If you go all the way back to Tarkanian days of UNLV, the elephant in the room has always been the "alleged" connection of the sports programs to outside influences. Of course it has never been proven, but the closer investigators got, the further UNLV sports programs fell. I'm not sorry the Pac isn't crawling into bed with UNLV. That's always going to be a ticking time bomb I'd want no part of.
Coming from SoCal, I chuckle when people were clamoring for UNLV... Here we all know it's a huge party school that is not taken seriously for academics.... And no one started talking about football until recently, it's been considered pretty low level in almost everything
When you get turned down for a prom date it's real easy to say she wasn't that pretty, anyway.
UNLV has tremendous media potential in one of the fastest growing markets in the country. Their $20MM debt? Washington State's athletic department is $100MM in debt.
Roughly 3/4 of WSU's debt are from low interst bonds that are systematically being retired over the next 15 years. We borrowed $80M to build the Football Ops center and revitalize Bohler. Its not like the $240m bomb in Tucson or the $11M "accounting error" with the Moses Lake School District in Washington.
It's called Sales Rich, was disappointed that we offered those two in the first place, happy as a clam they chose the MWest. Now they both can dominate a crummy conference and very happy that the best 5 CHOSE the PAC.
If the idea is to build the 5th best conference in college football, you're not going to do it by adding the Utah State's of the world while getting publicly embarrassed when 5 other programs - including UNLV - have told you to take a hike. The Pac-12 is foraging around like they have no idea what they're doing.
I think they have a good idea what they are doing, but I think they now understand how far that Southern Tory-Brit alliance reaches. If UNLV and Air Force want to hang with Hawaii, Wyoming and New Mexico, so be it. They had their chance.
Those might be good moves but they wouldn’t meet the minimum FBS football requirement. The NewPac needs 8 multi sport members who all play FB, MBB, and WBB to get off probation and qualify as an FBS conference again
I think the best advice is don’t extend any offers to schools unless you know the answer is yes. Getting rejected by mediocre schools doesn’t look good.
True that, but getting that done sooner than later is what needs to happen in order to get to the NCAA minimum 8 members and to have a fully defined product to market for a media rights deal.
I’d still look at Texas State. I see better growth potential there versus all of the other uncommitted schools. They would be a big geographic outlier in the Pac, so it would probably take some real dollars to make it worth their while….but maybe not too much, since they are also a bit of a geographic outlier in the Sun Belt Conference.
This is never going anywhere. The pipedream of getting the PAC 12 back to a P5 conference is nothing more than wishful thinking (sort of like MLB to PDX). Merge the two conferences and make the best G5 conference in CF. If you do that, chances are you will get one of your teams in. IF OSU and WA ST can dominate that conference, they have a chance to end up on the right side of the ledger when this whole thing blows up again.
I read a piece elsewhere this morning that said if the Pac had invited the entire Mt. West there would have been no penalties, exit fees, etc. Though, I understand that would just have resulted in a Mt. West Plus conference and media value would have stayed about the same. But, OSU and WSU would have been annual contenders (locks?) for a Playoff berth.
WSU, Oregon State, Boise State, SDSU, Fresno State, and Utah State doesn't want bottom feeders SJSU, Wyoming, New Mexico, and Hawaii. The media contract valuation would be higher without those bottom MWC schools.
The new Pac-12 is basically the Mountain West+. The MWC is now the "bad WAC" (circa the early 2000s). None of it needed to happen. Instead, billable hours remains undefeated.
So, OSU and WSU are going to retain the same level of teams, with 20-25% of the media dollars that they had in 2023, in your scenario - and the scenario of everyone that says "just merge with the MWC". Please explain how that works.
Several tactical reactions, but something seemingly much more important needs to be said.
JC often talks about the PAC’s “brand” (wisely so) as a driver of strategy and decision-making. I cannot overstate how central that should be — must be — as this plays out.
