If UCLA can't make money at it, if the regents do impose a financial penalty, if many of their alumni are against it.... It's just odd. I'm sure keeping up with USC is included in the Bruins' motives. But FWIW, my UCLA friends say: Let USC go it alone. Don't care.
Despite all of the will they or won't they go back and forth, from the Regent's standpoint I think they are be allowed to go. One, if they are out I lay odds Stanford quickly takes the invite (Is Stanford's ranking in the NoCal market really much worse than UCLA's in the SoCal?). And secondly, it balance's the risk of the decline of the Pac12/10 sports funding with funds coming from the Big Ten. That said, I think there is likely fallout: how much UCLA has to give the UC system (giving specifically to Cal might put a likely lawsuit on more shaky grounds) and more hands on from the Regents for future decisions such as the rules for paying athletes. The state of California sticking their fingers into the interworkings of the Mountain West, Pac 12/10 and the Big Ten...tell me you don't see this coming.....
I think Kliavkoff’s idea of expansion right now is reeling UCLA back into the fold. Seems like he is going out of his way to sow seeds of doubt about the wisdom of this move for them.
It's different. Can't say I've ever heard another commissioner say things like that when a school announces it's leaving. Makes you wonder if he has some rationale, or if it's just wishful thinking. Even if the UC regents impose a financial penalty on UCLA, it's hard to imagine them losing money by going to the Big Ten.
I'm not sure the new PAC even needs UCLA. There is total apathy for the Football program with reports (and pictures to prove) that attendance at the South Alabama game was maybe 2000-3000 people.
Balancing revenues against distribution should also recognize that fans despise late night games after September, possibly excluding the Arizona schools. Night games do not increase exposure or elevate any respective brands since very few outside the west and mountain time zones watch them. Give me an Amazon or Apple+ 5PM or earlier kickoff over an ESPN2 of FS1 8PM kickoff any day.
Be careful when anyone says they're 99.5% sure of anything. Also the comment about "If anybody else were going to leave for the BIG 10 they would have done so by now" is a little troubling.
Not sure they've been "aggressive." Believe it's limited to a consultant talking with another consultant. I don't think Oregon leaves for the Big Ten -- ever.
That just means that all 10 remaining schools are in on the negotiations and he expects the deal to be finalized with them (with new penalties for breaking out). Nothing about schools moving in the future. Or more aptly put, the window to move to the big is closed for this year.
The SEC has little (see NO) interest in going anywhere west of Austin.
So yeah, I think this deal includes all remaining 10 PAC schools.
Great interview by you and Wilner, JC. I gotta say I like the guy more every time I hear him speak - and while I too would like to hear more, I get why he his playing his cards close to the vest. The intel on UCLA is fascinating because if what GK said about the finances is true, the Bruins are better off staying put. That would change the calculus, obviously, and simplifies the expansion question considerably. Add SDSU immediately and then have a think about options further to the East.
Great job John(s)! A story idea for y'all: poke around UCAL a bit. Hardly anyone wants to go to the Big 10. Put them on the spot and have them address the fact that they won't make more money, will negatively impact student-athletes, families and fans.
I am really enjoying what you are doing here. I remember when you started at the Oregonian. I did not always enjoy your columns in print. But you have proven yourself to be accurate and honest. That said, I have enjoyed this blog a great deal. I don't always comment, but I find myself reaching for it every day!
I like that he stated and reiterated he only works with that which he can control and does not waste energy on all the other. Wise man and we as fans can learn from that. He appears to be allowing processes to happen, but shows he is paying attention. And, yes. He resonated confidence. He didn't hype up or dramatize. It will be fun watching him progress through his job. Not quite as fun as watching a great football game, but...
Sounds like George K. was an avid fan of Stephen Covey's The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People as that quote seemed to come directly from the book...
Did he offer any explanation for the UCLA comment? UCLA definitely has a greater shot at the playoff in the Pac-12...maybe that's where his money comment is coming from. And UCLA has certainly consigned itself to an eternity of mediocrity in the Big10.
