Conference Realignment

[Merkin]

Actions speak louder than words. Especially when lawyers are involved. I'd imagine lawyers for top conferences and top ACC schools have examined the contract looking for an out. As of today, no action.

FSU most certainly has an out according to their legal counsel. It's just to going to cost them $120M.

[AzCatFan2]

Rumors were it would take over $100 million to get out of the ACC contract. Confirmed now with the FSU BOR meeting. FSU's Athletic Dept is healthy, making about $10 million in profit last year. But $120 million would likely require a loan. Doubt boosters could come up with that kind of coin. Anyone want to do the math on how much interest would be using current rates on a $100 million loan?

I'm no fan of the PAC. But the BIG12 isn't much, if any better. And if the BIG12 wants us to sign a GOR past five years, we shouldn't repeat the mistake the ACC schools did.

Want some predictions? ESPN announces going full streaming in the next 5 years. It's no secret the B1G wants to continue western expansion, and talks begin in about 3 years. The big question is what will ESPN want? A coast-to-coast conference to compete head-to-head with the B1G? Or, will the BIG12 survive, and give ESPN late night content? If ESPN and SEC expand west, we potentially land in the SEC. If the math ESPN sees favors the BIG12, that's where we land.

[AzCatFan2]

One more possibility. The ACC and the PAC merge to form the APAC. Probably won't happen this round, but talks are reportedly starting, and merge could potentially happen 4 or 5 years from now. The resulting super conference would have enough big names to be competitive. From Forbes (https://www.forbes.com/sites/zengernews ... ger-talks/)

Also, from that same article:

"But the Big 12 targets are Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah making up what the media has dubbed “The Four Corner Schools,” which Yormark would like to add to his conference. The question is those four schools are far more valuable to the Big 12 than the few million dollars they might get for moving so why move?

'The answer is there is no reason for any of the Pac 12 members including the “Four Corner Schools to leave the conference at this point,” says Florida-based media consultant Jeff Edwards. “What the conference needs is to stay together and quickly ink a new four- or five-year media rights deal as we see how the college realignment saga plays out. I think that staying together and using that time to engage the ACC in talks about a future merger or alliance is in the best interest of both conferences. The chance to join the Big 12 will be there four years from now.”

[KillerKlown]

One more possibility. The ACC and the PAC merge to form the APAC. Probably won't happen this round, but talks are reportedly starting, and merge could potentially happen 4 or 5 years from now. The resulting super conference would have enough big names to be competitive. From Forbes (https://www.forbes.com/sites/zengernews ... ger-talks/)

Also, from that same article:

"But the Big 12 targets are Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah making up what the media has dubbed “The Four Corner Schools,” which Yormark would like to add to his conference. The question is those four schools are far more valuable to the Big 12 than the few million dollars they might get for moving so why move?

'The answer is there is no reason for any of the Pac 12 members including the “Four Corner Schools to leave the conference at this point,” says Florida-based media consultant Jeff Edwards. “What the conference needs is to stay together and quickly ink a new four- or five-year media rights deal as we see how the college realignment saga plays out. I think that staying together and using that time to engage the ACC in talks about a future merger or alliance is in the best interest of both conferences. The chance to join the Big 12 will be there four years from now.”

"One more possibility", dude, this is like your 4th time bringing this up.
Nobody cares what some consultant from Florida says. Especially one as dumb as the one you quoted.

[AzCatFan2]

One more possibility. The ACC and the PAC merge to form the APAC. Probably won't happen this round, but talks are reportedly starting, and merge could potentially happen 4 or 5 years from now. The resulting super conference would have enough big names to be competitive. From Forbes (https://www.forbes.com/sites/zengernews ... ger-talks/)

Also, from that same article:

"But the Big 12 targets are Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah making up what the media has dubbed “The Four Corner Schools,” which Yormark would like to add to his conference. The question is those four schools are far more valuable to the Big 12 than the few million dollars they might get for moving so why move?