Honestly, I’ve not always agreed with JC about the inherent remaining value of the conference’s brand in the wake of all the defections. Here’s why: your brand isn’t what you declare or wish it to be - it’s what you (your product, your reputation, the experience your audience has when it engages you) actually ARE.
Sorry if this sounds pedantic. I’m trying to be pragmatic.
WSU and OSU are what they always were — esteemed universities with proud traditions, loyal alumni and solid leadership. But the reconfigured PAC12? It is not what it once was.
The name may still exist. The logo. The aspirations. And they have value.
But poaching the MWC’s strongest members came at a cost — and I’m not talking about the poaching fees.
Gloria Navarez knew the (real) PAC12. She worked there before becoming commissioner of the WCC and later the MWC.
She’s a survivor. She’s tough. She’s a former litigator.
And I suspect she was enraged by what she saw unfolding — a “big dog” that doesn’t bark as loudly as it used to — and wasn’t about to slink away or be intimidated. I don’t blame her.
Back to the brand. When you forget what and who you are, your decisions can become fuzzy. Your actions can be counter-productive.
I wonder if Gould and her board assumed the second tier of MWC schools and whoever else they wanted would jump at the chance to join. After all — they’re the PAC12, right?
Maybe in name. And legacy. But those targets clearly knew what Gould et al might have forgotten. This isn’t the old PAC12. It isn’t a P5. And that should be ever more apparent as the next potential additions surface.
Brands evolve. And leaders either see that and act accordingly, or they don’t.
This is why they should just do the reverse merger. Both groups of schools (we can't exactly call them "conferences" at this point) are losing as things now stand. As a group of 13 (14 for football), at least they have an identity as a regional entity and the likelihood of at least some long term stability.
You're correct in saying that neither the combined entity nor as two separate groups will have anything approaching P4 status. At least not until one/both go out and start consistently beating better P4 teams. There doesn't seem to be much honor (or even much financial gain) from being the 12th school in the CFB playoff that gets beat 72-3 by Alabama or Ohio State in the first round.
Good points. Regional integrity always seemed important to me (ever more so with the remaining targets operating on leaner budgets and without national footprints, alumni bases, etc).
I think you have it backwards...Navarez is basically extorting the PAC. The PAC didn't do any bullying, they walked away from the MWest, and when they did, the best 5 of the MWest approached the PAC. I don't see that as being the bully, I see the MWest with their ridiculous extortion schemes as trying to get their hands on as much of the PAC-12 treasure chest as they can. They can't create it on their own, they can only extort it to get it.
Very well said. We all know hindsight is 20/20 and as things have panned out it is very unfortunate that the MW and PAC didn’t simply merge. Reverse merger. Such a waste of money all around in both conferences and now there are two conferences significantly damaged with not much chance at being relevant nationally. It’s a sad situation.
Same could be said for when your Ducks chose not to stand with their neighbor 45 minutes North when jumping to the Big 10 for the money. The money with the MWC would not have made sense for a full merger. So, as greed is King these days on college athletics, the Ducks jumped to the Big 10 and the Pac-12 took the 5 most valuable schools from the MWC.
Quit your patronizing behavior towards the people your Ducks abandoned and perhaps they will quit hating you?
Wow. Not sure why I can’t feel bad for all schools involved, including the Beavs and Cougs? Sheesh. Your hate precedes your comment. Maybe that’s the problem? The whole thing stinks, including the breakdown of the PAC-12.
Wishing OSU and WSU into the MWC would NOT have been good for them. You suggest a step down as a positive. And, yeah, I don't have a wholeot of reasons to like the Ducks these days. But, in fairness, it appears that all college athletics is about these days in the money. A degree is no longer a valuable thing for athletes, they have to be paid, etc. which is probably why I'm paying a lot less attention to it these days. I'm enjoying a lot of high school football this year which is rained by the poor behavior of college and pro athletes, but not the greed (yet!).
