Conference Realignment

[RichardCranium]

Come to arizona and play Kansas, or go to ucla and slog through twice monthly 5-4day trips to snow and cold flyover country.

Kansas is snow and cold flyover country

[azgreg]

U Dub getting left out?

One source thinks so. I think we wait and see what ND does.

[CalStateTempe]

One trip every 2-3 season vs 5-6 weekends a BB season.

[ASUHATER!]

I can see Arizona, ASU, Utah and Colorado going to the big 12 and Oregon and UW/Stanford to the big 10. And UW/Stanford Cal, OSU and WSU getting left out and having to join some super sized mountain west

[PHXCATS]

Now that we are seeing what looks like fair and accurate revenue projections yes UW may get left out of the Big Ten. Stanford brings enough outside of revenue to make up their portion. UW doesn't.

The biggest question is are the Arizona schools plus CU and Utah worth 125M a year for the Big 12 to take us on

[dmjcat]

I can see Arizona, ASU, Utah and Colorado going to the big 12 and Oregon and UW/Stanford to the big 10. And UW/Stanford Cal, OSU and WSU getting left out and having to join some super sized mountain west

I can also see UW/UO not getting a B1G invite and instead going to the B12..........which then has two spots left to pick from among Utah/asu/ua/Col..........with the UA being the odd man out and nowhere to go but back to a glorified WAC/MWC.

I would rather see both UW/UO get picked up by the B1G. What we have here is a consolidation of CFB teams........with fewer power schools left over once this game of musical chairs ends. The UA needs a chair to sit down in. We are a long way from being in a good position.

[PHXCATS]

If U of A's addition of revenue is close to the projected payouts basketball and academics will help

UW culture and academics will help UW as well but only if it is close. I don't think UW is close revenue wise. Oregon is for sure though

[dmjcat]

If U of A's addition of revenue is close to the projected payouts basketball and academics will help

UW culture and academics will help UW as well but only if it is close. I don't think UW is close revenue wise. Oregon is for sure though

You are wrong. UDUB had $133M total revenue vs. $102M for the UA

https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges ... fe/sports/

https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges ... 20a%20loss.

Here's WSJ football revenue rankings from 2019........the UW is #19, the UA was #48

https://graphics.wsj.com/table/NCAA_2019

[RondaeShimmy]

I can see Arizona, ASU, Utah and Colorado going to the big 12 and Oregon and UW/Stanford to the big 10. And UW/Stanford Cal, OSU and WSU getting left out and having to join some super sized mountain west

I can also see UW/UO not getting a B1G invite and instead going to the B12..........which then has two spots left to pick from among Utah/asu/ua/Col..........with the UA being the odd man out and nowhere to go but back to a glorified WAC/MWC.

I would rather see both UW/UO get picked up by the B1G. What we have here is a consolidation of CFB teams........with fewer power schools left over once this game of musical chairs ends. The UA needs a chair to sit down in. We are a long way from being in a good position.

We're literally meeting with the big 12 tomorrow

In fact, we're more likely to leave the PAC first (w/ asu, Colorado and Utah) instead of Oregon and Washington, as they are waiting on ND

[dmjcat]

I can see Arizona, ASU, Utah and Colorado going to the big 12 and Oregon and UW/Stanford to the big 10. And UW/Stanford Cal, OSU and WSU getting left out and having to join some super sized mountain west

I can also see UW/UO not getting a B1G invite and instead going to the B12..........which then has two spots left to pick from among Utah/asu/ua/Col..........with the UA being the odd man out and nowhere to go but back to a glorified WAC/MWC.

I would rather see both UW/UO get picked up by the B1G. What we have here is a consolidation of CFB teams........with fewer power schools left over once this game of musical chairs ends. The UA needs a chair to sit down in. We are a long way from being in a good position.

We're literally meeting with the big 12 tomorrow

In fact, we're more likely to leave the PAC first (w/ asu, Colorado and Utah) instead of Oregon and Washington, as they are waiting on ND

You hope.

There is nothing preventing the Big12 from sitting tight and waiting to see if UO/UW fall into their lap. As of now its just a meeting.

[PHXCATS]

If U of A's addition of revenue is close to the projected payouts basketball and academics will help

UW culture and academics will help UW as well but only if it is close. I don't think UW is close revenue wise. Oregon is for sure though

You are wrong. UDUB had $133M total revenue vs. $102M for the UA

https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges ... fe/sports/

https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges ... 20a%20loss.

Here's WSJ football revenue rankings from 2019........the UW is #19, the UA was #48

https://graphics.wsj.com/table/NCAA_2019

1) I never compared UA revenue to UW revenue
2) Revenue produced for the conference is not the same as revenue production for the school

UW is going for a conference that will.pay out about 100M a year. UW will have to produce over that to be worth it for the Big Ten to take them o

UA is going for a conference that will pay out 35M a year.

Does UA bring the Big 12 close to 35M a year? That is the real and only quality that matters in this.

