Thanks for keeping me updated on the Pac-12! I'm a big Cal fan and I'm still in shock that UCLA and USC are gone. Seems like a bad dream.
I personally hope the Pac-12 goes on the offensive and goes after San Diego as well as Fresno State. If the media contracts are all about football, makes sense to scoop up all the good football schools that are in the Pac-12's regional vicinity. We just can't afford to lose Oregon or really any other school. I don't even like football, but I'll take cohesion and the conference staying alive over any other concern.
It's weird to me that UCLA would continue to get California state funding, but not cooperate with California collegiate athletics. How does that play out? (USC is different as a private school.)
UCLA’s move to the Big Ten is a colossal gain for the UC system. Prior to UCLA’s move, both UCLA and Berkeley were projected to receive about $42 million each per year in TV revenue (total about $85 million). Now, UCLA is projected to bring in around $100 million annually as a member of the Big Ten while Cal’s projected share in the 10 team Pac-12 is around $30 million annually. In other words, the UC system is now projected to bring in a total of $130 million in TV revenue each year. That’s a massive increase in TV revenue of more than 50% annually. Moreover, Cal’s reduction in revenue is $12 million annually but since UCLA is only one of the parties involved in Cal’s revenue reducing, UCLA’s role in Cal’s reduced revenue (assuming 50% which in actuality USC is the more valuable commodity) amounts to just $6 million, which equates to a 14% decrease in revenue to Cal. Thus, in the scheme of things, the proportional benefit of the move to for the UC system far outweighs the negligible rate of harm done to Cal, meaning the Regents withhold any state funds to UCLA would amount to legal breach of their fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of university and people of California.
Moreover, UCLA’s athletic department receives just $3 million in university subsidies a year. Meanwhile, Cal’s athletic department receives $25 million annually in university funds and recently received a bailout worth hundreds of millions of dollars from the university. In other words, Cal’s athletic department has already received enormous financial benefits from the state that UCLA has never received. To withhold any funding from UCLA would require offsetting the amount from what Cal has received in university benefits. Considering UCLA only receives $3 million annually, it would take many years before that $3 million balances with Cal’s hundreds of millions of dollars in university assistance.
This math is exactly why Newsome would be a special kind of stupid to block the UCLA move. He is merely using this to get his name in headlines, and pissed that he couldn’t have used this situation for even more political gain.
For the first time with the new stadium income, SDSU will be able to run the program at a a decent level . Higher raked than Oregon State and WAZZU by USNWR good basketball and football. Would seem a natural?
Totally agree Fergus! I've been reading that the best fits for the Pac-12 would be (at least in CA) SDSU and Fresno State. SDSU would be ideal as it would keep intact the NorCal SoCal rivalry and capture a share of the significant SoCal media market. I think all the potential suitors (ESPN, Fox, Apple, Amazon, etc.) will be looking at the media markets. It would be interesting if Netflix makes a move to bring in sports - it could bring a different type of subscriber into their platform and it looks like their competitors (Disney, Amazon, etc.) are already doing that.
While it's true that UCLA's athletics are almost entirely self-supported, that does not also mean that the University and Regents don't necessarily have some entitlement to say something here. So you may think that's the way it should be, but may not be what in fact is. In fact, they can probably do whatever they want if they'd like to set that precedent. UCLA athletics still wears the institution's brand and trademarks, they use it's facilities, and it's student-athletes receive scholarships from said University which allow them to participate as part of UCLA athletics. Regardless of funding, they are intertwined.
Very good points which I agree with 100%. This is in line with the fact that any major expenditure, such as hiring a new head coach, needs sign off from the Regents. In regard to stopping UCLA from joining the B1G, most writers are unanimous in doubting they have any power here. Also, was addressing the original question which was "UCLA continuing to receive California state funding"....to which my original answer stands. Athletic dept receives zero state funding.
Maybe. I'm not really concerned with what the writers have to say, as they don't have any greater insight into what can or can't be done by the Regents. This is a fairly unprecedented situation. But there is incentive for the Regents to allow UCLA to jump and it's $100 million per year. But they do have to try to understand the collateral impact that will have elsewhere in the system--mainly Cal. They may want to try to use their leverage to get Cal an invite (which is all but likely to fail, at least now). More likely they will reallocate funds towards Cal's losses, which seems to me the most plausible scenario here.
What funds are you referring to? The additional revenue generated from UCLA's membership in the B1G? There's very little chance of that happening. If you are referring to the general funds received from the state, that's even less likely.
Great points Pedro! This may have already been answered, but what share of UCLA's windfall will the state actually see? Is it UCLA itself that gets the $100M/year? If UCLA's athletic dept receives zero state funding than the state probably stands to receive...$0. That seems somewhat wrong for all the reasons Pedro enumerated above. Even if UCLA is almost entirely self-supported, they do receive some support from the state, not the least of which is the tax-exempt status of the university. It would seem that the state should be entitled to something. The other question is if that $100M/year is all for the athletic department. I would hope that some of that would trickle down to the students who worked hard to get into a very selective school.