College football/basketball represent an important potential asset or liability for a university, but the importance goes way beyond the media contract amounts. Universities are facing demographic realities that make student enrolment the most important metric on the budget sheet. Oregon joining the Big Ten had everything to do with football, but behind it all is the need for Oregon to remain a national brand as a university, so that students from Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc, apply to UO as undergrads bringing in out of state tuition. 50 million (media deal) is about .5 of the operating budget, student tuition is probably about 40% (Just a guess based on national averages) of UO's budget. Oregon did not want to be fighting this fight the OSU/WSU are fighting to stay relevant nationally as a university, not just as a football team.
"UConn is a football powerhouse" said no one ever. That reminds me of when I was in Minnesota and the B1G picked up Rutgers. It was like WHAT?! Who knew they even played football in New Jersey. We were all told is was for access to the NYC TV market. Okay, but does that market even care about Rutgers football (probably not). UConn would be the same twisted logic. Can't these folks do better? Be patient. Add the basketball schools and meet the NCAA conference requirements and then build back football as opportunities develop, not out of desperation
Rutgers was all about the Big Ten Network subscriber fees. That was back when cable TV was at peak subscribership, and having a Big Ten team in the NYC market meant the network could charge about 10x the fee that they did when NYC was out of market. Also, the conference owned a bigger share of BTN at the time than they do now (51% vs 39% after they sold a piece off to FOX several years ago).
I’m sure the Big Ten raked in a lot more cash with that decision, but fast forward to now in the era of cord-cutting and it hasn’t aged quite so well.
Outstanding column! Insightful, informative and objective.
The Pac-12 --Oregon State and Washington State -- had a good run for about 10 months - a real good run resulting in a $255MM haul. The last two months they've looked like the Keystone Kops. Incredible they would go public with offers to schools without already having a "yes" in their back pocket - just amateurish. Now, at least 5 programs have publicly told the Pac-12 they're not interested. Maybe more behind the scenes. That hurts. That tarnishes the brand badly. It also creates more leverage for the next two programs the Pac-12 approaches. That's why the Pac-12 is now in a position where it has to accept programs like Utah State. And, BTW, just because a program is geographically sitting in a major media market is absolutely no guarantee that market is going to watch them. Utah State is a prime example - they sit in a rapidly growing TV market and don't move the needle. The University of Utah does; so do the Jazz, BYU and now the NHL. Utah State is very minor player in that market. They're the Portland State of the Utah media market. The Pac-12 is fooling themselves if they think they can build the 5th strongest football conference in the country by adding programs like Utah State. The Pac-12 needs a win. They would be smart to focus on those basketball combinations (Gonzaga, particularly) quietly but intensely. Their next offers - football or basketball - need to be a guaranteed "yes". Start acting like they know what they're doing instead of a couple of kids who inherited a ton of money and don't know how to handle it.
"Sacramento State, in FCS, announces that it has secured millions in funding for a new football stadium - part of a public pursuit of Pac-12 membership.
In a release, the school calls on 'business leaders across the region to join efforts to elevate Sac State to the Pac-12.'"
Do you think they're willing to invest in SJSU athletics? I honestly don't know. I just read and hear so much about Sacramento putting money into the community, sports, etc., and it's the state capital. Seems like it would be a better long term play, but that's just an uneducated guess.
Why not look at both. If the Sacramento State president, AD, and major donors are willing to put the money and effort it takes to get Sac State up to a high P5 level, they're well situated geographically. Within 5-6 years, that program could be on a par with other Pac-12 teams. The plans for that 25,000 seat stadium they're planning could easily be changed to at least 35K, with structural changes allowing expansion up to 50,000 or more. And in the NIL era, it doesn't take long to recruit enough talented players to be competitive.
OSU and WSU will survive in some form athletically but it won’t be close to what they have been in the past. The best athletes have voted with their feet and left, especially at OSU. Both schools are now in downgrade mode despite their energetic efforts to remain relevant. For this Beaver fan this whole thing is heartbreaking. Sure, we will occasionally find a sleeper athlete who is great, but the overall quality of our teams will continue to decline and it is uncertain when it will level out. OSU does not have the resources (read $$) to compete at the highest level of athletics. And the best athletes want to play against the best and who can blame them? This is a new reality and the loss is painful...
