Conference Realignment

[azcat49]

Those are just very depressing numbers. Saw a piece where Sankey, the SEC commissioner is on the attack to change the NCAA basketball tournament. He wants more of the big boys and less Cinderella’s.

Freaking money runs everything and college sports is lessor because of it

[PHXCATS]

Yeah that math still doesn't work. You don't go up 8M a year per school losing Texas and Oklahoma that year even with increasing the CFP in the Big 12

PAC goes up 10M per school for 10 schools while the ACC goes up 15M per school for 14 schools when CFP expands?

[RondaeShimmy]

Even if we get a new contract with a floor of $30 million per year per school, that's still going to be far less than other conference's.

This would get worse the further into the future it gets, pretty much forcing the two big NW schools to leave and crippling the conference even further.

[ChooChooCat]

Yeah that math still doesn't work. You don't go up 8M a year per school losing Texas and Oklahoma that year even with increasing the CFP in the Big 12

PAC goes up 10M per school for 10 schools while the ACC goes up 15M per school for 14 schools when CFP expands?

1. The bubble hasn't popped on the cost of live sports TV rights. Meaning that the cost of these deals is still going up. So with Texas/OU the deal would be much much more. The NFL and NBA haven't changed their product since their last TV deals and yet their TV deals pay them exponentially more each time they come up. Until that bubble pops this is how it will continue to go.

2. The ACC deal is set in stone already and was signed long ago, while the Pac-10/Big-12 is projecting what they will get in this new market since their deals haven't been signed yet. In other words ESPN will get the ACC at a major discount for the next decade plus. The ACC traded a shorter deal with a chance at more money for long term security, but less money.

[PHXCATS]

Yeah that math still doesn't work. You don't go up 8M a year per school losing Texas and Oklahoma that year even with increasing the CFP in the Big 12

PAC goes up 10M per school for 10 schools while the ACC goes up 15M per school for 14 schools when CFP expands?

1. The bubble hasn't popped on the cost of live sports TV rights. Meaning that the cost of these deals is still going up. So with Texas/OU the deal would be much much more. The NFL and NBA haven't changed their product since their last TV deals and yet their TV deals pay them exponentially more each time they come up. Until that bubble pops this is how it will continue to go.

2. The ACC deal is set in stone already and was signed long ago, while the Pac-10/Big-12 is projecting what they will get in this new market since their deals haven't been signed yet. In other words ESPN will get the ACC at a major discount for the next decade plus. The ACC traded a shorter deal with a chance at more money for long term security, but less money.

I agree which is why those payouts for the ACC don't make sense

[RondaeShimmy]

It's all based on Navigate research, the original from March 2022, they could be wrong.

Could be just typical consultant BS

[PHXCATS]

Looking at that my guess is they don't have Texas and Oklahoma leaving the Big 12 factored in on the Bug 12 side

[ChooChooCat]

Looking at that my guess is they don't have Texas and Oklahoma leaving the Big 12 factored in

Nor USC/UCLA leaving the Pac12.

[PHXCATS]

Looking at that my guess is they don't have Texas and Oklahoma leaving the Big 12 factored in

Nor USC/UCLA leaving the Pac12.

Agree. I know the guy who tweeted yesterday factored that in

I just think this chart has errors in the ACC and Big 12 columns

[ChooChooCat]

Looking at that my guess is they don't have Texas and Oklahoma leaving the Big 12 factored in

Nor USC/UCLA leaving the Pac12.

Agree. I know the guy who tweeted yesterday factored that in

I just think this chart has errors in the ACC and Big 12 columns

ACC is locked in, that's the numbers. Big 12 though I won't argue, that's entirely up for debate and well above my head.

[PHXCATS]

I am not saying stay in the PAC-12. But there is no reason to move until the negotiation window closes in three weeks unless Oregon and Washington leave before that

Also again not saying stay but the PAC can make sense if a) espn is willing to pay a huge premium for the late window or b) George gets very creative with an Apple or Amazon or Netflix on streaming

[ChooChooCat]

I am not saying stay in the PAC-12. But there is no reason to move until the negotiation window closes in three weeks unless Oregon and Washington leave before that

Also again not saying stay but the PAC can make sense if a) espn is willing to pay a huge premium for the late window or b) George gets very creative with an Apple or Amazon or Netflix on streaming

I can think of at least 100 reasons to leave regardless of what Oregon and Washington does and one of the primary reasons is because we'd be staying in a position where Oregon and Washington control the situation. That's a NO. You do not let your future depend on anybody else if you don't have to. That's a recipe for disaster. NO. I don't give a shit if we're losing a few million on a deal by moving in the short term, you do not let yourself get in a situation where you could end up losing way more millions in the future. That's what inept leadership does.

[RondaeShimmy]

Looking at that my guess is they don't have Texas and Oklahoma leaving the Big 12 factored in on the Bug 12 side

Why wouldn't it? It was released in March/2022, also including the Cincy, UCF, Houston, BYU additions.

The USC/UCLA thing happened after, so it's not factored in.

[RondaeShimmy]

[Merkin]

Big 12 seems interested, but in no rush either.

[ChooChooCat]

[AzCatFan2]

I am not saying stay in the PAC-12. But there is no reason to move until the negotiation window closes in three weeks unless Oregon and Washington leave before that

Also again not saying stay but the PAC can make sense if a) espn is willing to pay a huge premium for the late window or b) George gets very creative with an Apple or Amazon or Netflix on streaming

I can think of at least 100 reasons to leave regardless of what Oregon and Washington does and one of the primary reasons is because we'd be staying in a position where Oregon and Washington control the situation. That's a NO. You do not let your future depend on anybody else if you don't have to. That's a recipe for disaster. NO. I don't give a shit if we're losing a few million on a deal by moving in the short term, you do not let yourself get in a situation where you could end up losing way more millions in the future. That's what inept leadership does.

Respectfully disagree. Each situation is different. And doing something just for the sake of doing something to control your destiny isn't always the right course. There are times when you can let other dictate your actions, especially if you have a good Plan B to fall back on if the other's actions aren't in your favor. This is one of those times.

If the charts are assumed to be correct, then we'd make more money by staying in the PAC. And by going to the BIG 12, we would likely dilute their pool of money and each school would make less than what what the chart is saying. Why would we make this deal today if we can have patience, and see what other options are on the table? Just to control our own destiny? Silly reason to possibly leave millions of dollars a year on the table, just because we wanted to make a change just for change sake.

The BIG 12 isn't going anywhere, unless the PAC poaches some of its better schools. If not, and Oregon and UW end up in the BIG 10, then the era of superconferences is upon us, and the BIG 12 will have to react. At this point, the Arizona schools, assuming we have no other home, will be some of the most attractive left on the table. Then, and only then, is it right to go to the BIG 12 regardless of what other schools are doing. Until that point, we have the luxury of waiting and see if there are any better options out there for us.