On another note, it would be great for Cal to receive any additional funds. That would save more sports and would also not make the debt of the football stadium/facilities seem so daunting. I would not want Cal to leave the Pac-12, but it's not up to me. It's a money grab on one end and surviving to play in a power conference on the other end.
Not qualified to answer, but Cal’s stadium debt is no doubt first and foremost on the minds of the Regents. Barring a B1G invite to Cal, UCLA’s move takes Cal farther from ever getting out from under that mountain of debt. Which is why I suspect that at least some of that UCLA TV money will find it’s way to Berkeley.
I believe Cal is similar with their powerful alumni base, though UCLA also generates substantial revenue from their medical center. With that said, it really pains me to see what's happening to the Pac12....though I fully understand UCLA/USC's financial motivations. I don't know how I'm going to get used to UCLA not playing it's traditional west coast opponents every year. It would have been awesome if Scott had actually pulled off that huge heist of Oklahoma & Texas he attempted ten years ago.
Totally agree Tony. Regional rivalries mean so much - it's a shame that they are going away. Can't imagine Cal and Stanford not having The Big Game, Big Swim, etc.
Another thought: The idea of the student-athlete is such a joke now - at least for football players who basically dedicate all their time to practices, games, training, etc. Now throw the travel on top of that (for UCLA/USC). SEC/ACC/Pac-12/Big-10 - the power conferences - should just end the charade and just run their football programs like minor league baseball - pay the players (in addition to NIL) and just provide school during the off-season. I guess traveling is a part of college sports, but now it is starting to seem excessive when you have to travel 2/3 time zones to play a conference game.
I'm done with this nonsense. Sports loyalty, to me, is about two things: personal history and geographical area. I don't care about TV deals or projected numbers. Will I watch college football? Sometimes. I like it better than the pro game. The teams I care about are local to the Great North Wet.
Fox and the Big 10 are happy to have a foothold in the Pacific Time Zone so they can fill that 7:00 pm time slot. I'm sure a lot of Midwest fans will not be happy having to stay up well past midnight to see to their teams play in California. This is clearly not in the best interest of the fans or the athletes for that matter due to the travel times. This is in the best interest of Fox and the Universities to line their own pockets and in the case of UCLA helping to bail them out over very poor financial decisions. Iowa head football coach Kirk Ferentz said the sport is need of a strong commissioner in order to save the game.
We pac-12 boosters have one hope: ESPN or bust. Hey John: I first met Anthony Newman in the early 80s while he was at Beaverton High school, where my mom taught for many years. I had dreams he would go to the U of O, and he did. I have followed him during his Duck days, and his career in the NFL. You story yesterday about his daughter and her boyfriend was great us usual. I visited with Anthony when he was playing for Oregon, usually after away games, like once in Berkeley. Chris Miller and Oregon that hot day in Berkeley, came from behind to win! I visited with Rich Brooks that day outside of the visiting locker room. He was pretty happy, as were all Ducks that sweltering day for an early afternoon game. . Anthony came out and I told him how I had followed him since his high school days. In his senior year in Beaverton, I went to Hillsboro to see the Beavers play the Hilhi baseball team at Hare field. The baseball field there is now called Rutschman field. My late father and Ad Rutschman were long time friends; coach Rutschman coached football and baseball in Hillsboro. Then, he went to Linfield to coach. In college in McMinnville, Mr. Rutschman won 12 letters in sports; four each in football, basketball, and baseball. In my sophomore year at Hillsboro High school. Coach R's team won a state championship; 1966. He also coached a state title in baseball the same year, 1966. In 1968 he coached a baseball team in Hillsboro to a state title, and I knew all the players. His son, Donnie Rutschman, coached in High school in McMinnville and later at Glencoe, a school also in Hillsboro, Donnie and I were close in age, and played baseball together in our little league days. His dad let Donnie and myself sit in the varsity dugout at baseball games in the early 1960s. A pretty big deal when you are 10 years old! The whole Rutschman family are a class act, and I got to know most all of them. Ad's grandson, who was player of the year while a senior at Oregon State in Corvallis in 2019, as a baseball catcher, helped the Beavers to a national title that year. He was the number one pick in the major league draft. He is now playing for the Baltimore Orioles, who have a good young team. Since Adley got called up this year, the team has caught fire. He is a good catcher, and a switch hitter. When Ad was coaching at Linfield, he won national titles in two sports: baseball and football more than once. That hot day in Berkeley I mentioned to Mr. Newman about a home run I saw him hit in 1983 at Rutschman field. It started off as a very high pop up, and I was sure it would be caught. Am not sure if the wind caught it, or if it was just pretty deep, but that ball cleared the right field fence for a homer and it was almost an out of body experience. I was by myself sitting in my car, and I was beyond amazed that a high fly, that looked shallow at first, ended up being a four bagger! When I told Anthony I was there that day, and described the scene he said: "Wow Donnie, you saw that homer in Hillsboro I hit as a senior outfielder at