I’ve refrained from commenting on this PAC 12 vs MWC issue. There’s been too much taunting and mean spirited remarks for me. I appreciate how well you’ve kept your subscribers informed. Oregon alumni should realize while we managed to land on our feet it’s not all roses for the Ducks. The down side of joining the B1G has been has been explained from lengthy travel to joining at a discounted pay out. I truly believe OSU and WSU are able to hold on to their funds. Realignment is not over. Rushing to cobble together a conference may all be for naught. Both schools have shown they can compete at what used be referred to as a Major College level. Maybe I’m a Pollyanna but I think they will get their shot. Sadly it will not be under the banner of the PAC 12.
I hope OSU gets an offer, but the most common sense landing spot is the Big 12 and OSU sued 3 of its existing members and stripped each of those 3 of roughly $25 million in future conference revenue in the process.
I don't know what vote is required for admission but we all know human nature.
"So do what the Big Ten did. Negotiate a media deal for your current membership and ask the prospective TV partners to include escalators for select additions."
OK, so here we go again--trying to get media bids without a finished product to sell! How can the PAC expect anyone to offer a valid number? At best you get a non-binding 'guess' but then how do you sell that to a prospective invite to your conference? This was what the Pac-10 tried...no workee. Wouldn't it be better to just go buy an 8th member with their war chest and then market themselves?
Yep. Get the 8th school committed and go to market with a defined product. 8 members leaves plenty of room to take advantage of any future expansion opportunities that may come with the next media induced shuffle.
Your Pac-12 glacier has turned into an ice cube...thanks to hubris and amateurism. JC might not have been kidding when he mentioned Grand Canyon State. Yeah, go to market with a collection of third tier programs and tell me about your "defined product".
Navigate.... Sounding like their compass was broken going into this.
Here is a thought, go to market with your current seven partners and find out what the market thinks. We don't have the Holy Grail every school needs, firm financial numbers. Be willing to go to market with a partner or partners that might need a trial period, say two seasons to prove value of the fledgling conference. Let's face it, we are a big risk. What we do have and nobody can deny it, we have the more attractive seven teams of the two conferences. The Mountain West has a media deal but I doubt the media partners are excited to have an asset that touts a Wyoming - Las Vegas as it's game of the week. Especially with a Beaver - Aztec playing up the street in the LA media territory.
We don't need an 8th school until next spring but a tentative media deal that is based on the conference will have the 8th team can still be worked out.
What a shame to lose UNLV, particularly when their LIV operation is getting such good press. And no presence in Las Vegas! We’ll never get Stanford back now.
UConn is worthless without their basketball programs, and they aren’t moving those to the Pac. If you are willing to consider UConn for football, then may as well invite UTEP…..they’re just as bad but it’s only 1/3 the travel.
I totally agree. UConn as a football program is one of the worst. El Paso makes more sense if you are gonna add a subpar football program just for the sake of adding it. May as well consider Rice too. Or (LOL!!!) Portland State if you are looking for market size.
Considering the news about UNLV debt and the NIL scandal with the QB, Pac12 may have dodged a bullet
If you go all the way back to Tarkanian days of UNLV, the elephant in the room has always been the "alleged" connection of the sports programs to outside influences. Of course it has never been proven, but the closer investigators got, the further UNLV sports programs fell. I'm not sorry the Pac isn't crawling into bed with UNLV. That's always going to be a ticking time bomb I'd want no part of.
Coming from SoCal, I chuckle when people were clamoring for UNLV... Here we all know it's a huge party school that is not taken seriously for academics.... And no one started talking about football until recently, it's been considered pretty low level in almost everything
100%
When you get turned down for a prom date it's real easy to say she wasn't that pretty, anyway.