Notre Dame will be the next domino. Everyone is waiting on them, and if they decide to go to the BIG 10, Stanford likely follows. If not, who knows what might happen. Still a bunch of moving parts and dozens, if not more potential moves that could be coming. Say, for example, Notre Dame chooses to remain independent, and the SEC wants to move west, and gobbles up Oregon and UW. The BIG 10 wants partners for the LA schools, and UW and Oregon are off the table, so the BIG 10 takes Stanford, Arizona, Utah, and Colorado (all AAU schools) to give USC and UCLA partners, and form a bridge between LA and Nebraska. Leaves the SEC to take CAL and the States.

Improbable? Yes. But not impossible. But would be impossible if we jumped to the BIG 12 today without waiting to see what other dominoes may fall.

[ChooChooCat]

I am not saying stay in the PAC-12. But there is no reason to move until the negotiation window closes in three weeks unless Oregon and Washington leave before that

Also again not saying stay but the PAC can make sense if a) espn is willing to pay a huge premium for the late window or b) George gets very creative with an Apple or Amazon or Netflix on streaming

I can think of at least 100 reasons to leave regardless of what Oregon and Washington does and one of the primary reasons is because we'd be staying in a position where Oregon and Washington control the situation. That's a NO. You do not let your future depend on anybody else if you don't have to. That's a recipe for disaster. NO. I don't give a shit if we're losing a few million on a deal by moving in the short term, you do not let yourself get in a situation where you could end up losing way more millions in the future. That's what inept leadership does.

Respectfully disagree. Each situation is different. And doing something just for the sake of doing something to control your destiny isn't always the right course. There are times when you can let other dictate your actions, especially if you have a good Plan B to fall back on if the other's actions aren't in your favor. This is one of those times.

If the charts are assumed to be correct, then we'd make more money by staying in the PAC. And by going to the BIG 12, we would likely dilute their pool of money and each school would make less than what what the chart is saying. Why would we make this deal today if we can have patience, and see what other options are on the table? Just to control our own destiny? Silly reason to possibly leave millions of dollars a year on the table, just because we wanted to make a change just for change sake.

The BIG 12 isn't going anywhere, unless the PAC poaches some of its better schools. If not, and Oregon and UW end up in the BIG 10, then the era of superconferences is upon us, and the BIG 12 will have to react. At this point, the Arizona schools, assuming we have no other home, will be some of the most attractive left on the table. Then, and only then, is it right to go to the BIG 12 regardless of what other schools are doing. Until that point, we have the luxury of waiting and see if there are any better options out there for us.

Notre Dame will be the next domino. Everyone is waiting on them, and if they decide to go to the BIG 10, Stanford likely follows. If not, who knows what might happen. Still a bunch of moving parts and dozens, if not more potential moves that could be coming. Say, for example, Notre Dame chooses to remain independent, and the SEC wants to move west, and gobbles up Oregon and UW. The BIG 10 wants partners for the LA schools, and UW and Oregon are off the table, so the BIG 10 takes Stanford, Arizona, Utah, and Colorado (all AAU schools) to give USC and UCLA partners, and form a bridge between LA and Nebraska. Leaves the SEC to take CAL and the States.

Improbable? Yes. But not impossible. But would be impossible if we jumped to the BIG 12 today without waiting to see what other dominoes may fall.

Did you miss the part where I said I couldn't give two shits less if we lose a few million per year instead of putting our entire livelihoods in the hands of Oregon and Washington?

I don't care what your reasoning is because I stopped when you started discussing money as if we'd be making such an astronomical amount more in the Pac-10. You're wrong. The Big 12 can end up choosing 4 different schools than Arizona if it so chooses and it gets to the point where they're a no brainer over the Pac-12. The ACC could get blown up first and they fill in that way instead. There's no guarantee of tomorrow. You're being ridiculously short sighted. Arizona isn't in a safe or stable situation right now. Beating others to the punch of the Big 12 would put us in that situation. We share a major market, but aren't located in said market, and we have shit for football. We are not safe.

You're wrong.

Plus if we stay in the Pac-10 we will be relegated to midnight EST kickoff/tipoff for the entire length of our contract. That's the sole reason ESPN wants us, because a live sporting event gets better ratings than their 4th airing of Sportscenter. In a conference with numerous CST/EST schools we would not be relegated to such treatment. You literally have zero forecasting ability and spare me any shit of us getting into the B1G any time soon. I live in reality and not unicorn fantasy land. That's not in the cards for us. Stop it.

[RondaeShimmy]

If the charts are assumed to be correct, then we'd make more money by staying in the PAC. And by going to the BIG 12, we would likely dilute their pool of money and each school would make less than what what the chart is saying.

We'd make significantly less

[azcat49]

Choo for school President! Make it so.

Now I have to ask what are the dominoes to fall for us to move. What are our hurdles? Do we have to have ASSU on our hip? Does ESPIN want a merger?

[ChooChooCat]

Choo for school President! Make it so.

Now I have to ask what are the dominoes to fall for us to move. What are our hurdles? Do we have to have ASSU on our hip? Does ESPIN want a merger?

Only way I can see the Pac-10 surviving is ESPN (there are no other bidders) grossly overpaying for our rights. They're desperate for that late night content, but I'm not sure what's in it for them to do that when they could just advise the Big 12 to pull us apart and then sign a deal with them for that late night window as opposed to trying to bid on two different conferences. ASU is going to be on our hip or ours on theirs, depending how you view it.

[RondaeShimmy]

Plus if we stay in the Pac-10 we will be relegated to midnight EST kickoff/tipoff for the entire length of our contract. That's the sole reason ESPN wants us, because a live sporting event gets better ratings than their 4th airing of Sportscenter. In a conference with numerous CST/EST schools we would not be relegated to such treatment. You literally have zero forecasting ability and spare me any shit of us getting into the B1G any time soon. I live in reality and not unicorn fantasy land. That's not in the cards for us. Stop it.

Yeah I feel like playing mostly in CST is the most underrated part of the big 12 move.

Playing super late on ESPN is what actually kills the PAC 12 just because a network needs some programming. It severely restricts the reach of the conference.

[ChooChooCat]

Plus if we stay in the Pac-10 we will be relegated to midnight EST kickoff/tipoff for the entire length of our contract. That's the sole reason ESPN wants us, because a live sporting event gets better ratings than their 4th airing of Sportscenter. In a conference with numerous CST/EST schools we would not be relegated to such treatment. You literally have zero forecasting ability and spare me any shit of us getting into the B1G any time soon. I live in reality and not unicorn fantasy land. That's not in the cards for us. Stop it.

Yeah I feel like playing mostly in CST is the most underrated part of the big 12 move.

Playing super late on ESPN is what actually kills the PAC 12 just because a network needs some programming. It severely restricts the reach of the conference.

And the more you think of it, if you wanted to get the Arizona brand bigger to the point that a B1G or SEC would actually humor us in the future, playing at midnight EST is not the way to go about doing that. Not to mention it only harms our basketball program too. I'm fine with a game here and there in that late night window, but all the time? Hard pass. I don't love the Pac-12 at all, let alone enough to stay together for that sort of arrangement, a tad more money or not.