Beavo?" I proudly said yes and we both had a good visit! He played for 12 years in the NFL, and was a good defensive back. A real nice guy, and the average career as a player is much less than 12 years. The Rutschmans and the Newmans have been favorites of mine for years. At my father's funeral in Hillsboro in September of 1983, a surprise guest appeared: it was Coach Rutschman, who had left his team's football practice in McMinnville early that day to attend the funeral. A class act all the way. His first national title at Linfield was in 1984 in football. I missed the game, but later wrote him a letter of congratulations. He took the time to hand write me a thank you letter! Winning national titles, at the same college, is more than one sport, , is a pretty rare experience. Ad still volunteers as a football assistant in McMinnville, or he used to. There is an athletic building at Linfield named after him. Adley once kicked for the football Beavers in his first year at OSU. When he was in high school in Sherwood, Or, he kicked a 62 yard field goal in a game. He decided to concentrate on baseball at OSU. Smart choice and as a number one pick out of college, he got a five million dollar bonus. He not only is a quality young man, but he is humble and not arrogant at all. Even though he had $5 million payday right out of college, he did not go out and buy anything. He kept driving his same used Honda! I have heard the Big 10 conference talk at their media day. I have no problem with UCLA and USC joining the league, starting in football in two years. It is called big money; either you get it from tv deals for your league, or you get left in the dust. Quit bashing the California schools, please, as any school, when offered what the Bruins and Trojans got, would jump at the chance to earn much more than if they stayed in the weak pac-12. The rich get richer, like in life, and now with kids being able to get money from endorsements while also getting a scholarship, and with athletes being able to play at a new school right away, without sitting out a year, all has changed. To compete with the SEC in football takes major millions of dollars, lots of recruiting, a winning, solid program, great coaching, and more. It takes huge tv deals; the live gate and hot dog sales are peanuts compared to a contract with ESPN. It will take the pac-12 years to catch the big boys in football and basketball. If they cannot get a deal with ESPN now, that is not a lowball figure, the pac-12 will remain a minor conference. Pac-12, league of champions, Bill Walton, is a bad joke. The minor sports, which produce no revenue at all, only survive by getting money from their school. TV money rules all, and the Pac-12 with a horrible tv deal, created by the circus clown of a leader, who thank God got deported, is another bad joke. USC only gave their new football coach $110 million in salary and he lives in a $17 million dollar shack in LA. If you think Chip Kelly cannot use the extra $30 million a year his school will get for football, go back to Florida and see where slick Willy and super Mario are still confused and not very smart. UCLA and USC are very wise. and both of these programs will improve a lot right away. Millions of dollars can do many things! GO DUCKS
There is an easy solution for the Pac 10. The big 10 should absorb the remaining Pac 10 teams with the exception of the Arizona schools. They could the have 3 conferences East, Central and Pacific. The Rosebowl could then serve as the championship game for the Big ten. There could be a 4 team playoff between the three conference champions and the 4th best record to determine the Rose bowl participant's.
SDSU and UNLV are great! But, who replaces Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, And Colorado when they join the BIG12? Then how long does Oregon and Washington wait on an invitation from the B1G? Every estimation I have seen has Oregon and Washington as a Net Negative to the B1G; meaning they take more from their share of TV Revenue than they add to the overall value. They both add value to the Big12. If the entire Mountain West becomes the new PAC12, the Big12 Conference will look better to Phil Knight.
Thanks John….Why dont you tell us when you actually know something. I’m getting a little tired of “ I wondered” “I dont think” “I kind of go back and forth” “ should they decide to go ahead with expansion” I don’t really know anymore now than when I started….Maybe when there is a little more of who, what, when, where and why, would be great, thanks
Thank you John. Your insights have been invaluable in helping me to understand this chaotic era of college athletics! Thank you NCAA for fostering this by your incredibly selfish, rigid and self-serving athletic model! College athletics will be unrecognizable in 10years!
Without equal revenue sharing, then the Pac-12 is not a conference. There is no way that the other schools will accept UO and UW getting more money. All the major pro sports share national broadcast rights equally. Wouldn't the Cowboys love to get more money than the Jaguars?
Equal sharing is part of what got us into this mess. As a born and bred USC hater, I'd love to say they should receive the same slice of the pie as the rest of the Pac-12 programs, but the reality is that they were entitled to a bigger slice. I'd prefer to create a system that is more equitable and will keep the tent poles that remain happy enough to stick. The ones that aren't really have limited alternatives.
I can promise you that if UW, UO, Cal and Stanford ever get B1G invites they will not be getting the same cut as the rest, even USC and UCLA. Things are about to change. The difference between USC and Bama is that Bama is in the SEC and USC was in the Pac-12. When you're getting a 1/4 of what the B1G and SEC schools are getting those discrepancies within your own conference start to mean more.