[AZCatGirl]

You hope.

There is nothing preventing the Big12 from sitting tight and waiting to see if UO/UW fall into their lap. As of now its just a meeting.

A meeting that is being hyped up so much because we're most likely moving to the Big 12 this week. You don't need to worry about us getting left out.

[U.P. Zona Fan]

As a basketball mostly only fan, I would sigh with relief if we joined the big12. No one would again say, "oh their conference is weak, not sure they should have been seeded that high, who did they play? UCLA, Oregon and a bunch of cupcakes."

[RondaeShimmy]

Kinda interesting but if the big 12 ends up w the 4 corner schools from the PAC, they're likely done expanding west and will most likely try to poach acc leftovers like Louisville, NC St, etc

[CalStateTempe]

A pod with lv, wvu, ncst, Cincinnati, and Pitt/cuss, would be fun from a bb standpoint

[CalStateTempe]

I hope arizona locks this up and jumps to the big12 this week.

Writing on the all w the pac12

You know it’s a matter of time till Oregon and furd get the call.

[CalStateTempe]

Also, if we are talking purely market share…what’s to stop big from taking cal?

[azgreg]

I'm starting to get an un-easy feeling about all this.

[ChooChooCat]

Also, if we are talking purely market share…what’s to stop big from taking cal?

They don't need both Furd and Cal and Cal is one step away from throwing their athletics department in the trash. Literally the only thing keeping them going is their debt on their football stadium.

[dmjcat]

I'm starting to get an un-easy feeling about all this.

I have had that same feeling since about 1 millisecond after the USC/UCLA departure broke.

My primary fear is that the B1G doesn't take UO/UW......and then the B12 does.

To get to 16 teams the B12 then has to pick 2 teams amongst UA/asu/Utah/Col. We may very well not be in the top 2 in that group.

[RondaeShimmy]

The Big 12 is involved in deep discussions to add multiple Pac-12 programs as a way to shore up its membership in the wake of the USC and UCLA defection to the Big Ten, sources tell CBS Sports. At least four teams are being considered with the potential for the Big 12 to add more as realignment continues to shake out.

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah were mentioned specifically as the teams being targeted by the Big 12, sources tell CBS Sports. There is also consideration of adding Oregon and Washington to make the Big 12 an 18-team league, the largest in the FBS.

Also

[Merkin]

Also, if we are talking purely market share…what’s to stop big from taking cal?

They don't need both Furd and Cal and Cal is one step away from throwing their athletics department in the trash. Literally the only thing keeping them going is their debt on their football stadium.

The Bay Area schools are the perfect example of the decline of college football attendance. Stanford Stadium once hosted the Super Bowl, and in 1935 set a then record attendance of 94,000 for the Big Game v. Cal. Normal capacity was 85,500. Capacity of the new stadium is 50,400. Now they can't even sell out any game, and that with students getting free attendance. They did their new stadium right, cost was only $90M.

Cal's new stadium cost $321M by comparison. Cal's capacity dropped from 81K to 62K, and likewise can't sell out.

[CalStateTempe]

Also, if we are talking purely market share…what’s to stop big from taking cal?

They don't need both Furd and Cal and Cal is one step away from throwing their athletics department in the trash. Literally the only thing keeping them going is their debt on their football stadium.

I don’t disagree, but Cal get you all of northern California including Central Valley and Sacramento.

Again talking from pure market share since that’s what anyone cares about these days

[CalStateTempe]

I'm starting to get an un-easy feeling about all this.

I have had that same feeling since about 1 millisecond after the USC/UCLA departure broke.

My primary fear is that the B1G doesn't take UO/UW......and then the B12 does.

To get to 16 teams the B12 then has to pick 2 teams amongst UA/asu/Utah/Col. We may very well not be in the top 2 in that group.

Are you always wet blanket or just on this message board?

[dmjcat]

I'm starting to get an un-easy feeling about all this.

I have had that same feeling since about 1 millisecond after the USC/UCLA departure broke.

My primary fear is that the B1G doesn't take UO/UW......and then the B12 does.

To get to 16 teams the B12 then has to pick 2 teams amongst UA/asu/Utah/Col. We may very well not be in the top 2 in that group.

Are you always wet blanket or just on this message board?

Not a wet blanket........but a realist.

If you look at UW/UO/asu/Utah/Col/UA and then consider TV markets and what revenue each football program generates the UA is NOT in the top 4. Thats not being a wet blanket. Its just being factual.

[Merkin]

Stolen from Facebook.

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah bring an annual average value (AAV) that at least matches the 12 members of the Big 12 set to remain with the league once Texas and Oklahoma leave in 2025.

[CalStateTempe]

When it’s right it’s right.


Sure Arizona’s 10/10, but overall lame gf just left, but look at that cutie across the diner, she’s fetching and has similar tastes/background/upbringing

[azcat49]

Even then, it may only be a temporary home. Many prognosticators expect in the coming years to see the Big Ten and SEC gobble up more programs to form two super conferences, anywhere from 32 to 48 teams, leaving all the others to pick up the scraps.