[dmjcat]

Bottom line its still all about money, and all indications are we will get more in the Big12

I am not a fan of just hanging around in the P12 waiting for our destiny to arrive. I can still see a future where the B12 decides to expand to 16, takes UW and UO first, and then has to choose between the 4 corner schools.............where we may very well end up being the odd man out. Out as in the MWC.

Better to control our own destiny and pull the trigger before UO/UW does.

[ChooChooCat]

Bottom line its still all about money, and all indications are we will get more in the Big12

I am not a fan of just hanging around in the P12 waiting for our destiny to arrive. I can still see a future where the B12 decides to expand to 16, takes UW and UO first, and then has to choose between the 4 corner schools.............where we may very well end up being the odd man out. Out as in the MWC.

Better to control our own destiny and pull the trigger before UO/UW does.

This is all absolutely correct.

[Basketcats]

I am not saying stay in the PAC-12. But there is no reason to move until the negotiation window closes in three weeks unless Oregon and Washington leave before that

Also again not saying stay but the PAC can make sense if a) espn is willing to pay a huge premium for the late window or b) George gets very creative with an Apple or Amazon or Netflix on streaming

I can think of at least 100 reasons to leave regardless of what Oregon and Washington does and one of the primary reasons is because we'd be staying in a position where Oregon and Washington control the situation. That's a NO. You do not let your future depend on anybody else if you don't have to. That's a recipe for disaster. NO. I don't give a shit if we're losing a few million on a deal by moving in the short term, you do not let yourself get in a situation where you could end up losing way more millions in the future. That's what inept leadership does.

Respectfully disagree. Each situation is different. And doing something just for the sake of doing something to control your destiny isn't always the right course. There are times when you can let other dictate your actions, especially if you have a good Plan B to fall back on if the other's actions aren't in your favor. This is one of those times.

If the charts are assumed to be correct, then we'd make more money by staying in the PAC. And by going to the BIG 12, we would likely dilute their pool of money and each school would make less than what what the chart is saying. Why would we make this deal today if we can have patience, and see what other options are on the table? Just to control our own destiny? Silly reason to possibly leave millions of dollars a year on the table, just because we wanted to make a change just for change sake.

The BIG 12 isn't going anywhere, unless the PAC poaches some of its better schools. If not, and Oregon and UW end up in the BIG 10, then the era of superconferences is upon us, and the BIG 12 will have to react. At this point, the Arizona schools, assuming we have no other home, will be some of the most attractive left on the table. Then, and only then, is it right to go to the BIG 12 regardless of what other schools are doing. Until that point, we have the luxury of waiting and see if there are any better options out there for us.

Notre Dame will be the next domino. Everyone is waiting on them, and if they decide to go to the BIG 10, Stanford likely follows. If not, who knows what might happen. Still a bunch of moving parts and dozens, if not more potential moves that could be coming. Say, for example, Notre Dame chooses to remain independent, and the SEC wants to move west, and gobbles up Oregon and UW. The BIG 10 wants partners for the LA schools, and UW and Oregon are off the table, so the BIG 10 takes Stanford, Arizona, Utah, and Colorado (all AAU schools) to give USC and UCLA partners, and form a bridge between LA and Nebraska. Leaves the SEC to take CAL and the States.

Improbable? Yes. But not impossible. But would be impossible if we jumped to the BIG 12 today without waiting to see what other dominoes may fall.

So you want Arizona to be a sock puppet? That is what the PAC12 is about to become. The conference of sock puppets. The only thing staying in this dumb conference accomplishes is weakening the universities already weakened position at the bargaining table. The PAC12 had the chance to strengthen our conference last expansion go-round and pissed it away. Now they are stuck with pulling in the dregs of the C league and are praying that is going to make it more desirable. Newsflash...this pig can wear all the lipstick you can put on it, but, it is still gonna be just a nasty old pig. Loyalty to a conference that has done nothing for it's members is just plain stupid.

[PHXCATS]

Bottom line its still all about money, and all indications are we will get more in the Big12

I am not a fan of just hanging around in the P12 waiting for our destiny to arrive. I can still see a future where the B12 decides to expand to 16, takes UW and UO first, and then has to choose between the 4 corner schools.............where we may very well end up being the odd man out. Out as in the MWC.

Better to control our own destiny and pull the trigger before UO/UW does.

This is all absolutely correct.

I agree as well after we see the offer from espn

[AzCatFan2]

It's all based on Navigate research, the original from March 2022, they could be wrong.

Could be just typical consultant BS

If you go by these numbers, we'll get paid more by staying in the PAC. And it's also unlikely that if the 4 PAC corner schools are added to the BIG 12, we'd increase their share more per average. In fact, we'd likely dilute the numbers and bring down the average per school. It's why the BIG 12 isn't courting us too hard right now. But if the age of the superconference has begun, then the BIG 12 will have to react.

We'll see if ACC schools can get out of their contract. Right now, they are locked in until 2036, and current estimates are it would cost schools $100 million to break that. The only schools that might be able to pay it are those who would bolt for the SEC or BIG 10. If the BIG 10 are hell bent on adding only top notch academic schools (AAU or Notre Dame), then there aren't any current ACC schools worth it. UNC and UVA would be the top targets for the BIG 10, but they would dilute the BIG 10. Clemson, Miami, and FSU aren't academic fits for the BIG 10, but would fit in the SEC. But the SEC already owns the Florida and South Carolina markets. It's unlikely that any ACC team is going to be able to afford to break their TV contract, because I don't see the the BIG 10 or SEC adding any of those teams right now. And an it just won't make financial sense for an ACC team to break the ACC contract for a BIG 12 move. Money doesn't make sense.

Looking at the entire college athletics landscape holistically, we can afford to be patient. ACC schools aren't moving any time soon, and everyone is waiting for Notre Dame to make its move. The BIG 12 is going to add the top ACC schools, and we are more attractive to the BIG 12 than the next lot of ACC schools past Clemson, FSU, Miami, and North Carolina. We add similar value, but are geographically closer. Geography and travel costs are meaningless when you have a BIG 10 type contract, but keeping costs down when you're trying to be the #3 conference will matter.

Moving now just for the sake of moving is a panic move. The chances of Arizona being completely left behind is slim. Slim enough that we can afford to be patient. Even if that means letting other dictate our response.

[RondaeShimmy]

It's all based on Navigate research, the original from March 2022, they could be wrong.

Could be just typical consultant BS

If you go by these numbers, we'll get paid more by staying in the PAC. And it's also unlikely that if the 4 PAC corner schools are added to the BIG 12, we'd increase their share more per average. In fact, we'd likely dilute the numbers and bring down the average per school. It's why the BIG 12 isn't courting us too hard right now. But if the age of the superconference has begun, then the BIG 12 will have to react.