'The answer is there is no reason for any of the Pac 12 members including the “Four Corner Schools to leave the conference at this point,” says Florida-based media consultant Jeff Edwards. “What the conference needs is to stay together and quickly ink a new four- or five-year media rights deal as we see how the college realignment saga plays out. I think that staying together and using that time to engage the ACC in talks about a future merger or alliance is in the best interest of both conferences. The chance to join the Big 12 will be there four years from now.”

"One more possibility", dude, this is like your 4th time bringing this up.
Nobody cares what some consultant from Florida says. Especially one as dumb as the one you quoted.

Don't agree with the consultant, but can't argue he is wrong. What's left? Ad hominen attack and call the guy dumb.

[CardiacCats97]

A merger with the ACC sounds great and we should do it now.

Oh, we’re talking maybe five years from now? And in the meantime we’ll make shitty money being streamed where no one gives a flying fuck?

Hard pass. Big12 now please and thank you.

[ChooChooCat]

A merger with the ACC sounds great and we should do it now.

Oh, we’re talking maybe five years from now? And in the meantime we’ll make shitty money being streamed where no one gives a flying fuck?

Hard pass. Big12 now please and thank you.

Merging with us does not help the ACC. It’s not happening. Only dipshits continue to bring it up.

[AzCatFan2]

A merger with the ACC sounds great and we should do it now.

Oh, we’re talking maybe five years from now? And in the meantime we’ll make shitty money being streamed where no one gives a flying fuck?

Hard pass. Big12 now please and thank you.

So, we can wait for something good in about 5 years. Or, take something mediocre now, and ruin our chances of something good. And if we wait, and nothing good comes our way, the mediocre will still be available to us. So, tell me again why we shouldn't wait?

We survived over a decade with the PAC12 Network. Whatever the PAC deal is, we'll survive that too. And, if in 5 years, a much better deal comes along, we'll be better for it. If nothing better comes to fruition, then we can go BIG12.

[AzCatFan2]

A merger with the ACC sounds great and we should do it now.

Oh, we’re talking maybe five years from now? And in the meantime we’ll make shitty money being streamed where no one gives a flying fuck?

Hard pass. Big12 now please and thank you.

Merging with us does not help the ACC. It’s not happening. Only dipshits continue to bring it up.

So Forbes, a well respected financial magazine published for years, and published the article, is full of dipshits. Good to know! I'll certainly be taking advise and industry information from anonymous people from message boards from now. And forget Forbes!

[dmjcat]

A merger with the ACC sounds great and we should do it now.

Oh, we’re talking maybe five years from now? And in the meantime we’ll make shitty money being streamed where no one gives a flying fuck?

Hard pass. Big12 now please and thank you.

So, we can wait for something good in about 5 years. Or, take something mediocre now, and ruin our chances of something good. And if we wait, and nothing good comes our way, the mediocre will still be available to us. So, tell me again why we shouldn't wait?

We survived over a decade with the PAC12 Network. Whatever the PAC deal is, we'll survive that too. And, if in 5 years, a much better deal comes along, we'll be better for it. If nothing better comes to fruition, then we can go BIG12.

OMG you are dense.

We can wait "for something better" for 5 years while we are in the Big12 Mr. One Dimensional Brain

[KillerKlown]

One more possibility. The ACC and the PAC merge to form the APAC. Probably won't happen this round, but talks are reportedly starting, and merge could potentially happen 4 or 5 years from now. The resulting super conference would have enough big names to be competitive. From Forbes (https://www.forbes.com/sites/zengernews ... ger-talks/)

Also, from that same article:

"But the Big 12 targets are Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah making up what the media has dubbed “The Four Corner Schools,” which Yormark would like to add to his conference. The question is those four schools are far more valuable to the Big 12 than the few million dollars they might get for moving so why move?

'The answer is there is no reason for any of the Pac 12 members including the “Four Corner Schools to leave the conference at this point,” says Florida-based media consultant Jeff Edwards. “What the conference needs is to stay together and quickly ink a new four- or five-year media rights deal as we see how the college realignment saga plays out. I think that staying together and using that time to engage the ACC in talks about a future merger or alliance is in the best interest of both conferences. The chance to join the Big 12 will be there four years from now.”