"You've got to be one of the upper levels of the Big 12 because I think they're going to be cannibalized in eight years and there's going to be 30 to 40 schools in probably two leagues. Maybe 20-team leagues or something like that," Hill said.

Sobering comments by a former Utah AD

[Alieberman]

I'd be so much more comfortable moving to the Big 12 if Oregon and Washington come along

[PHXCATS]

The name of the game is getting close to 40M a year in distribution one way or another. 40ish million is what UA was projected to get next tv round with USC and UCLA still in the conference

Big 18 with asu CU Utah Oregon ans Washington accomplishs that

[CalStateTempe]

If big 12 could be the 6-PAC that would be sweet.

[RondaeShimmy]

This guy was right about USC and UCLA to the big ten a long time ago and has some interesting tweets lately

[azgreg]

[dirtbags]

i'm a bill walton, love the pac, west coast / best coast kinda guy so this news really hurts. fuck.

if the pac-12 somehow manages to remain intact, i could see the presidents / chancellors deciding to go hard after UNLV and rice, since they might be the best fit with the whole athletics-academics mantra while perhaps helping to rebuild the conference's media footprint.

ideally, there would be a B1G-pac superconference merger. while the idea has been reportedly ruled-out by the big ten (and it might be a tough sell with the dilution of revenue sharing), the bigger, longer-term play is concentration of power between the b1g and sec, and ultimately running a megaconference independent of the ncaa - so anything is possible.


i also understand that a move to the big12 makes a lot of sense in the near-term, but let's not forget that the big 12 has been as much of a shitshow, and member schools like ku, baylor, ok state, etc. would jump to the b1g or sec in a hearbeat. then we'd be back in the same place we are now, only further away from home.


anyway, i totally agree with the underlying sentiment that college athletics totally sucks now with all the realignment volatility, media money, NIL BS, etc. - i hope this ultimately ends up betraying huge swaths of fans and the media pie shrinks to a tart. i could go on, but my sentiment has been summarized tidily in this piece: Here’s hoping this USC/UCLA-Big Ten merger careens off the track, crashes and burns

[dmjcat]

Arizona, ASU, Utah and Colorado were reported late last week to be leaning into a possible contingency escape to the Big 12 themselves, but I’m told by a high-ranking official at one of those universities to pump the brakes on that speculation.

“There is no meeting on the books for us with the Big 12,” the source said, “and George is kicking ass.”

[AzCatFan2]

When it comes to pecking orders, clearly Oregon and Washington are above Arizona. But as compared to Utah, Colorado, and ASu, Arizona offers a better chance to diversify the portfolio than the others. Our football revenue and eyeballs aren't that far behind ASu, Colorado, and Utah, but what Arizona has that they don't are consistently strong spring and summer athletics. While you aren't going to see Arizona football primetime in September, you aren't going to see too many primetime ASu or Colorado games either. Or Utah, despite their recent success. But come January and February, which school is your headliner for both men's and women's basketball? How about April or May, when the conference network is promoting a big baseball or softball series?

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

Football is king. But is there really much of a difference between Arizona and ASu football? No, and how often has both fan bases lamented that we've been confused for one-another.

If Oregon and UW come with us, Utah, Colorado, and ASu to the BIG 12, we should jump at the opportunity. But I don't see Oregon settling for the BIG 12. They have their eyes set on the BIG 10. I also wouldn't count out the SEC thinking they may need to follow the BIG 10 and add some west coast viewers. If there is going to be just two big conferences, the SEC needs to act soon to get what's best left in the west. And they could gobble up some of the better PAC programs left. And the SEC certainly understands the value of a school with marginal football but great basketball (Kentucky).

[dmjcat]

When it comes to pecking orders, clearly Oregon and Washington are above Arizona. But as compared to Utah, Colorado, and ASu, Arizona offers a better chance to diversify the portfolio than the others. Our football revenue and eyeballs aren't that far behind ASu, Colorado, and Utah, but what Arizona has that they don't are consistently strong spring and summer athletics. While you aren't going to see Arizona football primetime in September, you aren't going to see too many primetime ASu or Colorado games either. Or Utah, despite their recent success. But come January and February, which school is your headliner for both men's and women's basketball? How about April or May, when the conference network is promoting a big baseball or softball series?

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

Football is king. But is there really much of a difference between Arizona and ASu football? No, and how often has both fan bases lamented that we've been confused for one-another.

If Oregon and UW come with us, Utah, Colorado, and ASu to the BIG 12, we should jump at the opportunity. But I don't see Oregon settling for the BIG 12. They have their eyes set on the BIG 10. I also wouldn't count out the SEC thinking they may need to follow the BIG 10 and add some west coast viewers. If there is going to be just two big conferences, the SEC needs to act soon to get what's best left in the west. And they could gobble up some of the better PAC programs left. And the SEC certainly understands the value of a school with marginal football but great basketball (Kentucky).