We'll see if ACC schools can get out of their contract. Right now, they are locked in until 2036, and current estimates are it would cost schools $100 million to break that. The only schools that might be able to pay it are those who would bolt for the SEC or BIG 10. If the BIG 10 are hell bent on adding only top notch academic schools (AAU or Notre Dame), then there aren't any current ACC schools worth it. UNC and UVA would be the top targets for the BIG 10, but they would dilute the BIG 10. Clemson, Miami, and FSU aren't academic fits for the BIG 10, but would fit in the SEC. But the SEC already owns the Florida and South Carolina markets. It's unlikely that any ACC team is going to be able to afford to break their TV contract, because I don't see the the BIG 10 or SEC adding any of those teams right now. And an it just won't make financial sense for an ACC team to break the ACC contract for a BIG 12 move. Money doesn't make sense.

Looking at the entire college athletics landscape holistically, we can afford to be patient. ACC schools aren't moving any time soon, and everyone is waiting for Notre Dame to make its move. The BIG 12 is going to add the top ACC schools, and we are more attractive to the BIG 12 than the next lot of ACC schools past Clemson, FSU, Miami, and North Carolina. We add similar value, but are geographically closer. Geography and travel costs are meaningless when you have a BIG 10 type contract, but keeping costs down when you're trying to be the #3 conference will matter.

Moving now just for the sake of moving is a panic move. The chances of Arizona being completely left behind is slim. Slim enough that we can afford to be patient. Even if that means letting other dictate our response.

Those are March 2022 numbers done before USC and UCLA left at the end of June

Again, these are the updated projections based on the original numbers. USC and UCLA leaving takes away 40% of the PAC 12s value

[PHXCATS]

Again the Big 12 number has to be off. 2025 has Oklahoma, Texas, BYU, Cincinnati, UCF and Houston in it. Even with an expanded playoff you dont go up in 2026 by losing Oklahoma and Texas that year.

Yes the payout will be split less ways but with a ten team Big 12 Oklahoma and Texas make up half the revenue

[AzCatFan2]

I don't see a 45% reduction coming from the loss of the LA schools. Yes, they brought in 40% of the revenue, but if ESPN really values the late night, live content, they aren't going to reduce what they might have paid with the LA school by 45%.

Also, doing math, in 2026, with 12 schools, the BIG 12 will be making $631,200,000 (this divided by 12 gets $52,600,000). To keep the payout the same and add 4 schools, each school would have to add $55,100,000 in value. The four corner PAC schools aren't worth this much per year. Again, we would dilute the value. Add UW and Oregon to the mix, and it makes sense and cents for the BIG 12. Without them, they only add the 4 corner PAC schools as a necessary move for survival in the era of the superconference.

But remember, both Oregon and UW have said the BIG 12 is beneath them. You have to figure FSU, Clemson, Miami, and UNC all feel the same way. In the superconference era, none of these schools will end up in the BIG 12 unless they have no other options. And if the top conferences expand to more than 16, i.e. the SEC and BIG 10, these are the schools, along with Notre Dame, that will have the targets on their back.

If this happens, and these schools get the call up to either the BIG 10 or SEC, the four corner PAC schools will be the most attractive options left over on the table for the BIG 12. None of the leftovers are going to move the needle in the right direction in terms of money and revenue, but at least with the four corner PAC schools, we won't dilute it too much, while the BIG 12 will be able to keep most travel costs down. Again, travel costs is not a consideration if you're fighting for #1. But if you're a distant #3, everything helps.

There are good reasons why the BIG 12 hasn't done anything. Or why schools like Colorado and Utah aren't keen on moving to the BIG 12 today. There may be better options in the future, and it's unlikely the fall back of joining the BIG 12 is going to evaporate.

[ChooChooCat]

I don't see a 45% reduction coming from the loss of the LA schools. Yes, they brought in 40% of the revenue, but if ESPN really values the late night, live content, they aren't going to reduce what they might have paid with the LA school by 45%.

Here's the thing, ESPN values the late night content, but why should we? How does it benefit the Pac-10 or its schools to play so many god damn late night games? How do you think we're in this situation now? Why hasn't the Pac-12 been relevant in any major sport in over a decade? Why stay in a situation like that if you're Arizona and you have a way out of that?

Also, doing math, in 2026, with 12 schools, the BIG 12 will be making $631,200,000 (this divided by 12 gets $52,600,000). To keep the payout the same and add 4 schools, each school would have to add $55,100,000 in value. The four corner PAC schools aren't worth this much per year. Again, we would dilute the value. Add UW and Oregon to the mix, and it makes sense and cents for the BIG 12. Without them, they only add the 4 corner PAC schools as a necessary move for survival in the era of the superconference.

I don't even care about the money, because the differences are going to be absolutely minimal. Selling your soul for more money still means you have no soul and no future.

But remember, both Oregon and UW have said the BIG 12 is beneath them. You have to figure FSU, Clemson, Miami, and UNC all feel the same way. In the superconference era, none of these schools will end up in the BIG 12 unless they have no other options. And if the top conferences expand to more than 16, i.e. the SEC and BIG 10, these are the schools, along with Notre Dame, that will have the targets on their back.

Ok you took the wrong turn at Albuquerque here man. Nobody is saying FSU, Clemson, Miami, or UNC would end up in the Big12. The thought is they will leave for the B1G or SEC. Then it's a scramble amongst the remaining ACC schools to get into the Big 12. Those remaining ACC schools could take Arizona's spot. On the Oregon/UW tip, I've never once seen them say anything of the sorts, but even if they feel that way they will go to the Big 12 if the Pac-12 falls apart and they don't have the soft landing of the B1G. So that's jut a dumb point on your end.

If this happens, and these schools get the call up to either the BIG 10 or SEC, the four corner PAC schools will be the most attractive options left over on the table for the BIG 12. None of the leftovers are going to move the needle in the right direction in terms of money and revenue, but at least with the four corner PAC schools, we won't dilute it too much, while the BIG 12 will be able to keep most travel costs down. Again, travel costs is not a consideration if you're fighting for #1. But if you're a distant #3, everything helps.

Again, there's no guarantee that Arizona has a spot when they're in literally zero control of what occurs with the rest of the world. They can control their destiny now, but there's a time limit with that. It's either go now or play Russian Roulette.

There are good reasons why the BIG 12 hasn't done anything. Or why schools like Colorado and Utah aren't keen on moving to the BIG 12 today. There may be better options in the future, and it's unlikely the fall back of joining the BIG 12 is going to evaporate.

Well yeah the Big 12 can only add teams that 1. They want and 2. Wants to come. The Pac-12 schools are waiting to hear back what the TV deal offer is and then go from there. Colorado is more keen on moving to the B12 than you think, but Utah isn't, because they have deluded themselves into thinking a B1G invite is right around the corner for them. Utah and CU are probably in a better spot to take a B12 spot if and when they want you're right. The same doesn't go for Arizona. I don't give a fuck about Utah and CU though and I'm not sure why someone with the moniker 'AzCatFan2' does either. This is about Arizona. Arizona needs to go ASAP.