"One more possibility", dude, this is like your 4th time bringing this up.
Nobody cares what some consultant from Florida says. Especially one as dumb as the one you quoted.

Don't agree with the consultant, but can't argue he is wrong. What's left? Ad hominen attack and call the guy dumb.

You wouldn't happen to be a consultant living in Florida would you? Lol
We've been over this topic too many times already and it's the exact same argument you lost already 3 times over. Like i said this is the 4th time you brought this same exact idea up.

[KillerKlown]

A merger with the ACC sounds great and we should do it now.

Oh, we’re talking maybe five years from now? And in the meantime we’ll make shitty money being streamed where no one gives a flying fuck?

Hard pass. Big12 now please and thank you.

Merging with us does not help the ACC. It’s not happening. Only dipshits continue to bring it up.

So Forbes, a well respected financial magazine published for years, and published the article, is full of dipshits. Good to know! I'll certainly be taking advise and industry information from anonymous people from message boards from now. And forget Forbes!

Says the guy quoting Canzano and articles from last July.

[CardiacCats97]

A merger with the ACC sounds great and we should do it now.

Oh, we’re talking maybe five years from now? And in the meantime we’ll make shitty money being streamed where no one gives a flying fuck?

Hard pass. Big12 now please and thank you.

Merging with us does not help the ACC. It’s not happening. Only dipshits continue to bring it up.

So Forbes, a well respected financial magazine published for years, and published the article, is full of dipshits. Good to know! I'll certainly be taking advise and industry information from anonymous people from message boards from now. And forget Forbes!

You do realize that’s not a Forbes article written by a Forbes reporter, right? It’s from a “contributor” to Zenger News which is a paid partner of Forbes.

You’re basically getting your opinions and prognostications from a clickbait “Divers in Arizona need to know this ONE TRICK to lower their insurance rates” article. What a joke.

[AzCatFan2]

A merger with the ACC sounds great and we should do it now.

Oh, we’re talking maybe five years from now? And in the meantime we’ll make shitty money being streamed where no one gives a flying fuck?

Hard pass. Big12 now please and thank you.

So, we can wait for something good in about 5 years. Or, take something mediocre now, and ruin our chances of something good. And if we wait, and nothing good comes our way, the mediocre will still be available to us. So, tell me again why we shouldn't wait?

We survived over a decade with the PAC12 Network. Whatever the PAC deal is, we'll survive that too. And, if in 5 years, a much better deal comes along, we'll be better for it. If nothing better comes to fruition, then we can go BIG12.

OMG you are dense.

We can wait "for something better" for 5 years while we are in the Big12 Mr. One Dimensional Brain

Not if the BIG12 makes us sign a GOR that lasts longer than 5 years. Or, if all 4 corner PAC schools leave, and the PAC dissipates, then UW and Oregon go B1G now at a discount. And that's the end of our options in the future.

And I know a Forbes writer didn't write the article. It was written likely by someone with industry knowledge, and vetted by Forbes. Not some dipshit. Here's a newsflash, not everyone who disagrees with you is a dipshit. Maybe you should listen to their argument make counter points instead of ad hominen attacks? Or is calling people who have a difference of opinion a dipshit the entire argument against waiting on this board?

[ChooChooCat]

A merger with the ACC sounds great and we should do it now.

Oh, we’re talking maybe five years from now? And in the meantime we’ll make shitty money being streamed where no one gives a flying fuck?

Hard pass. Big12 now please and thank you.

Merging with us does not help the ACC. It’s not happening. Only dipshits continue to bring it up.

So Forbes, a well respected financial magazine published for years, and published the article, is full of dipshits. Good to know! I'll certainly be taking advise and industry information from anonymous people from message boards from now. And forget Forbes!

First of all he doesn’t work for Forbes, second of all it was an opinion article. Any idiot can have an opinion article with no sources. Give it a try, I’m sure you’ll write great bullshit with all your free time.