UNLV has tremendous media potential in one of the fastest growing markets in the country. Their $20MM debt? Washington State's athletic department is $100MM in debt.
Roughly 3/4 of WSU's debt are from low interst bonds that are systematically being retired over the next 15 years. We borrowed $80M to build the Football Ops center and revitalize Bohler. Its not like the $240m bomb in Tucson or the $11M "accounting error" with the Moses Lake School District in Washington.
UNLV is a dumpster fire, just like the city. Only good for one thing.
It's called Sales Rich, was disappointed that we offered those two in the first place, happy as a clam they chose the MWest. Now they both can dominate a crummy conference and very happy that the best 5 CHOSE the PAC.
If the idea is to build the 5th best conference in college football, you're not going to do it by adding the Utah State's of the world while getting publicly embarrassed when 5 other programs - including UNLV - have told you to take a hike. The Pac-12 is foraging around like they have no idea what they're doing.
I think they have a good idea what they are doing, but I think they now understand how far that Southern Tory-Brit alliance reaches. If UNLV and Air Force want to hang with Hawaii, Wyoming and New Mexico, so be it. They had their chance.
IntriguingStuff, John
Who “wins” in all of this? In the end, nobody, in my opinion
“Things are raw. And Nevarez, who played basketball at UMass, is a competitor. Losing the top section of her conference didn’t sit well.”
I like her
All of the college football world is watching with varied opinion and baited breath
The lawyers and TV networks win
Yup
Excellent insight into the new world of college football. Adding UConn for FB and GCU/ST MARYS/GONZAGA for hoops are strategic moves.
Those might be good moves but they wouldn’t meet the minimum FBS football requirement. The NewPac needs 8 multi sport members who all play FB, MBB, and WBB to get off probation and qualify as an FBS conference again
I think the best advice is don’t extend any offers to schools unless you know the answer is yes. Getting rejected by mediocre schools doesn’t look good.
True that, but getting that done sooner than later is what needs to happen in order to get to the NCAA minimum 8 members and to have a fully defined product to market for a media rights deal.
I’d still look at Texas State. I see better growth potential there versus all of the other uncommitted schools. They would be a big geographic outlier in the Pac, so it would probably take some real dollars to make it worth their while….but maybe not too much, since they are also a bit of a geographic outlier in the Sun Belt Conference.
https://www.texasfootball.com/article/2024/09/26/texas-state-utep-remain-active-in-conference-realignment-chatter
This.
This is never going anywhere. The pipedream of getting the PAC 12 back to a P5 conference is nothing more than wishful thinking (sort of like MLB to PDX). Merge the two conferences and make the best G5 conference in CF. If you do that, chances are you will get one of your teams in. IF OSU and WA ST can dominate that conference, they have a chance to end up on the right side of the ledger when this whole thing blows up again.
I read a piece elsewhere this morning that said if the Pac had invited the entire Mt. West there would have been no penalties, exit fees, etc. Though, I understand that would just have resulted in a Mt. West Plus conference and media value would have stayed about the same. But, OSU and WSU would have been annual contenders (locks?) for a Playoff berth.
WSU, Oregon State, Boise State, SDSU, Fresno State, and Utah State doesn't want bottom feeders SJSU, Wyoming, New Mexico, and Hawaii. The media contract valuation would be higher without those bottom MWC schools.
The new Pac-12 is basically the Mountain West+. The MWC is now the "bad WAC" (circa the early 2000s). None of it needed to happen. Instead, billable hours remains undefeated.
The media value would be about the same. The difference is you'd be cutting the same-sized pie into fewer pieces.
So, OSU and WSU are going to retain the same level of teams, with 20-25% of the media dollars that they had in 2023, in your scenario - and the scenario of everyone that says "just merge with the MWC". Please explain how that works.
Several tactical reactions, but something seemingly much more important needs to be said.
JC often talks about the PAC’s “brand” (wisely so) as a driver of strategy and decision-making. I cannot overstate how central that should be — must be — as this plays out.