[azcat49]

Damn, you sold me Choo but where is our leadership at on this issue currently? Wait and see? What is that period? The TV negotiation period?

It sounds like schools like Oregon, UDub and maybe Utah must have received some feedback from the B1G to make them flinch about moving?

[AzCatFan2]

I don't see a 45% reduction coming from the loss of the LA schools. Yes, they brought in 40% of the revenue, but if ESPN really values the late night, live content, they aren't going to reduce what they might have paid with the LA school by 45%.

Here's the thing, ESPN values the late night content, but why should we? How does it benefit the Pac-10 or its schools to play so many god damn late night games? How do you think we're in this situation now? Why hasn't the Pac-12 been relevant in any major sport in over a decade? Why stay in a situation like that if you're Arizona and you have a way out of that?

Also, doing math, in 2026, with 12 schools, the BIG 12 will be making $631,200,000 (this divided by 12 gets $52,600,000). To keep the payout the same and add 4 schools, each school would have to add $55,100,000 in value. The four corner PAC schools aren't worth this much per year. Again, we would dilute the value. Add UW and Oregon to the mix, and it makes sense and cents for the BIG 12. Without them, they only add the 4 corner PAC schools as a necessary move for survival in the era of the superconference.

I don't even care about the money, because the differences are going to be absolutely minimal. Selling your soul for more money still means you have no soul and no future.

But remember, both Oregon and UW have said the BIG 12 is beneath them. You have to figure FSU, Clemson, Miami, and UNC all feel the same way. In the superconference era, none of these schools will end up in the BIG 12 unless they have no other options. And if the top conferences expand to more than 16, i.e. the SEC and BIG 10, these are the schools, along with Notre Dame, that will have the targets on their back.

Ok you took the wrong turn at Albuquerque here man. Nobody is saying FSU, Clemson, Miami, or UNC would end up in the Big12. The thought is they will leave for the B1G or SEC. Then it's a scramble amongst the remaining ACC schools to get into the Big 12. Those remaining ACC schools could take Arizona's spot. On the Oregon/UW tip, I've never once seen them say anything of the sorts, but even if they feel that way they will go to the Big 12 if the Pac-12 falls apart and they don't have the soft landing of the B1G. So that's jut a dumb point on your end.

If this happens, and these schools get the call up to either the BIG 10 or SEC, the four corner PAC schools will be the most attractive options left over on the table for the BIG 12. None of the leftovers are going to move the needle in the right direction in terms of money and revenue, but at least with the four corner PAC schools, we won't dilute it too much, while the BIG 12 will be able to keep most travel costs down. Again, travel costs is not a consideration if you're fighting for #1. But if you're a distant #3, everything helps.

Again, there's no guarantee that Arizona has a spot when they're in literally zero control of what occurs with the rest of the world. They can control their destiny now, but there's a time limit with that. It's either go now or play Russian Roulette.

There are good reasons why the BIG 12 hasn't done anything. Or why schools like Colorado and Utah aren't keen on moving to the BIG 12 today. There may be better options in the future, and it's unlikely the fall back of joining the BIG 12 is going to evaporate.

Well yeah the Big 12 can only add teams that 1. They want and 2. Wants to come. The Pac-12 schools are waiting to hear back what the TV deal offer is and then go from there. Colorado is more keen on moving to the B12 than you think, but Utah isn't, because they have deluded themselves into thinking a B1G invite is right around the corner for them. Utah and CU are probably in a better spot to take a B12 spot if and when they want you're right. The same doesn't go for Arizona. I don't give a fuck about Utah and CU though and I'm not sure why someone with the moniker 'AzCatFan2' does either. This is about Arizona. Arizona needs to go ASAP.

Here's a story about Phil Knight saying it's the SEC, BIG 10, or bust for Oregon (https://247sports.com/Article/Nike-foun ... 189727453/). If Oregon and UW thought the BIG 12 was good enough for them, they deal would already be done. It's not.

And sorry, this is about money. Money needed to compete. If we're playing at 10:00 PM Eastern but making $15 million more a year, we'll be able to compete better because of the money. The PAC hasn't been able to compete because later starting times. Later starting times is nothing new for west coast teams. But look at the chasm between what SEC schools, BIG 10 schools, and PAC schools are making on TV contracts. Think USC and UCLA left for better starting times? No. They left for money.

We'll see just how much ESPN values the late night live content. I'm willing to bet they overpay even without USC and UCLA, especially since those schools will be featured on Fox when they become BIG 10 members. How much ESPN is willing to pay for west coast viewers might also pique the SEC's interest. I'm sure Phil Knight, when he called the SEC offices and SEC schools has made this exact same pitch.

I also don't see how the BIG 10 will leave the LA schools on an island for long. Football doesn't matter, but the travel for Olympic sports will be difficult without some close by partners. UW and Oregon are the two, bigger west coast fish left in the pond. But the BIG 10 is still waiting to hear back from Notre Dame, catching a whale like ND would allow the BIG 10 to take a small one in Stanford, a ND rival, and still make it work economically. The BIG 10 would likely then get to 20 and look at UW and Oregon as top targets, assuming the SEC hasn't already made a deal with them.

Meanwhile, if the top PAC teams get gobbled up by the BIG 10 and SEC, and Arizona is left out, the BIG 12 will still be there for us. The only way we get left out is if the top ACC teams leave for the BIG 12, which is highly unlikely in the near future. Leaving for the BIG 12 just won't pay off enough to make economic sense considering the huge payout any ACC team would have to come up with break their contract before 2036. A BIG 12 move certainly isn't economically feasible for the middle of revenue pack ACC teams. Throw in the fact that travel costs, which will be a factor for any conference not named SEC or BIG 10 also favors the 4 corner PAC schools when it comes to a BIG 12 move, and this fear of being left out in favor of mid-level ACC teams is unfounded.

Let's see what the next PAC TV contract looks like. If ESPN really values that late night content, it will overpay for it. And Phil Knight will be continuing to call the SEC, putting a bug in their ear that going west brings the SEC the most value in the era of a superconference. The SEC already owns the TV market in ACC territory, so less eyeballs to add in states like S. Carolina and Florida. And if the SEC does add Oregon and UW, it then becomes a mad scramble to add west coast partners between the SEC and the BIG 10, with the BIG 10 being handicapped by only selecting AAU schools (or Notre Dame). And even if Arizona gets left out somehow, the BIG 12 is still there, and will need to grow to stay relevant. And a move to the BIG 12 will still not make financial sense for most ACC schools given their contract.

[KillerKlown]

Pure, unadulterated cope.

[Captcarnage]

I am not saying stay in the PAC-12. But there is no reason to move until the negotiation window closes in three weeks unless Oregon and Washington leave before that

Also again not saying stay but the PAC can make sense if a) espn is willing to pay a huge premium for the late window or b) George gets very creative with an Apple or Amazon or Netflix on streaming

I can think of at least 100 reasons to leave regardless of what Oregon and Washington does and one of the primary reasons is because we'd be staying in a position where Oregon and Washington control the situation. That's a NO. You do not let your future depend on anybody else if you don't have to. That's a recipe for disaster. NO. I don't give a shit if we're losing a few million on a deal by moving in the short term, you do not let yourself get in a situation where you could end up losing way more millions in the future. That's what inept leadership does.