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

The 100,00 eyeballs during football season, and its not even close. Football has 4x the revenue of basketball and more revenue than the next 35 sports combined.

[AzCatFan2]

When it comes to pecking orders, clearly Oregon and Washington are above Arizona. But as compared to Utah, Colorado, and ASu, Arizona offers a better chance to diversify the portfolio than the others. Our football revenue and eyeballs aren't that far behind ASu, Colorado, and Utah, but what Arizona has that they don't are consistently strong spring and summer athletics. While you aren't going to see Arizona football primetime in September, you aren't going to see too many primetime ASu or Colorado games either. Or Utah, despite their recent success. But come January and February, which school is your headliner for both men's and women's basketball? How about April or May, when the conference network is promoting a big baseball or softball series?

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

Football is king. But is there really much of a difference between Arizona and ASu football? No, and how often has both fan bases lamented that we've been confused for one-another.

If Oregon and UW come with us, Utah, Colorado, and ASu to the BIG 12, we should jump at the opportunity. But I don't see Oregon settling for the BIG 12. They have their eyes set on the BIG 10. I also wouldn't count out the SEC thinking they may need to follow the BIG 10 and add some west coast viewers. If there is going to be just two big conferences, the SEC needs to act soon to get what's best left in the west. And they could gobble up some of the better PAC programs left. And the SEC certainly understands the value of a school with marginal football but great basketball (Kentucky).

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

The 100,00 eyeballs during football season, and its not even close. Football has 4x the revenue of basketball and more revenue than the next 35 sports combined.

If the number was 500,000 eyeballs, you are correct. But there's good reason why ASu and Arizona games are the last ones selected, and are often the 7:30 pm or 8:00 pm starts. The extra ad revenue a network may generate if there are 12,000 eyeballs on the last game of the evening on Conference Network TV is minimal. ESPN and Fox certainly don't care. By the time our games kickoff, they have already made their money.

But January through June, these extra eyeballs have some value. The few extra eyeballs during a football game barely moves the needle, because again, the big games of the day are the money makers. But football season is only 4 months out of the year, and TV networks need 12 months of content. And need to sell advertising to make money 12 months out of the year. So ask yourself, what's more valuable to ESPN. 10,000 extra eyeballs for a football game they aren't likely going to broadcast, and if they do, it would be on ESPNU, last time slot of the day? Or an extra 10,000 eyeballs for a marquee basketball game in February, broadcast in a prime time slot?

[dmjcat]

When it comes to pecking orders, clearly Oregon and Washington are above Arizona. But as compared to Utah, Colorado, and ASu, Arizona offers a better chance to diversify the portfolio than the others. Our football revenue and eyeballs aren't that far behind ASu, Colorado, and Utah, but what Arizona has that they don't are consistently strong spring and summer athletics. While you aren't going to see Arizona football primetime in September, you aren't going to see too many primetime ASu or Colorado games either. Or Utah, despite their recent success. But come January and February, which school is your headliner for both men's and women's basketball? How about April or May, when the conference network is promoting a big baseball or softball series?

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

Football is king. But is there really much of a difference between Arizona and ASu football? No, and how often has both fan bases lamented that we've been confused for one-another.

If Oregon and UW come with us, Utah, Colorado, and ASu to the BIG 12, we should jump at the opportunity. But I don't see Oregon settling for the BIG 12. They have their eyes set on the BIG 10. I also wouldn't count out the SEC thinking they may need to follow the BIG 10 and add some west coast viewers. If there is going to be just two big conferences, the SEC needs to act soon to get what's best left in the west. And they could gobble up some of the better PAC programs left. And the SEC certainly understands the value of a school with marginal football but great basketball (Kentucky).

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

The 100,00 eyeballs during football season, and its not even close. Football has 4x the revenue of basketball and more revenue than the next 35 sports combined.

If the number was 500,000 eyeballs, you are correct. But there's good reason why ASu and Arizona games are the last ones selected, and are often the 7:30 pm or 8:00 pm starts. The extra ad revenue a network may generate if there are 12,000 eyeballs on the last game of the evening on Conference Network TV is minimal. ESPN and Fox certainly don't care. By the time our games kickoff, they have already made their money.

But January through June, these extra eyeballs have some value. The few extra eyeballs during a football game barely moves the needle, because again, the big games of the day are the money makers. But football season is only 4 months out of the year, and TV networks need 12 months of content. And need to sell advertising to make money 12 months out of the year. So ask yourself, what's more valuable to ESPN. 10,000 extra eyeballs for a football game they aren't likely going to broadcast, and if they do, it would be on ESPNU, last time slot of the day? Or an extra 10,000 eyeballs for a marquee basketball game in February, broadcast in a prime time slot?

You keep bringing up the eyeballs but don't seem to understand the economics. Football is king.....the vast majority of the revenue is from football and thats why nobody (including ESPN/Fox/CBS, etc.) gives a rats ass about all of the spring sports. The football revenue is whats driving the conference realignments....NOT eyeballs in spring.