Ratings may not be equal during the course of the contract. if we are going by tv households then Cal and Stanford should get the most money. The Bay Area has more people than the entire state of Oregon and about the same as Washington. Equal revenue sharing is the only fair way to go. It will be the same way in the Big 10 - Indiana gets the same money as Ohio State.
Equal share for everyone. Oregon already has Nike money. USC and UCLA are greedy bastards. Everyone else needs to have some sense of equality and fairness. Every school has had ups and downs. This is what a conference is. Otherwise what's the point?
Trying to enforce equal sharing, given the immense disparities in attractiveness, draw, revenue creation .... is just a recipe to shatter what's left of the Pac at this point.
Yes, SDSU at the top of this list and I'm higher on UNLV than most. Is there a faster growing population in the country? Weird cultural fit for the conference, but this is the world we live in now. If they go further east, Houston is the other for me. Huge market and Texas is such an important recruiting territory. BYU also makes sense to pair with Utah.
LA is already lost. USC and UCLA are gone. The Pac-10 should consolidate the best remaining fan bases in the Mountain and Pacific Time Zones. BYU is the strongest brand in that area that is not now in the conference.
If you look in a map, SDS isn't very much closer to LA than Vegas is. Plus UNLV is playing in a shiny new domed stadium this fall.
The Mormon Church and BYU have a huge number of followers in the West. BYU would bring more eyeballs to Pac10/12 football that any other school and it isn't even close for # 2.
"BYU is its own discussion I don't personally count them in play here"
BINGO! The Notre Dame of the West is removed from consideration due to religious bias. Betcha you don't want them Air Force Academy baby killers, either.
HaHaHa. So BYU is going to get 43mill currentlly, and 50million + in the next B12 contract. Why they would settle for the 25mill being offered to the P10 is beyond me. How does that work?
Boise has a weak overall athletic program, isn't in the Pacific Time Zone, almost no football recruits from the area and will not be able to complete against this level of competition. San Diego St. makes sense and Fresno St. or SMU make sense from a $$$$$$$$ and recruiting standpoint. I would only take SDSU and some Big 12 defectors down the road.
Really not sure how GK is going to get any kind of good media rights deal done with all this ambiguity and UW/OR for sure wanting to keep their options open for the foreseeable future.
The posturing and wondering aloud from Warren isn't helping..
Pretty sure GK & KW won't be exchanging bottles of Caymus this Christmas
Sort of amazing KW can get up and talk about "how he was raised" ...and keep a straight face. Straight up did GK dirty to his face with all the "Alliance" stuff ... all while planning to raid his house through the back door at night.
Shameful stuff from KW if you ask me.
This is from the "leadership" of the conference also.
Nice example we are setting for the students here.
I'm surprised USC/UCLA can bolt from the conference (even with two years notice). I'd think the twelve schools would huddle to consider any conference changes.
I'm just counting down the dumping of the PAC-12 Networks for Duck games which many of us can't watch out of state. Game televising seems to work in priority order: OTA networks (ABC/FOX), streaming networks (ESPN group) and then PAC-12 Networks for leftovers.
IMHO - IF it's the plan of the PAC to stay together, then I honestly do not see how we can go forward and PROSPER without adding teams. If we want to make a HARD play to save the league, then we should go to 14 teams. Absolutely add SDSU (a MUST). Really hard to say who those other 3 teams would be but "I" would go after Okie State, Houston and UNLV. I'd say BYU but Utah? YIKES! That could turn into an ugly conversation real fast - LOL. Plus, the "no playing on Sunday" thing, oh boy :-) Maybe Baylor?
I think the PAC not doing ANYTHING may very well tell us more about how close we are to our total demise than we might expect. Under that scenario I see the UW, Oregon, Stanford and Cal to the B1G. Yes, I think Cal would be included. I see Arizona, ASU, Colorado and Utah to the B-12. Unfortunately for WSU and OSU, I see the MWC but, MAYBE the B-12? They are surely worthy.
Thanks for keeping me updated on the Pac-12! I'm a big Cal fan and I'm still in shock that UCLA and USC are gone. Seems like a bad dream.
I personally hope the Pac-12 goes on the offensive and goes after San Diego as well as Fresno State. If the media contracts are all about football, makes sense to scoop up all the good football schools that are in the Pac-12's regional vicinity. We just can't afford to lose Oregon or really any other school. I don't even like football, but I'll take cohesion and the conference staying alive over any other concern.
It's weird to me that UCLA would continue to get California state funding, but not cooperate with California collegiate athletics. How does that play out? (USC is different as a private school.)
UCLA’s move to the Big Ten is a colossal gain for the UC system. Prior to UCLA’s move, both UCLA and Berkeley were projected to receive about $42 million each per year in TV revenue (total about $85 million). Now, UCLA is projected to bring in around $100 million annually as a member of the Big Ten while Cal’s projected share in the 10 team Pac-12 is around $30 million annually. In other words, the UC system is now projected to bring in a total of $130 million in TV revenue each year. That’s a massive increase in TV revenue of more than 50% annually. Moreover, Cal’s reduction in revenue is $12 million annually but since UCLA is only one of the parties involved in Cal’s revenue reducing, UCLA’s role in Cal’s reduced revenue (assuming 50% which in actuality USC is the more valuable commodity) amounts to just $6 million, which equates to a 14% decrease in revenue to Cal. Thus, in the scheme of things, the proportional benefit of the move to for the UC system far outweighs the negligible rate of harm done to Cal, meaning the Regents withhold any state funds to UCLA would amount to legal breach of their fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of university and people of California.