[ChooChooCat]

Also only a colossal idiot would argue to sign a 5 year deal to try to later join with a conference that’s currently in the process of blowing up.

[CardiacCats97]

And I know a Forbes writer didn't write the article.

LOL, you just tried to use Forbes rep to bolster your argument.

It was written likely by someone with industry knowledge, and vetted by Forbes.

It’s a paid placement by Zenger News. You have no idea if it was vetted by Forbes. And you don’t know what his industry knowledge is. But you’ve now based your entire argument on this one piece so I can see why you’re getting defensive.

[dmjcat]

A merger with the ACC sounds great and we should do it now.

Oh, we’re talking maybe five years from now? And in the meantime we’ll make shitty money being streamed where no one gives a flying fuck?

Hard pass. Big12 now please and thank you.

So, we can wait for something good in about 5 years. Or, take something mediocre now, and ruin our chances of something good. And if we wait, and nothing good comes our way, the mediocre will still be available to us. So, tell me again why we shouldn't wait?

We survived over a decade with the PAC12 Network. Whatever the PAC deal is, we'll survive that too. And, if in 5 years, a much better deal comes along, we'll be better for it. If nothing better comes to fruition, then we can go BIG12.

OMG you are dense.

We can wait "for something better" for 5 years while we are in the Big12 Mr. One Dimensional Brain

Not if the BIG12 makes us sign a GOR that lasts longer than 5 years. Or, if all 4 corner PAC schools leave, and the PAC dissipates, then UW and Oregon go B1G now at a discount. And that's the end of our options in the future.

And I know a Forbes writer didn't write the article. It was written likely by someone with industry knowledge, and vetted by Forbes. Not some dipshit. Here's a newsflash, not everyone who disagrees with you is a dipshit. Maybe you should listen to their argument make counter points instead of ad hominen attacks? Or is calling people who have a difference of opinion a dipshit the entire argument against waiting on this board?

For all we know the P12 will require us to sign a longer GOR than the B12 will.

Again, your arguments are completely illogical and lack any basic thought process.

[TucsonCat]

And the frightening thing, guys, is that ACF2 legitimately believes he is right, and everyone else is wrong. EVERYONE ELSE! Talk about shouting into the wind, and not understanding that he is having zero affect on anyone’s opinion. It’s actually gotten kind of sad to watch.

[AzCatFan2]

Zenger News is a wire agency that Forbes use as contributors. It's not a paid opinion piece at all. https://www.forbes.com/sites/zengernews ... a7079213ab

The only schools that would agree to a long PAC GOR are Oregon St. and Washington St. Every other school has good reason to limit the next contract to 5 years or less. The conference needs 3 no votes to reject something. Any GOR past 5 years would get a lot more than 2 no votes.

My arguments are backed by industry experts with sources I link to. Everyone else here seems to be talking out of their asses. If reading industry sources, and basing my opinion on the information I gather is considered illogical and lacking any thought process, it's a wonder I've gotten as far in life as I have!

[CardiacCats97]

Zenger News is a wire agency that Forbes use as contributors. It's not a paid opinion piece at all. https://www.forbes.com/sites/zengernews ... a7079213ab

Get your head out of your ass. They aren’t a wire agency. They are an “underground newspaper” that pays for placements in mainstream sources. I’m glad you can read the bio they provided but have you looked at any other source on them?

That article you linked is a single-source opinion piece masquerading as informed news. It’s not. And that you’ve based your entire opinion on this subject on it should be embarrassing for you. The fact that it’s not just shows how tightly you’re gripping to the notion that you’re the only informed person in this argument even though all logic, evidence, and subsequent news reports from real journalists shows otherwise.

[dmjcat]

Zenger News is a wire agency that Forbes use as contributors. It's not a paid opinion piece at all. https://www.forbes.com/sites/zengernews ... a7079213ab

The only schools that would agree to a long PAC GOR are Oregon St. and Washington St. Every other school has good reason to limit the next contract to 5 years or less. The conference needs 3 no votes to reject something. Any GOR past 5 years would get a lot more than 2 no votes.