[AzCatFan2]

When it comes to pecking orders, clearly Oregon and Washington are above Arizona. But as compared to Utah, Colorado, and ASu, Arizona offers a better chance to diversify the portfolio than the others. Our football revenue and eyeballs aren't that far behind ASu, Colorado, and Utah, but what Arizona has that they don't are consistently strong spring and summer athletics. While you aren't going to see Arizona football primetime in September, you aren't going to see too many primetime ASu or Colorado games either. Or Utah, despite their recent success. But come January and February, which school is your headliner for both men's and women's basketball? How about April or May, when the conference network is promoting a big baseball or softball series?

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

Football is king. But is there really much of a difference between Arizona and ASu football? No, and how often has both fan bases lamented that we've been confused for one-another.

If Oregon and UW come with us, Utah, Colorado, and ASu to the BIG 12, we should jump at the opportunity. But I don't see Oregon settling for the BIG 12. They have their eyes set on the BIG 10. I also wouldn't count out the SEC thinking they may need to follow the BIG 10 and add some west coast viewers. If there is going to be just two big conferences, the SEC needs to act soon to get what's best left in the west. And they could gobble up some of the better PAC programs left. And the SEC certainly understands the value of a school with marginal football but great basketball (Kentucky).

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

The 100,00 eyeballs during football season, and its not even close. Football has 4x the revenue of basketball and more revenue than the next 35 sports combined.

If the number was 500,000 eyeballs, you are correct. But there's good reason why ASu and Arizona games are the last ones selected, and are often the 7:30 pm or 8:00 pm starts. The extra ad revenue a network may generate if there are 12,000 eyeballs on the last game of the evening on Conference Network TV is minimal. ESPN and Fox certainly don't care. By the time our games kickoff, they have already made their money.

But January through June, these extra eyeballs have some value. The few extra eyeballs during a football game barely moves the needle, because again, the big games of the day are the money makers. But football season is only 4 months out of the year, and TV networks need 12 months of content. And need to sell advertising to make money 12 months out of the year. So ask yourself, what's more valuable to ESPN. 10,000 extra eyeballs for a football game they aren't likely going to broadcast, and if they do, it would be on ESPNU, last time slot of the day? Or an extra 10,000 eyeballs for a marquee basketball game in February, broadcast in a prime time slot?

You keep bringing up the eyeballs but don't seem to understand the economics. Football is king.....the vast majority of the revenue is from football and thats why nobody (including ESPN/Fox/CBS, etc.) gives a rats ass about all of the spring sports. The football revenue is whats driving the conference realignments....NOT eyeballs in spring.

Football is king. And when it comes to football, programs like Arizona, ASu, Colorado, and Utah are all in the same boat. It's why we aren't first choices when it comes to conference expansion. But don't discount the other sports in the spring. Kentucky is a valuable member of the SEC, despite having a poor to middling football team for decades. Why? Because Kentucky makes the SEC relevant in the Spring. And ESPN spends plenty of money promoting Kentucky basketball once the calendar changes years. If ESPN didn't expect a ROI, do they spend all that money promoting big time college basketball programs?

Arizona is part of the football also-rans. A network isn't going to spend big money on promoting Arizona vs. California football. Just like they aren't going to promote Cal-Colorado. No ROI. Sure, if a conference picks Colorado over Arizona, they may get a few extra eyeballs in the fall on ESPNU, 11:00 PM EST start. But that's not prime TV real estate, and not a big money maker for the TV network.

But 4:00 PM EST Saturday in February, and Arizona Basketball is playing, and we're top 10 like we were last year, that's prime TV real estate, and will get plenty of promotion. Again, it comes down to which has more value to a TV network. Last game of the day, on ESPNU or Conference Network, that starts when most of the East coast is in bed, and the biggest games of the day are long over? Or a Game of the Week basketball game that is being promoted as the biggest game of the week in February. Following the marketing dollars. The also-ran football game gets no promo time, except for maybe listed on a slate of games at the bottom. The basketball game? Gets plenty of promotion.

Football is king, and compare Arizona with USC or Oregon, and what they bring on Saturday in the Fall far outpaces anything Arizona has to offer. But compare us with ASu or Colorado? The football differences are minimal. But the spring difference are not, and they are in our favor.

[dmjcat]

When it comes to pecking orders, clearly Oregon and Washington are above Arizona. But as compared to Utah, Colorado, and ASu, Arizona offers a better chance to diversify the portfolio than the others. Our football revenue and eyeballs aren't that far behind ASu, Colorado, and Utah, but what Arizona has that they don't are consistently strong spring and summer athletics. While you aren't going to see Arizona football primetime in September, you aren't going to see too many primetime ASu or Colorado games either. Or Utah, despite their recent success. But come January and February, which school is your headliner for both men's and women's basketball? How about April or May, when the conference network is promoting a big baseball or softball series?