As for expansion, I guess it's ESPN's call. But every G5 candidate out there will just water down the conference and eat a slice of the pie. I hope we don't make any panic pick ups of MWC teams.
Regarding UCLA, the analysis seems static. For the sake of argument let's say UCLA stays primarily due to the cost of travel. What is to stop the B10 from now saying screw you (Pac-12), we will now grab Cal, Stanford, UW, UCLA, OU and USC. False sense of security pertaining to the Bruins.
I keep wondering if there's too much emphasis being placed on "number of TV screens in the same town as the school".
I realize this is the metric used to help establish a valuation, but each market and
university is different. Just counting TV screens doesn't capture the entire picture.
Like San Diego State. They have a good number of TV screens and are in SoCal....but
how many folks in San Diego really care about SDSU football? Do we even know? That’s a pretty important detail if the valuation is based on the assumption that these people will be watching. I doubt many people in the rest of the country care about SDSU, so how well does their brand really scale?
I mean, suppose SDSU vs Houston is on at the same time as Oregon vs Oklahoma. The UO/OU home markets have far fewer local TV screens, but I bet quite a few people in San Diego and Houston would be watching the Ducks and Sooners ...and nobody outside of those cities is watching that other game.
Another thing I haven't heard much about with regards to realignment is the notion of rivalries...these are such an important part of college football. Regional rivalries give a conference cohesion. The PAC-10 had a sweet setup before adding Utah and Colorado. Each game had a history and mattered. I know SLC and Denver markets were added…but what was really gained there by adding those two?
I think rolling with the existing 10 is good plan, but if expansion is a must they should be careful not to end up with some hodge-podge of unrelated teams based solely on TV screen count.
How about this for an expansion idea:
West Division
Cal
Stanford
OSU
Oregon
WSU
Washington
East Division
ASU
Arizona
Utah
Colorado
Kansas
Kansas State
Yeah, that's right - Kansas and Kansas State.
Both have enough of a national brand so as not to de-value the conference, and they have a long historical rivalry. I think games with these teams would scale pretty well nationally. Far better than SDSU or UNLV would, IMO.
John, nice interview. I'm wondering if the streaming broadcasts would be exclusive to the streaming company or simulcast on the Pac-12 Network, or a combo of both?
actually he said a lot. I agree not too much on specifics but you don't give away the battle plans to invade Normandy Beach! He said what many of us fans needed to hear, that he was engaged, confident and working hard to do what is best for the new PAC and their student-athletes. He is showing strong leadership.
fascinating podcast with great questions!
I think the best point you brought up was that the CFP Championship expansion changes everything. That alone would cause any school to think long and hard about moving to the SEC or Big 10.
When you asked him about the 4 corners schools possibly looking at the BIG12 as a landing spot he said that he has spoken with all the Presidents and ADs from those schools and that they have said they are not considering this option. Kliavkoff said he was taking them at their word but I think he took Kevin Warren (conference 'alliance') USC and UCLA at their words too......
I thought his response to your question about the hundreds of millions of dollars apart from a media deal with ESPN was too rehearsed and his laugh seemed forced. Did anybody else have the same reaction? Or am I reading too much into it.
Again, great podcast and I agree with you that Kliavkoff comes off as very confident. He is a front-line General The fact that he traveled to Atlanta, Madison and Seattle for key games shows he is vested in the PAC 12 and he is showing solid leadership.
I think he was very intentional with his remarks.
Fascinating about UCLA. Curiously, living in LA, I'm seeing very little written about how UCLA fans feel. None of my friends who are UCLA alums like the idea. If UCLA can't make money at it, if the regents do impose a financial penalty, if many of their alumni are against it.... It's just odd. I'm sure keeping up with USC is included in the Bruins' motives. But FWIW, my UCLA friends say: Let USC go it alone. Don't care.
I wonder about the legal issues UCLA would face in backing out.