My arguments are backed by industry experts with sources I link to. Everyone else here seems to be talking out of their asses. If reading industry sources, and basing my opinion on the information I gather is considered illogical and lacking any thought process, it's a wonder I've gotten as far in life as I have!

"Gotten as far in life as I have"

Just curious, would that be a Chimney Sweep or the guy who scrapes dead animals off the road???

[AzCatFan2]

Zenger News is a wire agency that Forbes use as contributors. It's not a paid opinion piece at all. https://www.forbes.com/sites/zengernews ... a7079213ab

Get your head out of your ass. They aren’t a wire agency. They are an “underground newspaper” that pays for placements in mainstream sources. I’m glad you can read the bio they provided but have you looked at any other source on them?

That article you linked is a single-source opinion piece masquerading as informed news. It’s not. And that you’ve based your entire opinion on this subject on it should be embarrassing for you. The fact that it’s not just shows how tightly you’re gripping to the notion that you’re the only informed person in this argument even though all logic, evidence, and subsequent news reports from real journalists shows otherwise.

Do you have proof Zenger pays for Forbes placements? Because the link I gave linked 7 stories in the past week, published in Forbes, from Zenger. Zenger makes money by embedding advertisements in their stories. Last I look, digital CPMs are cheap, and not a huge income source. Zenger also advertises itself as a digital wire service. I could be wrong, but I'd like to see proof.

[CardiacCats97]

Forbes takes a portion of the ad sales Zenger nets from placing their stories on their site. Same as other sites where their content appears.

Or are you of the notion that Zenger, a company that’s been around for a year and a half, is so reputable that Forbes publishes their content out of some kind of journalistic camaraderie because their editors find it so compelling and worthy?

You tried to say it was a Forbes article and that Forbes was some kind of bastion of journalism so it must not be opinion and must be informed news. It’s not a Forbes article. It’s barely concealed opinion from a click farm. I’m sorry, but that’s the truth.

I’ve moved beyond feeling sorry for you at this point. Your wounds are all self-inflicted and getting deeper with each post. But I’m sure there will be another here shortly. Maybe you can tell us again about the one UW booster you supposedly know.

[AzCatFan2]

Zenger News is a wire agency that Forbes use as contributors. It's not a paid opinion piece at all. https://www.forbes.com/sites/zengernews ... a7079213ab

The only schools that would agree to a long PAC GOR are Oregon St. and Washington St. Every other school has good reason to limit the next contract to 5 years or less. The conference needs 3 no votes to reject something. Any GOR past 5 years would get a lot more than 2 no votes.

My arguments are backed by industry experts with sources I link to. Everyone else here seems to be talking out of their asses. If reading industry sources, and basing my opinion on the information I gather is considered illogical and lacking any thought process, it's a wonder I've gotten as far in life as I have!

"Gotten as far in life as I have"

Just curious, would that be a Chimney Sweep or the guy who scrapes dead animals off the road???

Ha ha. Very funny. I don't like to brag, but I do quite well for myself. My oldest will be a freshman at UA next week, and let's just say we don't qualify for financial aid tuition assistance.

My logic is also sound. If the 4 corners go to the BIG12, the PAC loses "P5" status with the NCAA. It means the rest of the PAC essentially become free agents. The B1G can then expand to 6 western schools, and get the Bays plus the big PNW schools at a discount. This happens, any APAC potential is gone. So is any SEC west coast expansion.

The BIG12 could merge with the ACC, with us in it. But this merge would have a power imbalance. The top schools, Clemson, FSU, UNC, and Miami would all come from the ACC. With UW, Oregon, and Stanford, the balance between the PAC and ACC is more in line. The ACC is free now to discuss a merge with the BIG12. But I've yet to see anyone suggest this course for the ACC.

If the rumor is true that Yormark wants any PAC school to sign at least a 10 year GOR to join the BIG12, that's a deal breaker. It locks us in way too long with a conference that isn't significantly better than the PAC. And leaves us with no options if and when things are likely to get real interesting when the next round of negotiations and realignment begins.