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

Football is king. But is there really much of a difference between Arizona and ASu football? No, and how often has both fan bases lamented that we've been confused for one-another.

If Oregon and UW come with us, Utah, Colorado, and ASu to the BIG 12, we should jump at the opportunity. But I don't see Oregon settling for the BIG 12. They have their eyes set on the BIG 10. I also wouldn't count out the SEC thinking they may need to follow the BIG 10 and add some west coast viewers. If there is going to be just two big conferences, the SEC needs to act soon to get what's best left in the west. And they could gobble up some of the better PAC programs left. And the SEC certainly understands the value of a school with marginal football but great basketball (Kentucky).

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

The 100,00 eyeballs during football season, and its not even close. Football has 4x the revenue of basketball and more revenue than the next 35 sports combined.

If the number was 500,000 eyeballs, you are correct. But there's good reason why ASu and Arizona games are the last ones selected, and are often the 7:30 pm or 8:00 pm starts. The extra ad revenue a network may generate if there are 12,000 eyeballs on the last game of the evening on Conference Network TV is minimal. ESPN and Fox certainly don't care. By the time our games kickoff, they have already made their money.

But January through June, these extra eyeballs have some value. The few extra eyeballs during a football game barely moves the needle, because again, the big games of the day are the money makers. But football season is only 4 months out of the year, and TV networks need 12 months of content. And need to sell advertising to make money 12 months out of the year. So ask yourself, what's more valuable to ESPN. 10,000 extra eyeballs for a football game they aren't likely going to broadcast, and if they do, it would be on ESPNU, last time slot of the day? Or an extra 10,000 eyeballs for a marquee basketball game in February, broadcast in a prime time slot?

You keep bringing up the eyeballs but don't seem to understand the economics. Football is king.....the vast majority of the revenue is from football and thats why nobody (including ESPN/Fox/CBS, etc.) gives a rats ass about all of the spring sports. The football revenue is whats driving the conference realignments....NOT eyeballs in spring.

Football is king. And when it comes to football, programs like Arizona, ASu, Colorado, and Utah are all in the same boat. It's why we aren't first choices when it comes to conference expansion. But don't discount the other sports in the spring. Kentucky is a valuable member of the SEC, despite having a poor to middling football team for decades. Why? Because Kentucky makes the SEC relevant in the Spring. And ESPN spends plenty of money promoting Kentucky basketball once the calendar changes years. If ESPN didn't expect a ROI, do they spend all that money promoting big time college basketball programs?

Arizona is part of the football also-rans. A network isn't going to spend big money on promoting Arizona vs. California football. Just like they aren't going to promote Cal-Colorado. No ROI. Sure, if a conference picks Colorado over Arizona, they may get a few extra eyeballs in the fall on ESPNU, 11:00 PM EST start. But that's not prime TV real estate, and not a big money maker for the TV network.

But 4:00 PM EST Saturday in February, and Arizona Basketball is playing, and we're top 10 like we were last year, that's prime TV real estate, and will get plenty of promotion. Again, it comes down to which has more value to a TV network. Last game of the day, on ESPNU or Conference Network, that starts when most of the East coast is in bed, and the biggest games of the day are long over? Or a Game of the Week basketball game that is being promoted as the biggest game of the week in February. Following the marketing dollars. The also-ran football game gets no promo time, except for maybe listed on a slate of games at the bottom. The basketball game? Gets plenty of promotion.

Football is king, and compare Arizona with USC or Oregon, and what they bring on Saturday in the Fall far outpaces anything Arizona has to offer. But compare us with ASu or Colorado? The football differences are minimal. But the spring difference are not, and they are in our favor.

The differences in spring sports revenue are far more "minimal" than the football differences. Again, football accounts for around 80% of total revenue and thats why AZ is ranked below most of the teams mentioned........and thats not my opinion. Its the opinion of the media outlets (Fox/ESPN) that are driving the re-alignment.

[RondaeShimmy]

[AzCatFan2]

It comes down to what's more valuable to a conference? Maybe 100,000 viewers in October and November, when overall viewership is already at its peak? Or an extra 100,000 eyeballs once the calendar flips years, especially at the end of the academic calendar year, when viewership dips.

The 100,00 eyeballs during football season, and its not even close. Football has 4x the revenue of basketball and more revenue than the next 35 sports combined.

If the number was 500,000 eyeballs, you are correct. But there's good reason why ASu and Arizona games are the last ones selected, and are often the 7:30 pm or 8:00 pm starts. The extra ad revenue a network may generate if there are 12,000 eyeballs on the last game of the evening on Conference Network TV is minimal. ESPN and Fox certainly don't care. By the time our games kickoff, they have already made their money.

But January through June, these extra eyeballs have some value. The few extra eyeballs during a football game barely moves the needle, because again, the big games of the day are the money makers. But football season is only 4 months out of the year, and TV networks need 12 months of content. And need to sell advertising to make money 12 months out of the year. So ask yourself, what's more valuable to ESPN. 10,000 extra eyeballs for a football game they aren't likely going to broadcast, and if they do, it would be on ESPNU, last time slot of the day? Or an extra 10,000 eyeballs for a marquee basketball game in February, broadcast in a prime time slot?