Honestly, I’ve not always agreed with JC about the inherent remaining value of the conference’s brand in the wake of all the defections. Here’s why: your brand isn’t what you declare or wish it to be - it’s what you (your product, your reputation, the experience your audience has when it engages you) actually ARE.
Sorry if this sounds pedantic. I’m trying to be pragmatic.
WSU and OSU are what they always were — esteemed universities with proud traditions, loyal alumni and solid leadership. But the reconfigured PAC12? It is not what it once was.
The name may still exist. The logo. The aspirations. And they have value.
But poaching the MWC’s strongest members came at a cost — and I’m not talking about the poaching fees.
Gloria Navarez knew the (real) PAC12. She worked there before becoming commissioner of the WCC and later the MWC.
She’s a survivor. She’s tough. She’s a former litigator.
And I suspect she was enraged by what she saw unfolding — a “big dog” that doesn’t bark as loudly as it used to — and wasn’t about to slink away or be intimidated. I don’t blame her.
Back to the brand. When you forget what and who you are, your decisions can become fuzzy. Your actions can be counter-productive.
I wonder if Gould and her board assumed the second tier of MWC schools and whoever else they wanted would jump at the chance to join. After all — they’re the PAC12, right?
Maybe in name. And legacy. But those targets clearly knew what Gould et al might have forgotten. This isn’t the old PAC12. It isn’t a P5. And that should be ever more apparent as the next potential additions surface.
Brands evolve. And leaders either see that and act accordingly, or they don’t.
This is why they should just do the reverse merger. Both groups of schools (we can't exactly call them "conferences" at this point) are losing as things now stand. As a group of 13 (14 for football), at least they have an identity as a regional entity and the likelihood of at least some long term stability.
You're correct in saying that neither the combined entity nor as two separate groups will have anything approaching P4 status. At least not until one/both go out and start consistently beating better P4 teams. There doesn't seem to be much honor (or even much financial gain) from being the 12th school in the CFB playoff that gets beat 72-3 by Alabama or Ohio State in the first round.
Good points. Regional integrity always seemed important to me (ever more so with the remaining targets operating on leaner budgets and without national footprints, alumni bases, etc).
I think you have it backwards...Navarez is basically extorting the PAC. The PAC didn't do any bullying, they walked away from the MWest, and when they did, the best 5 of the MWest approached the PAC. I don't see that as being the bully, I see the MWest with their ridiculous extortion schemes as trying to get their hands on as much of the PAC-12 treasure chest as they can. They can't create it on their own, they can only extort it to get it.
Very well said. We all know hindsight is 20/20 and as things have panned out it is very unfortunate that the MW and PAC didn’t simply merge. Reverse merger. Such a waste of money all around in both conferences and now there are two conferences significantly damaged with not much chance at being relevant nationally. It’s a sad situation.
You’re right. Two weakened entities, beating on each other instead of building each other up. No one wins.
Same could be said for when your Ducks chose not to stand with their neighbor 45 minutes North when jumping to the Big 10 for the money. The money with the MWC would not have made sense for a full merger. So, as greed is King these days on college athletics, the Ducks jumped to the Big 10 and the Pac-12 took the 5 most valuable schools from the MWC.
Quit your patronizing behavior towards the people your Ducks abandoned and perhaps they will quit hating you?
Wow. Not sure why I can’t feel bad for all schools involved, including the Beavs and Cougs? Sheesh. Your hate precedes your comment. Maybe that’s the problem? The whole thing stinks, including the breakdown of the PAC-12.
Wishing OSU and WSU into the MWC would NOT have been good for them. You suggest a step down as a positive. And, yeah, I don't have a wholeot of reasons to like the Ducks these days. But, in fairness, it appears that all college athletics is about these days in the money. A degree is no longer a valuable thing for athletes, they have to be paid, etc. which is probably why I'm paying a lot less attention to it these days. I'm enjoying a lot of high school football this year which is rained by the poor behavior of college and pro athletes, but not the greed (yet!).