[CardiacCats97]

I just looked everywhere I could think of and didn’t see anything about this 10-year agreement requirement. Link it for us.

[dmjcat]

Hmmmmmmmm.. He's clearly not in touch with reality, he is constantly making things up, his arguments run in circles.

I'm beginning to think I know who AZCatFan2 is !

[AzCatFan2]

I just looked everywhere I could think of and didn’t see anything about this 10-year agreement requirement. Link it for us.

No source other than message board chatter for other PAC schools. Which is why I have always referred to a longer GOR for BIG12 entrance as a rumor.

[AzCatFan2]

Hmmmmmmmm.. He's clearly not in touch with reality, he is constantly making things up, his arguments run in circles.

I'm beginning to think I know who AZCatFan2 is !

Yay! More ad hominem attacks! Don't like what the poster is saying, but can't argue against his points. So, let's attack the poster with a silly meme! That will show em! Certainly shows me that my logic is sound, and you have to resort to the Internet version of name calling.

As for the PAC, there are plenty of problems. But the BIG12 isn't some panacea that will make everything better. As I said before, 10 AM local start as the undercard on FS1 at UCF followed by a 7:30 pm home games against Kansas on ESPN+ doesn't thrill me.

If this is our future, so be it. But if we can do better, we should go for it until we're out of options. Go BIG12 now, and we're likely out of any future options. Wait, and the BIG12 will still be there.

[CardiacCats97]

I just looked everywhere I could think of and didn’t see anything about this 10-year agreement requirement. Link it for us.

No source other than message board chatter for other PAC schools. Which is why I have always referred to a longer GOR for BIG12 entrance as a rumor.

And yet you’ve based most of your current argument against joining the Big12 on these message board rumors (which are able to be linked by the way, you just chose not to show us where you got this hot info from).

Have you heard the term “grasping at straws”?

[ChooChooCat]

I just looked everywhere I could think of and didn’t see anything about this 10-year agreement requirement. Link it for us.

A GOR only lasts as long as the TV deal lasts. Their TV deal isn't for 10 years. Another ridiculous argument.

[CardiacCats97]

I just looked everywhere I could think of and didn’t see anything about this 10-year agreement requirement. Link it for us.

A GOR only lasts as long as the TV deal lasts. Their TV deal isn't for 10 years. Another ridiculous argument.

For two weeks now the argument has been that we shouldn’t join the Big12 because “rumor has it” the conference will want a long GOR from new members, maybe up to ten years, which would hamstring our future options like if the B1G or SEC come calling.

So that rumor is bullshit (unprovable anonymous unlinked message board chatter). Yet it’s been the central argument for staying in the PAC for weeks. Unbelievable

[Merkin]

[AzCatFan2]

Oregon and Washington want no part of the BIG12. None. Why? Because they know, one way or another, bigger and better things are on their horizon. What that looks like is TBD, but it's likely one of three things, a B1G invite, a SEC invite, or an APAC. By the way, this dipshit from ACC country thinks the APAC is the ACC's best option (https://fansided.com/2023/02/26/clemson ... -acc-deal/), as is this writer from CAL (https://writeforcalifornia.com/p/pac-12 ... ec-big-ten). Guess there are dipshits from coast to coast?

Regardless, whatever happens, there is a chance that we get to tag along with UW and Oregon, and end up in a conference that is bigger and better than the BIG12. If that doesn't happen, then the PAC leftovers are the top targets for BIG12 expansion. Our future is more cloudy than Oregon and UW, but it either includes a better deal in a few years, or a soft landing in the BIG12. There is zero chance UW and Oregon take our BIG12 spot, and almost as small a chance that our worst case scenario isn't a BIG12 invite.

If we go BIG12 now, we cast our lot with them long term, even if the rumors are false about Yormark wanting a longer GOR to ensure PAC schools don't use and abuse the BIG12. If the 4-corners go BIG12 now, the PAC no longer becomes a P5 conference, and the B1G picks up Oregon, UW, and the Bays at a discount. The APAC has zero chance, and the SEC has no good options to expand westward. Even if it's just the two AZ schools going BIG12, really think the PAC would invite us back in five years to an APAC? Highly unlikely.