You keep bringing up the eyeballs but don't seem to understand the economics. Football is king.....the vast majority of the revenue is from football and thats why nobody (including ESPN/Fox/CBS, etc.) gives a rats ass about all of the spring sports. The football revenue is whats driving the conference realignments....NOT eyeballs in spring.

Football is king. And when it comes to football, programs like Arizona, ASu, Colorado, and Utah are all in the same boat. It's why we aren't first choices when it comes to conference expansion. But don't discount the other sports in the spring. Kentucky is a valuable member of the SEC, despite having a poor to middling football team for decades. Why? Because Kentucky makes the SEC relevant in the Spring. And ESPN spends plenty of money promoting Kentucky basketball once the calendar changes years. If ESPN didn't expect a ROI, do they spend all that money promoting big time college basketball programs?

Arizona is part of the football also-rans. A network isn't going to spend big money on promoting Arizona vs. California football. Just like they aren't going to promote Cal-Colorado. No ROI. Sure, if a conference picks Colorado over Arizona, they may get a few extra eyeballs in the fall on ESPNU, 11:00 PM EST start. But that's not prime TV real estate, and not a big money maker for the TV network.

But 4:00 PM EST Saturday in February, and Arizona Basketball is playing, and we're top 10 like we were last year, that's prime TV real estate, and will get plenty of promotion. Again, it comes down to which has more value to a TV network. Last game of the day, on ESPNU or Conference Network, that starts when most of the East coast is in bed, and the biggest games of the day are long over? Or a Game of the Week basketball game that is being promoted as the biggest game of the week in February. Following the marketing dollars. The also-ran football game gets no promo time, except for maybe listed on a slate of games at the bottom. The basketball game? Gets plenty of promotion.

Football is king, and compare Arizona with USC or Oregon, and what they bring on Saturday in the Fall far outpaces anything Arizona has to offer. But compare us with ASu or Colorado? The football differences are minimal. But the spring difference are not, and they are in our favor.

The differences in spring sports revenue are far more "minimal" than the football differences. Again, football accounts for around 80% of total revenue and thats why AZ is ranked below most of the teams mentioned........and thats not my opinion. Its the opinion of the media outlets (Fox/ESPN) that are driving the re-alignment.

Sure. Compare Arizona with any of the top 35 revenue generating programs in football and we can't offer anything in the spring to compare. But the next 35 football programs? In terms of revenue and eyeballs, not much of a difference. So if you're ESPN, and all the top 35 football programs are taken up in long-term contracts, who has more value to you? The 45th best football team, with spring sports to match? Or the 55th best football program, but top 10 in all springs sports? The answer is the latter.

You are not spending significant time and money promoting the 45th best football team over the 55th. Both teams are empty calories, and the meat and potatoes are the top programs. The only way the 45th or 55th best team gets prime tv in the fall is if they are playing one of the big guys. Football may be 80%, but programs 45 and 55 don't have enough the pie to significantly move the needle.

But a school that is top 10 in spring sports to fill out a conference has some value to the TV networks. This is a school the network can ignore in the fall, but promote the hell out of in the spring. Versus say ASu. Think they will ever get top billing in football? Or in the spring?

[dmjcat]

If the number was 500,000 eyeballs, you are correct. But there's good reason why ASu and Arizona games are the last ones selected, and are often the 7:30 pm or 8:00 pm starts. The extra ad revenue a network may generate if there are 12,000 eyeballs on the last game of the evening on Conference Network TV is minimal. ESPN and Fox certainly don't care. By the time our games kickoff, they have already made their money.

But January through June, these extra eyeballs have some value. The few extra eyeballs during a football game barely moves the needle, because again, the big games of the day are the money makers. But football season is only 4 months out of the year, and TV networks need 12 months of content. And need to sell advertising to make money 12 months out of the year. So ask yourself, what's more valuable to ESPN. 10,000 extra eyeballs for a football game they aren't likely going to broadcast, and if they do, it would be on ESPNU, last time slot of the day? Or an extra 10,000 eyeballs for a marquee basketball game in February, broadcast in a prime time slot?

You keep bringing up the eyeballs but don't seem to understand the economics. Football is king.....the vast majority of the revenue is from football and thats why nobody (including ESPN/Fox/CBS, etc.) gives a rats ass about all of the spring sports. The football revenue is whats driving the conference realignments....NOT eyeballs in spring.

Football is king. And when it comes to football, programs like Arizona, ASu, Colorado, and Utah are all in the same boat. It's why we aren't first choices when it comes to conference expansion. But don't discount the other sports in the spring. Kentucky is a valuable member of the SEC, despite having a poor to middling football team for decades. Why? Because Kentucky makes the SEC relevant in the Spring. And ESPN spends plenty of money promoting Kentucky basketball once the calendar changes years. If ESPN didn't expect a ROI, do they spend all that money promoting big time college basketball programs?