Thats 100% correct. Especially when we know Oregon and Washington are leaving. Just a matter of when. We dont want to end up having a conference with leftover mountain west teams. We need and want to drive the bus out of here. Agreed we dont care what espn offers in the
30 day window. Ending up in a worse conference is too big a risk.

[AzCatFan2]

I am not saying stay in the PAC-12. But there is no reason to move until the negotiation window closes in three weeks unless Oregon and Washington leave before that

Also again not saying stay but the PAC can make sense if a) espn is willing to pay a huge premium for the late window or b) George gets very creative with an Apple or Amazon or Netflix on streaming

I can think of at least 100 reasons to leave regardless of what Oregon and Washington does and one of the primary reasons is because we'd be staying in a position where Oregon and Washington control the situation. That's a NO. You do not let your future depend on anybody else if you don't have to. That's a recipe for disaster. NO. I don't give a shit if we're losing a few million on a deal by moving in the short term, you do not let yourself get in a situation where you could end up losing way more millions in the future. That's what inept leadership does.

Thats 100% correct. Especially when we know Oregon and Washington are leaving. Just a matter of when. We dont want to end up having a conference with leftover mountain west teams. We need and want to drive the bus out of here. Agreed we dont care what espn offers in the
30 day window. Ending up in a worse conference is too big a risk.

In what scenario do we get completely left out of the BIG 12? And remember, the ACC is locked into a contract with a huge buyout until 2036. It's unlikely that a move to the BIG 12 for any ACC would make financial sense. For the mid level ACC teams, absolutely not. It would just take too long to pay off the breach of contract, which would likely have to be paid over a few years on a loan. And any extra money gained by going to the BIG 12 wouldn't cover the buyout.

In addition, the Arizona schools are likely more attractive than the mid level ACC teams. We're not as attractive as Clemson, FSU, UNC, or Miami, but after that, it's pretty equal footing. And a lot more BIG 12 schools are closer to Tucson than ACC country. If the BIG 12 is going to be #3 behind the SEC and BIG 10, things like keeping travel costs down will matter, because the money coming in won't compare. So better to keep the money going out down as much as possible.

So lay it out. How does Arizona get left out? What's the scenario?

[RondaeShimmy]

[ChooChooCat]

I am not saying stay in the PAC-12. But there is no reason to move until the negotiation window closes in three weeks unless Oregon and Washington leave before that

Also again not saying stay but the PAC can make sense if a) espn is willing to pay a huge premium for the late window or b) George gets very creative with an Apple or Amazon or Netflix on streaming

I can think of at least 100 reasons to leave regardless of what Oregon and Washington does and one of the primary reasons is because we'd be staying in a position where Oregon and Washington control the situation. That's a NO. You do not let your future depend on anybody else if you don't have to. That's a recipe for disaster. NO. I don't give a shit if we're losing a few million on a deal by moving in the short term, you do not let yourself get in a situation where you could end up losing way more millions in the future. That's what inept leadership does.

Thats 100% correct. Especially when we know Oregon and Washington are leaving. Just a matter of when. We dont want to end up having a conference with leftover mountain west teams. We need and want to drive the bus out of here. Agreed we dont care what espn offers in the
30 day window. Ending up in a worse conference is too big a risk.

In what scenario do we get completely left out of the BIG 12? And remember, the ACC is locked into a contract with a huge buyout until 2036. It's unlikely that a move to the BIG 12 for any ACC would make financial sense. For the mid level ACC teams, absolutely not. It would just take too long to pay off the breach of contract, which would likely have to be paid over a few years on a loan. And any extra money gained by going to the BIG 12 wouldn't cover the buyout.

In addition, the Arizona schools are likely more attractive than the mid level ACC teams. We're not as attractive as Clemson, FSU, UNC, or Miami, but after that, it's pretty equal footing. And a lot more BIG 12 schools are closer to Tucson than ACC country. If the BIG 12 is going to be #3 behind the SEC and BIG 10, things like keeping travel costs down will matter, because the money coming in won't compare. So better to keep the money going out down as much as possible.

So lay it out. How does Arizona get left out? What's the scenario?

I already laid out one scenario for you. If you’re going to argue for our continuance in a failed sports conference at least be intellectually honest. You’re not even debating, you’re yelling at the fucking wall at this point.

I’ll give you one more, the Big 12 decides it only wants to expand by 4 schools and picks Washington, Oregon, Utah and Colorado (or Stanford or ASU). All of those schools have a larger metro associated with it and/or better football. Arizona is not in a safe place, it’s just not. We’re a basketball school in a smaller market. Your head is up your ass if you don’t see the scenarios where we’re left out in the cold.

[AzCatFan2]

I am not saying stay in the PAC-12. But there is no reason to move until the negotiation window closes in three weeks unless Oregon and Washington leave before that

Also again not saying stay but the PAC can make sense if a) espn is willing to pay a huge premium for the late window or b) George gets very creative with an Apple or Amazon or Netflix on streaming

I can think of at least 100 reasons to leave regardless of what Oregon and Washington does and one of the primary reasons is because we'd be staying in a position where Oregon and Washington control the situation. That's a NO. You do not let your future depend on anybody else if you don't have to. That's a recipe for disaster. NO. I don't give a shit if we're losing a few million on a deal by moving in the short term, you do not let yourself get in a situation where you could end up losing way more millions in the future. That's what inept leadership does.

Thats 100% correct. Especially when we know Oregon and Washington are leaving. Just a matter of when. We dont want to end up having a conference with leftover mountain west teams. We need and want to drive the bus out of here. Agreed we dont care what espn offers in the
30 day window. Ending up in a worse conference is too big a risk.

In what scenario do we get completely left out of the BIG 12? And remember, the ACC is locked into a contract with a huge buyout until 2036. It's unlikely that a move to the BIG 12 for any ACC would make financial sense. For the mid level ACC teams, absolutely not. It would just take too long to pay off the breach of contract, which would likely have to be paid over a few years on a loan. And any extra money gained by going to the BIG 12 wouldn't cover the buyout.

In addition, the Arizona schools are likely more attractive than the mid level ACC teams. We're not as attractive as Clemson, FSU, UNC, or Miami, but after that, it's pretty equal footing. And a lot more BIG 12 schools are closer to Tucson than ACC country. If the BIG 12 is going to be #3 behind the SEC and BIG 10, things like keeping travel costs down will matter, because the money coming in won't compare. So better to keep the money going out down as much as possible.

So lay it out. How does Arizona get left out? What's the scenario?

I already laid out one scenario for you. If you’re going to argue for our continuance in a failed sports conference at least be intellectually honest. You’re not even debating, you’re yelling at the fucking wall at this point.