Despite all of the will they or won't they go back and forth, from the Regent's standpoint I think they are be allowed to go. One, if they are out I lay odds Stanford quickly takes the invite (Is Stanford's ranking in the NoCal market really much worse than UCLA's in the SoCal?). And secondly, it balance's the risk of the decline of the Pac12/10 sports funding with funds coming from the Big Ten. That said, I think there is likely fallout: how much UCLA has to give the UC system (giving specifically to Cal might put a likely lawsuit on more shaky grounds) and more hands on from the Regents for future decisions such as the rules for paying athletes. The state of California sticking their fingers into the interworkings of the Mountain West, Pac 12/10 and the Big Ten...tell me you don't see this coming.....
I think Kliavkoff’s idea of expansion right now is reeling UCLA back into the fold. Seems like he is going out of his way to sow seeds of doubt about the wisdom of this move for them.
Felt very intentional. Agree.
It's different. Can't say I've ever heard another commissioner say things like that when a school announces it's leaving. Makes you wonder if he has some rationale, or if it's just wishful thinking. Even if the UC regents impose a financial penalty on UCLA, it's hard to imagine them losing money by going to the Big Ten.
I think he's cultivating doubt.
I'm not sure the new PAC even needs UCLA. There is total apathy for the Football program with reports (and pictures to prove) that attendance at the South Alabama game was maybe 2000-3000 people.
It's for the LA TV market, although I agree with you regarding fan interest.
I am frankly shocked Kelly was retained, but then again, nothing they do seems to work.
Balancing revenues against distribution should also recognize that fans despise late night games after September, possibly excluding the Arizona schools. Night games do not increase exposure or elevate any respective brands since very few outside the west and mountain time zones watch them. Give me an Amazon or Apple+ 5PM or earlier kickoff over an ESPN2 of FS1 8PM kickoff any day.
Late kicks. Short windows. All of it bad.
Be careful when anyone says they're 99.5% sure of anything. Also the comment about "If anybody else were going to leave for the BIG 10 they would have done so by now" is a little troubling.
Given that Oregon has been aggressive about approaching the Big 10, I suspect they are going to want to keep the door open to leave in the future.
Not sure they've been "aggressive." Believe it's limited to a consultant talking with another consultant. I don't think Oregon leaves for the Big Ten -- ever.
I'll bet you a reasonably priced dinner it happens in the next two years.
Oregon's biggest boosters want out and who do you think is going to be in the middle of selecting UO's next President.
There is no way this doesn't happen.
That just means that all 10 remaining schools are in on the negotiations and he expects the deal to be finalized with them (with new penalties for breaking out). Nothing about schools moving in the future. Or more aptly put, the window to move to the big is closed for this year.
The SEC has little (see NO) interest in going anywhere west of Austin.
So yeah, I think this deal includes all remaining 10 PAC schools.
Great interview by you and Wilner, JC. I gotta say I like the guy more every time I hear him speak - and while I too would like to hear more, I get why he his playing his cards close to the vest. The intel on UCLA is fascinating because if what GK said about the finances is true, the Bruins are better off staying put. That would change the calculus, obviously, and simplifies the expansion question considerably. Add SDSU immediately and then have a think about options further to the East.
We'll see... gotta see the follow through.
Great job John(s)! A story idea for y'all: poke around UCAL a bit. Hardly anyone wants to go to the Big 10. Put them on the spot and have them address the fact that they won't make more money, will negatively impact student-athletes, families and fans.
John, Please get the person who makes the decisions at UCLA. I would love to hear what their reaction is to that interview you posted today.
I have reached out.
That would be EPIC!. Great podcast yesterday!
I am really enjoying what you are doing here. I remember when you started at the Oregonian. I did not always enjoy your columns in print. But you have proven yourself to be accurate and honest. That said, I have enjoyed this blog a great deal. I don't always comment, but I find myself reaching for it every day!
That person probably lives in day to day fear of Governor Newsome.
My guess is after the election, some heads are going to roll at the UC system and the University.
Whatever gets us to have game times known further in advance and somewhat limits the overall amount of night games, at least later in the year.