What we really should wish to avoid is going BIG12 now, only to have the future look like two majors, one with ESPN, and one with FOX, with the B1G and SEC picking the top ACC and BIG12 schools to fill out their line-ups. In this scenario, the SEC and B1G become 1A and 1B, and the leftovers, which may likely include us, all become second rate.

[TucsonCat]

Oregon and Washington want no part of the BIG12. None. Why? Because they know, one way or another, bigger and better things are on their horizon. What that looks like is TBD, but it's likely one of three things, a B1G invite, a SEC invite, or an APAC. By the way, this dipshit from ACC country thinks the APAC is the ACC's best option (https://fansided.com/2023/02/26/clemson ... -acc-deal/), as is this writer from CAL (https://writeforcalifornia.com/p/pac-12 ... ec-big-ten). Guess there are dipshits from coast to coast?

Regardless, whatever happens, there is a chance that we get to tag along with UW and Oregon, and end up in a conference that is bigger and better than the BIG12. If that doesn't happen, then the PAC leftovers are the top targets for BIG12 expansion. Our future is more cloudy than Oregon and UW, but it either includes a better deal in a few years, or a soft landing in the BIG12. There is zero chance UW and Oregon take our BIG12 spot, and almost as small a chance that our worst case scenario isn't a BIG12 invite.

If we go BIG12 now, we cast our lot with them long term, even if the rumors are false about Yormark wanting a longer GOR to ensure PAC schools don't use and abuse the BIG12. If the 4-corners go BIG12 now, the PAC no longer becomes a P5 conference, and the B1G picks up Oregon, UW, and the Bays at a discount. The APAC has zero chance, and the SEC has no good options to expand westward. Even if it's just the two AZ schools going BIG12, really think the PAC would invite us back in five years to an APAC? Highly unlikely.

What we really should wish to avoid is going BIG12 now, only to have the future look like two majors, one with ESPN, and one with FOX, with the B1G and SEC picking the top ACC and BIG12 schools to fill out their line-ups. In this scenario, the SEC and B1G become 1A and 1B, and the leftovers, which may likely include us, all become second rate.

You should really just stop. You have become a satire account at this point. You are convincing no one, and despite your many, many, many long-winded diatribes about the value of waiting for something better to come along, not one person on this board has been persuaded to see things from your view point. You are wasting your time putting your opinion out there over and over and over. If you are ok with being the running joke on this board, I suppose that is up to you, but honestly it’s gotten a little sad to see someone consistently put themselves out there for so much abuse. Unless you are a serious masochist, you should find a different use for your time and energy.

[AZCatGirl]

If this is true the Pac will be dead soon. Let's get the ball rolling and join the Big 12 now, like we should've done months ago. Do Heeke and Robbins have the balls though?

[Irish27]

[ChooChooCat]

The fact a school AD (and former UA grad) felt he could say this openly is a bad sign for the Pac 12.

[CardiacCats97]

He’s talking about us. Time to say yes to our future.

[Merkin]

Nothing new here, just speculation, but thought RichRod had some interesting comments about football in Tucson and for the most part, programs out west.

"We always thought, at Arizona, [in general] they like football, but I don't know if they really love it," Rodriguez said. "So, once [the players] leave our football building, they're not hearing people talk about football a lot. We had to make it really, really important moreso than maybe we really have should have. We wanted them to feel how important it was to our players.

"When you come out here to the Southeast, you don't have to worry about that."

and

"I know most everybody can get ESPN+ or the streaming things," Rodriguez said. "You're not going to have it on in the bars. … Your visibility will never be the same, ever. Then there's just the perception, 'Oh, you guys played? I didn't see it.' And then you won't be talked about."

[ChooChooCat]

The new Ourand/Marchand podcast was absolutely brutal for the Pac 12.

[RondaeShimmy]

The new Ourand/Marchand podcast was absolutely brutal for the Pac 12.