Moreover, UCLA’s athletic department receives just $3 million in university subsidies a year. Meanwhile, Cal’s athletic department receives $25 million annually in university funds and recently received a bailout worth hundreds of millions of dollars from the university. In other words, Cal’s athletic department has already received enormous financial benefits from the state that UCLA has never received. To withhold any funding from UCLA would require offsetting the amount from what Cal has received in university benefits. Considering UCLA only receives $3 million annually, it would take many years before that $3 million balances with Cal’s hundreds of millions of dollars in university assistance.
This math is exactly why Newsome would be a special kind of stupid to block the UCLA move. He is merely using this to get his name in headlines, and pissed that he couldn’t have used this situation for even more political gain.
For the first time with the new stadium income, SDSU will be able to run the program at a a decent level . Higher raked than Oregon State and WAZZU by USNWR good basketball and football. Would seem a natural?
Totally agree Fergus! I've been reading that the best fits for the Pac-12 would be (at least in CA) SDSU and Fresno State. SDSU would be ideal as it would keep intact the NorCal SoCal rivalry and capture a share of the significant SoCal media market. I think all the potential suitors (ESPN, Fox, Apple, Amazon, etc.) will be looking at the media markets. It would be interesting if Netflix makes a move to bring in sports - it could bring a different type of subscriber into their platform and it looks like their competitors (Disney, Amazon, etc.) are already doing that.
It's because the athletic department is not funded with state funds. In fact, over 90% of UCLA total operating budget is not from public funds.
While it's true that UCLA's athletics are almost entirely self-supported, that does not also mean that the University and Regents don't necessarily have some entitlement to say something here. So you may think that's the way it should be, but may not be what in fact is. In fact, they can probably do whatever they want if they'd like to set that precedent. UCLA athletics still wears the institution's brand and trademarks, they use it's facilities, and it's student-athletes receive scholarships from said University which allow them to participate as part of UCLA athletics. Regardless of funding, they are intertwined.
Very good points which I agree with 100%. This is in line with the fact that any major expenditure, such as hiring a new head coach, needs sign off from the Regents. In regard to stopping UCLA from joining the B1G, most writers are unanimous in doubting they have any power here. Also, was addressing the original question which was "UCLA continuing to receive California state funding"....to which my original answer stands. Athletic dept receives zero state funding.
Maybe. I'm not really concerned with what the writers have to say, as they don't have any greater insight into what can or can't be done by the Regents. This is a fairly unprecedented situation. But there is incentive for the Regents to allow UCLA to jump and it's $100 million per year. But they do have to try to understand the collateral impact that will have elsewhere in the system--mainly Cal. They may want to try to use their leverage to get Cal an invite (which is all but likely to fail, at least now). More likely they will reallocate funds towards Cal's losses, which seems to me the most plausible scenario here.
What funds are you referring to? The additional revenue generated from UCLA's membership in the B1G? There's very little chance of that happening. If you are referring to the general funds received from the state, that's even less likely.
Great points Pedro! This may have already been answered, but what share of UCLA's windfall will the state actually see? Is it UCLA itself that gets the $100M/year? If UCLA's athletic dept receives zero state funding than the state probably stands to receive...$0. That seems somewhat wrong for all the reasons Pedro enumerated above. Even if UCLA is almost entirely self-supported, they do receive some support from the state, not the least of which is the tax-exempt status of the university. It would seem that the state should be entitled to something. The other question is if that $100M/year is all for the athletic department. I would hope that some of that would trickle down to the students who worked hard to get into a very selective school.
On another note, it would be great for Cal to receive any additional funds. That would save more sports and would also not make the debt of the football stadium/facilities seem so daunting. I would not want Cal to leave the Pac-12, but it's not up to me. It's a money grab on one end and surviving to play in a power conference on the other end.
How much of that windfall will be spent on higher travel costs to all the other sports?
Not qualified to answer, but Cal’s stadium debt is no doubt first and foremost on the minds of the Regents. Barring a B1G invite to Cal, UCLA’s move takes Cal farther from ever getting out from under that mountain of debt. Which is why I suspect that at least some of that UCLA TV money will find it’s way to Berkeley.
Thanks Tony! Appreciate that and the over 90% figure is very noteworthy.
I believe Cal is similar with their powerful alumni base, though UCLA also generates substantial revenue from their medical center. With that said, it really pains me to see what's happening to the Pac12....though I fully understand UCLA/USC's financial motivations. I don't know how I'm going to get used to UCLA not playing it's traditional west coast opponents every year. It would have been awesome if Scott had actually pulled off that huge heist of Oklahoma & Texas he attempted ten years ago.