College football/basketball represent an important potential asset or liability for a university, but the importance goes way beyond the media contract amounts. Universities are facing demographic realities that make student enrolment the most important metric on the budget sheet. Oregon joining the Big Ten had everything to do with football, but behind it all is the need for Oregon to remain a national brand as a university, so that students from Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc, apply to UO as undergrads bringing in out of state tuition. 50 million (media deal) is about .5 of the operating budget, student tuition is probably about 40% (Just a guess based on national averages) of UO's budget. Oregon did not want to be fighting this fight the OSU/WSU are fighting to stay relevant nationally as a university, not just as a football team.
Uconn? There has got to be a better option.
"UConn is a football powerhouse" said no one ever. That reminds me of when I was in Minnesota and the B1G picked up Rutgers. It was like WHAT?! Who knew they even played football in New Jersey. We were all told is was for access to the NYC TV market. Okay, but does that market even care about Rutgers football (probably not). UConn would be the same twisted logic. Can't these folks do better? Be patient. Add the basketball schools and meet the NCAA conference requirements and then build back football as opportunities develop, not out of desperation
Rutgers was all about the Big Ten Network subscriber fees. That was back when cable TV was at peak subscribership, and having a Big Ten team in the NYC market meant the network could charge about 10x the fee that they did when NYC was out of market. Also, the conference owned a bigger share of BTN at the time than they do now (51% vs 39% after they sold a piece off to FOX several years ago).
I’m sure the Big Ten raked in a lot more cash with that decision, but fast forward to now in the era of cord-cutting and it hasn’t aged quite so well.
Outstanding column! Insightful, informative and objective.
The Pac-12 --Oregon State and Washington State -- had a good run for about 10 months - a real good run resulting in a $255MM haul. The last two months they've looked like the Keystone Kops. Incredible they would go public with offers to schools without already having a "yes" in their back pocket - just amateurish. Now, at least 5 programs have publicly told the Pac-12 they're not interested. Maybe more behind the scenes. That hurts. That tarnishes the brand badly. It also creates more leverage for the next two programs the Pac-12 approaches. That's why the Pac-12 is now in a position where it has to accept programs like Utah State. And, BTW, just because a program is geographically sitting in a major media market is absolutely no guarantee that market is going to watch them. Utah State is a prime example - they sit in a rapidly growing TV market and don't move the needle. The University of Utah does; so do the Jazz, BYU and now the NHL. Utah State is very minor player in that market. They're the Portland State of the Utah media market. The Pac-12 is fooling themselves if they think they can build the 5th strongest football conference in the country by adding programs like Utah State. The Pac-12 needs a win. They would be smart to focus on those basketball combinations (Gonzaga, particularly) quietly but intensely. Their next offers - football or basketball - need to be a guaranteed "yes". Start acting like they know what they're doing instead of a couple of kids who inherited a ton of money and don't know how to handle it.
From Ross Dellenger:
"Sacramento State, in FCS, announces that it has secured millions in funding for a new football stadium - part of a public pursuit of Pac-12 membership.
In a release, the school calls on 'business leaders across the region to join efforts to elevate Sac State to the Pac-12.'"
Well, they did beat Mike Riley and the Beavers in Corvallis...when they were cellar dwellers in the Big Sky.
In all seriousness, assuming they have the donor support, I'd take the Sacramento market over San Jose any day.
The big money and big donors are in the San Jose area, Jim. And I mean BIG.
Do you think they're willing to invest in SJSU athletics? I honestly don't know. I just read and hear so much about Sacramento putting money into the community, sports, etc., and it's the state capital. Seems like it would be a better long term play, but that's just an uneducated guess.
Why not look at both. If the Sacramento State president, AD, and major donors are willing to put the money and effort it takes to get Sac State up to a high P5 level, they're well situated geographically. Within 5-6 years, that program could be on a par with other Pac-12 teams. The plans for that 25,000 seat stadium they're planning could easily be changed to at least 35K, with structural changes allowing expansion up to 50,000 or more. And in the NIL era, it doesn't take long to recruit enough talented players to be competitive.