Sign me up.
I’d love a massive digital partner like Apple or Amazon
Digital partner solves revenue problem and kickoff issues... but you give up exposure.
Hope Mr. K is on track
Hope the PAC “whatever” breaks new ground in all this, rather than scrambling for crumbs
GO DAWGS
I like that he stated and reiterated he only works with that which he can control and does not waste energy on all the other. Wise man and we as fans can learn from that. He appears to be allowing processes to happen, but shows he is paying attention. And, yes. He resonated confidence. He didn't hype up or dramatize. It will be fun watching him progress through his job. Not quite as fun as watching a great football game, but...
I think we should all learn from the wasted energy remark...
Sounds like George K. was an avid fan of Stephen Covey's The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People as that quote seemed to come directly from the book...
Did he offer any explanation for the UCLA comment? UCLA definitely has a greater shot at the playoff in the Pac-12...maybe that's where his money comment is coming from. And UCLA has certainly consigned itself to an eternity of mediocrity in the Big10.
As for expansion, I guess it's ESPN's call. But every G5 candidate out there will just water down the conference and eat a slice of the pie. I hope we don't make any panic pick ups of MWC teams.
He went into greater detail in the podcast...
golly gosh darnit John!! Now I have to listen to the podcast.
I'm too old for podcasts, John!
Nobody is too old for a podcast. You will thank me later when you are regularly listening to them.
Regarding UCLA, the analysis seems static. For the sake of argument let's say UCLA stays primarily due to the cost of travel. What is to stop the B10 from now saying screw you (Pac-12), we will now grab Cal, Stanford, UW, UCLA, OU and USC. False sense of security pertaining to the Bruins.
I keep wondering if there's too much emphasis being placed on "number of TV screens in the same town as the school".
I realize this is the metric used to help establish a valuation, but each market and
university is different. Just counting TV screens doesn't capture the entire picture.
Like San Diego State. They have a good number of TV screens and are in SoCal....but
how many folks in San Diego really care about SDSU football? Do we even know? That’s a pretty important detail if the valuation is based on the assumption that these people will be watching. I doubt many people in the rest of the country care about SDSU, so how well does their brand really scale?
I mean, suppose SDSU vs Houston is on at the same time as Oregon vs Oklahoma. The UO/OU home markets have far fewer local TV screens, but I bet quite a few people in San Diego and Houston would be watching the Ducks and Sooners ...and nobody outside of those cities is watching that other game.
Another thing I haven't heard much about with regards to realignment is the notion of rivalries...these are such an important part of college football. Regional rivalries give a conference cohesion. The PAC-10 had a sweet setup before adding Utah and Colorado. Each game had a history and mattered. I know SLC and Denver markets were added…but what was really gained there by adding those two?
I think rolling with the existing 10 is good plan, but if expansion is a must they should be careful not to end up with some hodge-podge of unrelated teams based solely on TV screen count.
How about this for an expansion idea:
West Division
Cal
Stanford
OSU
Oregon
WSU
Washington
East Division
ASU
Arizona
Utah
Colorado
Kansas
Kansas State
Yeah, that's right - Kansas and Kansas State.
Both have enough of a national brand so as not to de-value the conference, and they have a long historical rivalry. I think games with these teams would scale pretty well nationally. Far better than SDSU or UNLV would, IMO.
John, nice interview. I'm wondering if the streaming broadcasts would be exclusive to the streaming company or simulcast on the Pac-12 Network, or a combo of both?
Believe the Pac-12 Network itself would move to a streaming service.
Thanks John!
So, he spoke. And I agree that it is good to hear from him. But he didn't say anything.
actually he said a lot. I agree not too much on specifics but you don't give away the battle plans to invade Normandy Beach! He said what many of us fans needed to hear, that he was engaged, confident and working hard to do what is best for the new PAC and their student-athletes. He is showing strong leadership.
Alright, I posted that before I listened to the podcast. There is some good stuff in there on UCLA.