I’ll give you one more, the Big 12 decides it only wants to expand by 4 schools and picks Washington, Oregon, Utah and Colorado (or Stanford or ASU). All of those schools have a larger metro associated with it and/or better football. Arizona is not in a safe place, it’s just not. We’re a basketball school in a smaller market. Your head is up your ass if you don’t see the scenarios where we’re left out in the cold.

If UW and Oregon wanted in the BIG 12, it would be old news already. And really think Stanford or CAL want to be in a conference with Baylor or BYU? Fat chance.

Oregon and UW would only go to the BIG 12 of that's their last resort. And there was a cheap out should the SEC or BIG 10 come calling. The BIG 12 knows this too, which is why they were willing to take Oregon, UW, plus the 4 corner PAC schools. Make the biggest splash possible, knowing it may only be temporary. But again, Oregon and UW want bigger, which is why the PAC still exists. They hope a short term PAC deal will be both more profitable and easier to leave than any BIG 12 deal.

If Stanford or CAL wanted to be in the same conference as Baylor, the PAC 16 would have happened. It almost did by adding OU, OKState, Texas, TTech, TAMU, and Colorado. But TAMU said no to being in the PAC, and the PAC said no to Baylor as a sub. We suggested Utah instead. Texas said no.

The nightmare scenario has such a low probability of happening. The finances make any ACC school taking a BIG 12 spot remote. Oregon and UW don't want any part of the BIG 12, and neither do Stanford or CAL. My head isn't up my ass. Your head is blinded by fear. A fear that if you look at things rationally isn't justified.

[ChooChooCat]

Ok I’m done, you’re hopeless.

[KillerKlown]

I can think of at least 100 reasons to leave regardless of what Oregon and Washington does and one of the primary reasons is because we'd be staying in a position where Oregon and Washington control the situation. That's a NO. You do not let your future depend on anybody else if you don't have to. That's a recipe for disaster. NO. I don't give a shit if we're losing a few million on a deal by moving in the short term, you do not let yourself get in a situation where you could end up losing way more millions in the future. That's what inept leadership does.

Thats 100% correct. Especially when we know Oregon and Washington are leaving. Just a matter of when. We dont want to end up having a conference with leftover mountain west teams. We need and want to drive the bus out of here. Agreed we dont care what espn offers in the
30 day window. Ending up in a worse conference is too big a risk.

In what scenario do we get completely left out of the BIG 12? And remember, the ACC is locked into a contract with a huge buyout until 2036. It's unlikely that a move to the BIG 12 for any ACC would make financial sense. For the mid level ACC teams, absolutely not. It would just take too long to pay off the breach of contract, which would likely have to be paid over a few years on a loan. And any extra money gained by going to the BIG 12 wouldn't cover the buyout.

In addition, the Arizona schools are likely more attractive than the mid level ACC teams. We're not as attractive as Clemson, FSU, UNC, or Miami, but after that, it's pretty equal footing. And a lot more BIG 12 schools are closer to Tucson than ACC country. If the BIG 12 is going to be #3 behind the SEC and BIG 10, things like keeping travel costs down will matter, because the money coming in won't compare. So better to keep the money going out down as much as possible.

So lay it out. How does Arizona get left out? What's the scenario?

I already laid out one scenario for you. If you’re going to argue for our continuance in a failed sports conference at least be intellectually honest. You’re not even debating, you’re yelling at the fucking wall at this point.

I’ll give you one more, the Big 12 decides it only wants to expand by 4 schools and picks Washington, Oregon, Utah and Colorado (or Stanford or ASU). All of those schools have a larger metro associated with it and/or better football. Arizona is not in a safe place, it’s just not. We’re a basketball school in a smaller market. Your head is up your ass if you don’t see the scenarios where we’re left out in the cold.

If UW and Oregon wanted in the BIG 12, it would be old news already. And really think Stanford or CAL want to be in a conference with Baylor or BYU? Fat chance.

Oregon and UW would only go to the BIG 12 of that's their last resort. And there was a cheap out should the SEC or BIG 10 come calling. The BIG 12 knows this too, which is why they were willing to take Oregon, UW, plus the 4 corner PAC schools. Make the biggest splash possible, knowing it may only be temporary. But again, Oregon and UW want bigger, which is why the PAC still exists. They hope a short term PAC deal will be both more profitable and easier to leave than any BIG 12 deal.

If Stanford or CAL wanted to be in the same conference as Baylor, the PAC 16 would have happened. It almost did by adding OU, OKState, Texas, TTech, TAMU, and Colorado. But TAMU said no to being in the PAC, and the PAC said no to Baylor as a sub. We suggested Utah instead. Texas said no.

The nightmare scenario has such a low probability of happening. The finances make any ACC school taking a BIG 12 spot remote. Oregon and UW don't want any part of the BIG 12, and neither do Stanford or CAL. My head isn't up my ass. Your head is blinded by fear. A fear that if you look at things rationally isn't justified.

Didn't you say something about a miracle and Arizona getting lucky riding OU and UWs coat tails not to long ago? You have have this wierd obsession with wanting Arizona to be Oregon's lap dog and a silly view of the BIG12. Why do we need to have any ties to Oregon? Oregon this, Oregon that. Fuck Oregon. They have nothing to do with us and don't want nothing to do with us. They shouldn't exist when determining our future. And what makes you think the PAC is going to make more money than the BIG 12 in the future? Our conference was already a joke. Pac 12 after dark might as well have been infomercials for the rest of the country. You keep bringing up this tv contract like the PAC has any leverage. Why do you want our future to be handled by the PAC higher ups when they put us in this position in the first place?

[AzCatFan2]

Ok I’m done, you’re hopeless.

I'm not the one worried about Stanford too the BIG 12.

Let's do some math with ACC schools. The contract is doing exactly what it was designed. Stop schools from leaving. The cost to break the contract is $100 million. No school will have that laying around. They will have to finance it. If say the BIG 12 adds 4 ACC schools, if those schools are worth $320 million a year for a TV contract, that's an extra $20 million a year per school. That would mean the ACC schools would spend the next 5 years paying off the principle, and another year or two paying off the interest.

Oregon and UW are said to be worth about $60 million for a TV contract. Doubtful there are 4 ACC schools with a cumulative $320 million. Clemson may be worth $80 million, but not any other. So unless the ACC can nullify the contract, don't worry about them until 2036.

Don't worry about Oregon and Washington to the BIG 12 without us either. They don't want to go. If they are forced to because they have no other options, the PAC NW schools will want as many PAC schools to come along to lesson the blow.

Don't worry about Stanford or CAL going to the BIG 12. That's laughable. Stanford or CAL in the same conference as religious schools? Not happening.

So where does this leave us? The only way we get left out is if the top teams from the BIG 12 and PAC all agree to join the ACC. A BIGPACACC merger might work, but again, the pesky ACC contract means the ACC can't afford to dissolve and leave members out in a new contract. Say, for example, the BIGPACACC leaves Wake Forest out. They are going to force the ACC teams to pay the $100 million each for breach on contract. And the ACC schools are back in a bind trying to pay that off.