Totally agree Tony. Regional rivalries mean so much - it's a shame that they are going away. Can't imagine Cal and Stanford not having The Big Game, Big Swim, etc.
Another thought: The idea of the student-athlete is such a joke now - at least for football players who basically dedicate all their time to practices, games, training, etc. Now throw the travel on top of that (for UCLA/USC). SEC/ACC/Pac-12/Big-10 - the power conferences - should just end the charade and just run their football programs like minor league baseball - pay the players (in addition to NIL) and just provide school during the off-season. I guess traveling is a part of college sports, but now it is starting to seem excessive when you have to travel 2/3 time zones to play a conference game.
Cal does get substantially more support from the University than UCLA does from its.
I'm done with this nonsense. Sports loyalty, to me, is about two things: personal history and geographical area. I don't care about TV deals or projected numbers. Will I watch college football? Sometimes. I like it better than the pro game. The teams I care about are local to the Great North Wet.
Fox and the Big 10 are happy to have a foothold in the Pacific Time Zone so they can fill that 7:00 pm time slot. I'm sure a lot of Midwest fans will not be happy having to stay up well past midnight to see to their teams play in California. This is clearly not in the best interest of the fans or the athletes for that matter due to the travel times. This is in the best interest of Fox and the Universities to line their own pockets and in the case of UCLA helping to bail them out over very poor financial decisions. Iowa head football coach Kirk Ferentz said the sport is need of a strong commissioner in order to save the game.
We pac-12 boosters have one hope: ESPN or bust. Hey John: I first met Anthony Newman in the early 80s while he was at Beaverton High school, where my mom taught for many years. I had dreams he would go to the U of O, and he did. I have followed him during his Duck days, and his career in the NFL. You story yesterday about his daughter and her boyfriend was great us usual. I visited with Anthony when he was playing for Oregon, usually after away games, like once in Berkeley. Chris Miller and Oregon that hot day in Berkeley, came from behind to win! I visited with Rich Brooks that day outside of the visiting locker room. He was pretty happy, as were all Ducks that sweltering day for an early afternoon game. . Anthony came out and I told him how I had followed him since his high school days. In his senior year in Beaverton, I went to Hillsboro to see the Beavers play the Hilhi baseball team at Hare field. The baseball field there is now called Rutschman field. My late father and Ad Rutschman were long time friends; coach Rutschman coached football and baseball in Hillsboro. Then, he went to Linfield to coach. In college in McMinnville, Mr. Rutschman won 12 letters in sports; four each in football, basketball, and baseball. In my sophomore year at Hillsboro High school. Coach R's team won a state championship; 1966. He also coached a state title in baseball the same year, 1966. In 1968 he coached a baseball team in Hillsboro to a state title, and I knew all the players. His son, Donnie Rutschman, coached in High school in McMinnville and later at Glencoe, a school also in Hillsboro, Donnie and I were close in age, and played baseball together in our little league days. His dad let Donnie and myself sit in the varsity dugout at baseball games in the early 1960s. A pretty big deal when you are 10 years old! The whole Rutschman family are a class act, and I got to know most all of them. Ad's grandson, who was player of the year while a senior at Oregon State in Corvallis in 2019, as a baseball catcher, helped the Beavers to a national title that year. He was the number one pick in the major league draft. He is now playing for the Baltimore Orioles, who have a good young team. Since Adley got called up this year, the team has caught fire. He is a good catcher, and a switch hitter. When Ad was coaching at Linfield, he won national titles in two sports: baseball and football more than once. That hot day in Berkeley I mentioned to Mr. Newman about a home run I saw him hit in 1983 at Rutschman field. It started off as a very high pop up, and I was sure it would be caught. Am not sure if the wind caught it, or if it was just pretty deep, but that ball cleared the right field fence for a homer and it was almost an out of body experience. I was by myself sitting in my car, and I was beyond amazed that a high fly, that looked shallow at first, ended up being a four bagger! When I told Anthony I was there that day, and described the scene he said: "Wow Donnie, you saw that homer in Hillsboro I hit as a senior outfielder at Beavo?" I proudly said yes and we both had a good visit! He played for 12 years in the NFL, and was a good defensive back. A real nice guy, and the average career as a player is much less than 12 years. The Rutschmans and the Newmans have been favorites of mine for years. At my father's funeral in Hillsboro in September of 1983, a surprise guest appeared: it was Coach Rutschman, who had left his team's football practice in McMinnville early that day to attend the funeral. A class act all the way. His first national title at Linfield was in 1984 in football. I missed the game, but later wrote him a letter of congratulations. He took the time to hand write me a thank you letter! Winning national titles, at the same college, is more than one sport, , is a pretty rare experience. Ad still volunteers as a football assistant in McMinnville, or he used to. There is an athletic building at Linfield named after him. Adley once kicked for the football Beavers in his first year at OSU. When he was in high school in Sherwood, Or, he kicked a 62 yard field goal in a game. He decided to concentrate on baseball at OSU. Smart choice and as a number one pick out