Here's a text recap I found on Reddit

PAC-12 running out of time, ESPN not as interested as they once were, CBS might be interested in the top PAC game each week, Apple deal won't come by the middle of March.

Segment about the PAC runs from roughly 18:00-22:20.

Time seems to be winding down on the PAC's ability to get a deal done, not a whole lot new besides the bits in the title. They said Apple is notoriously "persnickety" when it comes to negotiating deals and just based on how the timelines unfolded on the NFL Sunday Ticket bid and the MLS deal an Apple-PAC deal won't be done by the timeline that some PAC schools officials have publicly stated.

The CBS bit was more of a throw away line: "CBS might be interested in the top PAC game of the week, but even then not super interested". To me that also seems to run counter to Amazon's interest in the deal for their top game of the week, but would be an immensely better option for casual eyes than having their best game on streaming.

This conference is fucked

No future in it at all

[84Cat]

Being on the Pac 12 Network for years with games starting after 8 o'clock has killed any interest in our conference. Also, the 2 highest visible teams are leaving. Not a good recipe for success.

[AzCatFan2]

The B1G needs a new Commissioner. I doubt they expand without one. And not sure if the first act of a new B1G Commissioner would be expansion? The B1G will want to expand more in the west, and it's when, not if. The question is, will the B1G be Oregon and UW's only option?

[CardiacCats97]

The B1G needs a new Commissioner. I doubt they expand without one.

Why not? It’s the school presidents who sign off on the deals. They could easily tab five of them and their staffs to work it out.

And not sure if the first act of a new B1G Commissioner would be expansion?

Why not? What better way to put your stamp on your new regime than by pulling in two more money-making schools to round out your west coast presence?

The B1G will want to expand more in the west, and it's when, not if. The question is, will the B1G be Oregon and UW's only option?

Of course not. But it will likely be their best option.

[azcat49]

Say a deal comes in at 30-33m per with a 60% streaming and 40% linear output. You then give unequal revenue sharing rights n the CFP to the pacific NW schools and unequal revenue on the NCAA basketball revenue to AZ. Does that keep the biggest dissenters in the fold?

[AzCatFan2]

The B1G needs a new Commissioner. I doubt they expand without one.

Why not? It’s the school presidents who sign off on the deals. They could easily tab five of them and their staffs to work it out.

And not sure if the first act of a new B1G Commissioner would be expansion?

Why not? What better way to put your stamp on your new regime than by pulling in two more money-making schools to round out your west coast presence?

The B1G will want to expand more in the west, and it's when, not if. The question is, will the B1G be Oregon and UW's only option?

Of course not. But it will likely be their best option.

Anything is possible. But it's the Commissioner that signs on the dotted line when it comes to expansion and GOR. I doubt an Acting Commissioner would sign such huge agreements. If things turn sour, it wouldn't be fair at all to the new guy. I know this is the B1G, and things rarely, if ever turn sour, but still, something this big requires to have a Commissioner.

As for expanding now, the B1G Presidents nixed the idea with Warren. The numbers didn't work out with adding Oregon and UW, as they wouldn't increase payouts. And at the time, I don't think UW and Oregon liked the idea of being added at a discount rate.

But as PAC negotiations continue to stall, and the PAC looks more and more inept, the PNW schools' attitude may be changing? It's also the media speculation and the fact that one day, the B1G will look to add travel partners to the LA schools.

[Merkin]

Thought I read where Oregon and UDub were willing to accept a lower payout for a period of time from the B1G.

[ChooChooCat]

Say a deal comes in at 30-33m per with a 60% streaming and 40% linear output. You then give unequal revenue sharing rights n the CFP to the pacific NW schools and unequal revenue on the NCAA basketball revenue to AZ. Does that keep the biggest dissenters in the fold?

It still ends in the same way, the league will break up. You can’t have unequal revenue and have a league.

[azcat49]

Thx Choo. I see the future as the Big 12 but it will still be sad to see this era end. Such ineptness and poor leadership.

That leadership should remember that the A in PAC doesn’t stand for academics