Adding teams to the ACC would allow them to renegotiate. But if Oregon and UW don't want to go to the BIG 12, what makes anyone think they'd go to the ACC?

Running through all the possible scenarios, and Arizona being left high and dry is very small. Not until 2036, when the ACC contract runs out. If things haven't settled by then, we may be screwed. Until then, we're secure that worst case scenario is joining the BIG 12. Unless you think Stanford or Oregon wants to join the BIG 12!

[AzCatFan2]

Thats 100% correct. Especially when we know Oregon and Washington are leaving. Just a matter of when. We dont want to end up having a conference with leftover mountain west teams. We need and want to drive the bus out of here. Agreed we dont care what espn offers in the
30 day window. Ending up in a worse conference is too big a risk.

In what scenario do we get completely left out of the BIG 12? And remember, the ACC is locked into a contract with a huge buyout until 2036. It's unlikely that a move to the BIG 12 for any ACC would make financial sense. For the mid level ACC teams, absolutely not. It would just take too long to pay off the breach of contract, which would likely have to be paid over a few years on a loan. And any extra money gained by going to the BIG 12 wouldn't cover the buyout.

In addition, the Arizona schools are likely more attractive than the mid level ACC teams. We're not as attractive as Clemson, FSU, UNC, or Miami, but after that, it's pretty equal footing. And a lot more BIG 12 schools are closer to Tucson than ACC country. If the BIG 12 is going to be #3 behind the SEC and BIG 10, things like keeping travel costs down will matter, because the money coming in won't compare. So better to keep the money going out down as much as possible.

So lay it out. How does Arizona get left out? What's the scenario?

I already laid out one scenario for you. If you’re going to argue for our continuance in a failed sports conference at least be intellectually honest. You’re not even debating, you’re yelling at the fucking wall at this point.

I’ll give you one more, the Big 12 decides it only wants to expand by 4 schools and picks Washington, Oregon, Utah and Colorado (or Stanford or ASU). All of those schools have a larger metro associated with it and/or better football. Arizona is not in a safe place, it’s just not. We’re a basketball school in a smaller market. Your head is up your ass if you don’t see the scenarios where we’re left out in the cold.

If UW and Oregon wanted in the BIG 12, it would be old news already. And really think Stanford or CAL want to be in a conference with Baylor or BYU? Fat chance.

Oregon and UW would only go to the BIG 12 of that's their last resort. And there was a cheap out should the SEC or BIG 10 come calling. The BIG 12 knows this too, which is why they were willing to take Oregon, UW, plus the 4 corner PAC schools. Make the biggest splash possible, knowing it may only be temporary. But again, Oregon and UW want bigger, which is why the PAC still exists. They hope a short term PAC deal will be both more profitable and easier to leave than any BIG 12 deal.

If Stanford or CAL wanted to be in the same conference as Baylor, the PAC 16 would have happened. It almost did by adding OU, OKState, Texas, TTech, TAMU, and Colorado. But TAMU said no to being in the PAC, and the PAC said no to Baylor as a sub. We suggested Utah instead. Texas said no.

The nightmare scenario has such a low probability of happening. The finances make any ACC school taking a BIG 12 spot remote. Oregon and UW don't want any part of the BIG 12, and neither do Stanford or CAL. My head isn't up my ass. Your head is blinded by fear. A fear that if you look at things rationally isn't justified.

Didn't you say something about a miracle and Arizona getting lucky riding OU and UWs coat tails not to long ago? You have have this wierd obsession with wanting Arizona to be Oregon's lap dog and a silly view of the BIG12. Why do we need to have any ties to Oregon? Oregon this, Oregon that. Fuck Oregon. They have nothing to do with us and don't want nothing to do with us. They shouldn't exist when determining our future. And what makes you think the PAC is going to make more money than the BIG 12 in the future? Our conference was already a joke. Pac 12 after dark might as well have been infomercials for the rest of the country. You keep bringing up this tv contract like the PAC has any leverage. Why do you want our future to be handled by the PAC higher ups when they put us in this position in the first place?

I don't know if the PAC will make more than the BIG 12. But I think we should wait and find out.

As for Oregon, Phil Knight has stated he wants then in the BIG 10 or SEC. If we can manage to tag along, that would be a minor miracle, and something we need to jump at.

It's unlikely, and our most likely destination is the BIG 12. But read the post previous to this, and the likelihood of being completely left out of the BIG 12 is very small. We have nothing to lose waiting for a miracle.

[azcat49]

I have to say I see a lot more downside than upside in waiting. ESPIN won’t over bid and we probably will be less than the Big 12.

While they are a flyover conference that is not seen as even the third most valuable ESPIN will have access to west viewers through us and anyone that might follow. We get the best of both worlds.

I just can’t find the downside in moving sooner rather than later. Sure wait tge 30 day period of even 6 months but we need to be applying and ready to go when it’s time

[EastCoastCat]

Do some users get paid by the word on this site?

[PHXCATS]

I have to say I see a lot more downside than upside in waiting. ESPIN won’t over bid and we probably will be less than the Big 12.

While they are a flyover conference that is not seen as even the third most valuable ESPIN will have access to west viewers through us and anyone that might follow. We get the best of both worlds.

I just can’t find the downside in moving sooner rather than later. Sure wait tge 30 day period of even 6 months but we need to be applying and ready to go when it’s time

Exactly. See what George has to say after the window expired in two weeks and then go from there. The chances of missing the Big 12 by waiting until the end of the negotiation window is 0.001% especially if there have already been side conversations.

But move right then unless something big is in the works with Apple or something

[AzCatFan2]

Risk reward. The risk of being completely out of the BIG 12 is minimal. ACC teams are locked into their contracts until 2036. UW and Oregon don't want to go to the BIG 12 and neither do the Bay Area schools. And the reward for waiting? A deal that may be possibly better than jumping to the BIG 12 now.

Waiting is low risk with potential high reward.

[ChooChooCat]

Risk reward. The risk of being completely out of the BIG 12 is minimal. ACC teams are locked into their contracts until 2036. UW and Oregon don't want to go to the BIG 12 and neither do the Bay Area schools. And the reward for waiting? A deal that may be possibly better than jumping to the BIG 12 now.

Waiting is low risk with potential high reward.

A deal that guarantees the vast majority of Arizona’s games will be on when more than half the country is sleeping. Absolutely great deal. Let’s sign up for it forever. That’ll get us into the B1G eventually for sure!

[ChooChooCat]

Damn, you sold me Choo but where is our leadership at on this issue currently? Wait and see? What is that period? The TV negotiation period?

It sounds like schools like Oregon, UDub and maybe Utah must have received some feedback from the B1G to make them flinch about moving?

I can say with confidence if this was solely up to Arizona we’d probably be in the Big 12 right now. Unfortunately we have to convince stupid little brother and maybe some other friends to join us first.