Sac State? Aim high, I guess. Seems Sac State and UC Davis should be Mt. West.2 candidates?
Pass.
Unbelievable! It's come to that...?
OSU and WSU will survive in some form athletically but it won’t be close to what they have been in the past. The best athletes have voted with their feet and left, especially at OSU. Both schools are now in downgrade mode despite their energetic efforts to remain relevant. For this Beaver fan this whole thing is heartbreaking. Sure, we will occasionally find a sleeper athlete who is great, but the overall quality of our teams will continue to decline and it is uncertain when it will level out. OSU does not have the resources (read $$) to compete at the highest level of athletics. And the best athletes want to play against the best and who can blame them? This is a new reality and the loss is painful...
John,
I’ve refrained from commenting on this PAC 12 vs MWC issue. There’s been too much taunting and mean spirited remarks for me. I appreciate how well you’ve kept your subscribers informed. Oregon alumni should realize while we managed to land on our feet it’s not all roses for the Ducks. The down side of joining the B1G has been has been explained from lengthy travel to joining at a discounted pay out. I truly believe OSU and WSU are able to hold on to their funds. Realignment is not over. Rushing to cobble together a conference may all be for naught. Both schools have shown they can compete at what used be referred to as a Major College level. Maybe I’m a Pollyanna but I think they will get their shot. Sadly it will not be under the banner of the PAC 12.
I hope OSU gets an offer, but the most common sense landing spot is the Big 12 and OSU sued 3 of its existing members and stripped each of those 3 of roughly $25 million in future conference revenue in the process.
I don't know what vote is required for admission but we all know human nature.
Excellent post.
John, you write:
"So do what the Big Ten did. Negotiate a media deal for your current membership and ask the prospective TV partners to include escalators for select additions."
OK, so here we go again--trying to get media bids without a finished product to sell! How can the PAC expect anyone to offer a valid number? At best you get a non-binding 'guess' but then how do you sell that to a prospective invite to your conference? This was what the Pac-10 tried...no workee. Wouldn't it be better to just go buy an 8th member with their war chest and then market themselves?
Totally agree.
Yep. Get the 8th school committed and go to market with a defined product. 8 members leaves plenty of room to take advantage of any future expansion opportunities that may come with the next media induced shuffle.
Never linger on a melting glacier.
Your Pac-12 glacier has turned into an ice cube...thanks to hubris and amateurism. JC might not have been kidding when he mentioned Grand Canyon State. Yeah, go to market with a collection of third tier programs and tell me about your "defined product".
Error 502 Bad Gateway
Navigate.... Sounding like their compass was broken going into this.
Here is a thought, go to market with your current seven partners and find out what the market thinks. We don't have the Holy Grail every school needs, firm financial numbers. Be willing to go to market with a partner or partners that might need a trial period, say two seasons to prove value of the fledgling conference. Let's face it, we are a big risk. What we do have and nobody can deny it, we have the more attractive seven teams of the two conferences. The Mountain West has a media deal but I doubt the media partners are excited to have an asset that touts a Wyoming - Las Vegas as it's game of the week. Especially with a Beaver - Aztec playing up the street in the LA media territory.
We don't need an 8th school until next spring but a tentative media deal that is based on the conference will have the 8th team can still be worked out.
What a shame to lose UNLV, particularly when their LIV operation is getting such good press. And no presence in Las Vegas! We’ll never get Stanford back now.
UConn is worthless without their basketball programs, and they aren’t moving those to the Pac. If you are willing to consider UConn for football, then may as well invite UTEP…..they’re just as bad but it’s only 1/3 the travel.
I totally agree. UConn as a football program is one of the worst. El Paso makes more sense if you are gonna add a subpar football program just for the sake of adding it. May as well consider Rice too. Or (LOL!!!) Portland State if you are looking for market size.