of college, he got a five million dollar bonus. He not only is a quality young man, but he is humble and not arrogant at all. Even though he had $5 million payday right out of college, he did not go out and buy anything. He kept driving his same used Honda! I have heard the Big 10 conference talk at their media day. I have no problem with UCLA and USC joining the league, starting in football in two years. It is called big money; either you get it from tv deals for your league, or you get left in the dust. Quit bashing the California schools, please, as any school, when offered what the Bruins and Trojans got, would jump at the chance to earn much more than if they stayed in the weak pac-12. The rich get richer, like in life, and now with kids being able to get money from endorsements while also getting a scholarship, and with athletes being able to play at a new school right away, without sitting out a year, all has changed. To compete with the SEC in football takes major millions of dollars, lots of recruiting, a winning, solid program, great coaching, and more. It takes huge tv deals; the live gate and hot dog sales are peanuts compared to a contract with ESPN. It will take the pac-12 years to catch the big boys in football and basketball. If they cannot get a deal with ESPN now, that is not a lowball figure, the pac-12 will remain a minor conference. Pac-12, league of champions, Bill Walton, is a bad joke. The minor sports, which produce no revenue at all, only survive by getting money from their school. TV money rules all, and the Pac-12 with a horrible tv deal, created by the circus clown of a leader, who thank God got deported, is another bad joke. USC only gave their new football coach $110 million in salary and he lives in a $17 million dollar shack in LA. If you think Chip Kelly cannot use the extra $30 million a year his school will get for football, go back to Florida and see where slick Willy and super Mario are still confused and not very smart. UCLA and USC are very wise. and both of these programs will improve a lot right away. Millions of dollars can do many things! GO DUCKS
There is an easy solution for the Pac 10. The big 10 should absorb the remaining Pac 10 teams with the exception of the Arizona schools. They could the have 3 conferences East, Central and Pacific. The Rosebowl could then serve as the championship game for the Big ten. There could be a 4 team playoff between the three conference champions and the 4th best record to determine the Rose bowl participant's.
Fresno is a big city and so is Dallas. I could care less about either, but eyeballs are all that count.
SDSU and UNLV are great! But, who replaces Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, And Colorado when they join the BIG12? Then how long does Oregon and Washington wait on an invitation from the B1G? Every estimation I have seen has Oregon and Washington as a Net Negative to the B1G; meaning they take more from their share of TV Revenue than they add to the overall value. They both add value to the Big12. If the entire Mountain West becomes the new PAC12, the Big12 Conference will look better to Phil Knight.
Thanks John….Why dont you tell us when you actually know something. I’m getting a little tired of “ I wondered” “I dont think” “I kind of go back and forth” “ should they decide to go ahead with expansion” I don’t really know anymore now than when I started….Maybe when there is a little more of who, what, when, where and why, would be great, thanks
Thank you John. Your insights have been invaluable in helping me to understand this chaotic era of college athletics! Thank you NCAA for fostering this by your incredibly selfish, rigid and self-serving athletic model! College athletics will be unrecognizable in 10years!
Without equal revenue sharing, then the Pac-12 is not a conference. There is no way that the other schools will accept UO and UW getting more money. All the major pro sports share national broadcast rights equally. Wouldn't the Cowboys love to get more money than the Jaguars?
Equal sharing is part of what got us into this mess. As a born and bred USC hater, I'd love to say they should receive the same slice of the pie as the rest of the Pac-12 programs, but the reality is that they were entitled to a bigger slice. I'd prefer to create a system that is more equitable and will keep the tent poles that remain happy enough to stick. The ones that aren't really have limited alternatives.
Alabama doesnt get more than Vanderbilt. Ohio State doesnt get more than Indiana. Gimme a break.
I can promise you that if UW, UO, Cal and Stanford ever get B1G invites they will not be getting the same cut as the rest, even USC and UCLA. Things are about to change. The difference between USC and Bama is that Bama is in the SEC and USC was in the Pac-12. When you're getting a 1/4 of what the B1G and SEC schools are getting those discrepancies within your own conference start to mean more.
Ratings may not be equal during the course of the contract. if we are going by tv households then Cal and Stanford should get the most money. The Bay Area has more people than the entire state of Oregon and about the same as Washington. Equal revenue sharing is the only fair way to go. It will be the same way in the Big 10 - Indiana gets the same money as Ohio State.
I'm not deliberating about which schools deserve more over which now, just debating the merits of equal sharing in the current environment.
Equal share for everyone. Oregon already has Nike money. USC and UCLA are greedy bastards. Everyone else needs to have some sense of equality and fairness. Every school has had ups and downs. This is what a conference is. Otherwise what's the point?
You're looking at this from a moralistic point of view rather than a practical one.
Exactly right Pedro
Trying to enforce equal sharing, given the immense disparities in attractiveness, draw, revenue creation .... is just a recipe to shatter what's left of the Pac at this point.
Why?
This is exactly how the P10 worked before
Teams that are tentpoles and are directly responsible for bringing in higher media rights numbers should get some form of kickback for that
NOT having that is one key factor in what allowed daylight for UCLA/USC to leave (USC in particular)
Top realignment candidates for the Pac-10, ranked:
1. BYU
2. Boise St
3. San Diego St
4. UNLV
5. Air Force Acdemy
6. Colorado St
7. Wyoming
8. New Mexico
SDSU needs to be #1 due to the SoCal region
Yes, SDSU at the top of this list and I'm higher on UNLV than most. Is there a faster growing population in the country? Weird cultural fit for the conference, but this is the world we live in now. If they go further east, Houston is the other for me. Huge market and Texas is such an important recruiting territory. BYU also makes sense to pair with Utah.
LA is already lost. USC and UCLA are gone. The Pac-10 should consolidate the best remaining fan bases in the Mountain and Pacific Time Zones. BYU is the strongest brand in that area that is not now in the conference.
Totally disagree
SDSU and that region overall, even south of LA, is stuffed with crucial recruiting ground.
Any hope for a P10/12 to continue has to have a stake in that ground
If you look in a map, SDS isn't very much closer to LA than Vegas is. Plus UNLV is playing in a shiny new domed stadium this fall.
The Mormon Church and BYU have a huge number of followers in the West. BYU would bring more eyeballs to Pac10/12 football that any other school and it isn't even close for # 2.
BYU is its own discussion
I don't personally count them in play here, which is also why I have SDSU at #1 on the list
UNLV has an awful football program. Don't take it from me. Wilner shot that one down himself, on exactly that point
"BYU is its own discussion I don't personally count them in play here"
BINGO! The Notre Dame of the West is removed from consideration due to religious bias. Betcha you don't want them Air Force Academy baby killers, either.
HaHaHa. So BYU is going to get 43mill currentlly, and 50million + in the next B12 contract. Why they would settle for the 25mill being offered to the P10 is beyond me. How does that work?
That number is probably too high. Much too high. I still don't think they would leave, but they dumped the Mt. West.
50 mil + in next big 12 contract?
Boise has a weak overall athletic program, isn't in the Pacific Time Zone, almost no football recruits from the area and will not be able to complete against this level of competition. San Diego St. makes sense and Fresno St. or SMU make sense from a $$$$$$$$ and recruiting standpoint. I would only take SDSU and some Big 12 defectors down the road.
Fresno St. or SMU? Hey, how about Cleveland State and Whittenburg?
Really not sure how GK is going to get any kind of good media rights deal done with all this ambiguity and UW/OR for sure wanting to keep their options open for the foreseeable future.
The posturing and wondering aloud from Warren isn't helping..
Pretty sure GK & KW won't be exchanging bottles of Caymus this Christmas
Sort of amazing KW can get up and talk about "how he was raised" ...and keep a straight face. Straight up did GK dirty to his face with all the "Alliance" stuff ... all while planning to raid his house through the back door at night.
Shameful stuff from KW if you ask me.
This is from the "leadership" of the conference also.
Nice example we are setting for the students here.
I'm surprised USC/UCLA can bolt from the conference (even with two years notice). I'd think the twelve schools would huddle to consider any conference changes.
I'm just counting down the dumping of the PAC-12 Networks for Duck games which many of us can't watch out of state. Game televising seems to work in priority order: OTA networks (ABC/FOX), streaming networks (ESPN group) and then PAC-12 Networks for leftovers.
I think it's save to say if any more schools leave doesn't matter which ones the conference
is done... at that point the schools that are left will be begging for any kind of deal.
The bottom half will be looking at the MWC straight in the eye.
Oregon and Washington are must-keeps. They’re the glue.
Other than SDSU, the rest of the mentioned targets just don't do anything for me.
It's all just watering it down and turning the P12 shell into another form of the MWC.
This sucks
San Diego State is attractive. Agree on others. I’ll ask Bob about it on the radio show today.
IMHO - IF it's the plan of the PAC to stay together, then I honestly do not see how we can go forward and PROSPER without adding teams. If we want to make a HARD play to save the league, then we should go to 14 teams. Absolutely add SDSU (a MUST). Really hard to say who those other 3 teams would be but "I" would go after Okie State, Houston and UNLV. I'd say BYU but Utah? YIKES! That could turn into an ugly conversation real fast - LOL. Plus, the "no playing on Sunday" thing, oh boy :-) Maybe Baylor?
I think the PAC not doing ANYTHING may very well tell us more about how close we are to our total demise than we might expect. Under that scenario I see the UW, Oregon, Stanford and Cal to the B1G. Yes, I think Cal would be included. I see Arizona, ASU, Colorado and Utah to the B-12. Unfortunately for WSU and OSU, I see the MWC but, MAYBE the B-12? They are surely worthy.
Big Ten schools are apparently very good at educating their students on at least one important topic: Midwest weather stinks.
Too funny.