Arizona is part of the football also-rans. A network isn't going to spend big money on promoting Arizona vs. California football. Just like they aren't going to promote Cal-Colorado. No ROI. Sure, if a conference picks Colorado over Arizona, they may get a few extra eyeballs in the fall on ESPNU, 11:00 PM EST start. But that's not prime TV real estate, and not a big money maker for the TV network.

But 4:00 PM EST Saturday in February, and Arizona Basketball is playing, and we're top 10 like we were last year, that's prime TV real estate, and will get plenty of promotion. Again, it comes down to which has more value to a TV network. Last game of the day, on ESPNU or Conference Network, that starts when most of the East coast is in bed, and the biggest games of the day are long over? Or a Game of the Week basketball game that is being promoted as the biggest game of the week in February. Following the marketing dollars. The also-ran football game gets no promo time, except for maybe listed on a slate of games at the bottom. The basketball game? Gets plenty of promotion.

Football is king, and compare Arizona with USC or Oregon, and what they bring on Saturday in the Fall far outpaces anything Arizona has to offer. But compare us with ASu or Colorado? The football differences are minimal. But the spring difference are not, and they are in our favor.

The differences in spring sports revenue are far more "minimal" than the football differences. Again, football accounts for around 80% of total revenue and thats why AZ is ranked below most of the teams mentioned........and thats not my opinion. Its the opinion of the media outlets (Fox/ESPN) that are driving the re-alignment.

Sure. Compare Arizona with any of the top 35 revenue generating programs in football and we can't offer anything in the spring to compare. But the next 35 football programs? In terms of revenue and eyeballs, not much of a difference. So if you're ESPN, and all the top 35 football programs are taken up in long-term contracts, who has more value to you? The 45th best football team, with spring sports to match? Or the 55th best football program, but top 10 in all springs sports? The answer is the latter.

You are not spending significant time and money promoting the 45th best football team over the 55th. Both teams are empty calories, and the meat and potatoes are the top programs. The only way the 45th or 55th best team gets prime tv in the fall is if they are playing one of the big guys. Football may be 80%, but programs 45 and 55 don't have enough the pie to significantly move the needle.

But a school that is top 10 in spring sports to fill out a conference has some value to the TV networks. This is a school the network can ignore in the fall, but promote the hell out of in the spring. Versus say ASu. Think they will ever get top billing in football? Or in the spring?

ESPN/Fox/Networks don't agree with you.

[Irish27]

I wonder if it would be better if the Pac-12 asked schools from the Big-12 to join? This way they don't have to add the far-away schools like Central Florida, West Virginia and Cincinnati. It might also keep the Rose Bowl.

[GlobalCat]

I wonder how the rest of the Big 10 reacts when U$C tries to sell the conference's naming right to the highest bidder without informing the other teams.

[SabinoDrifter]

The value of college basketball from January 1 through February 15 has diminished significantly with the expansion of the NFL playoffs. These playoff games get monster numbers and the ratings for CBB games fall off a cliff between the Super Bowl and March Madness.

[AzCatFan2]

You keep bringing up the eyeballs but don't seem to understand the economics. Football is king.....the vast majority of the revenue is from football and thats why nobody (including ESPN/Fox/CBS, etc.) gives a rats ass about all of the spring sports. The football revenue is whats driving the conference realignments....NOT eyeballs in spring.

Football is king. And when it comes to football, programs like Arizona, ASu, Colorado, and Utah are all in the same boat. It's why we aren't first choices when it comes to conference expansion. But don't discount the other sports in the spring. Kentucky is a valuable member of the SEC, despite having a poor to middling football team for decades. Why? Because Kentucky makes the SEC relevant in the Spring. And ESPN spends plenty of money promoting Kentucky basketball once the calendar changes years. If ESPN didn't expect a ROI, do they spend all that money promoting big time college basketball programs?

Arizona is part of the football also-rans. A network isn't going to spend big money on promoting Arizona vs. California football. Just like they aren't going to promote Cal-Colorado. No ROI. Sure, if a conference picks Colorado over Arizona, they may get a few extra eyeballs in the fall on ESPNU, 11:00 PM EST start. But that's not prime TV real estate, and not a big money maker for the TV network.

But 4:00 PM EST Saturday in February, and Arizona Basketball is playing, and we're top 10 like we were last year, that's prime TV real estate, and will get plenty of promotion. Again, it comes down to which has more value to a TV network. Last game of the day, on ESPNU or Conference Network, that starts when most of the East coast is in bed, and the biggest games of the day are long over? Or a Game of the Week basketball game that is being promoted as the biggest game of the week in February. Following the marketing dollars. The also-ran football game gets no promo time, except for maybe listed on a slate of games at the bottom. The basketball game? Gets plenty of promotion.

Football is king, and compare Arizona with USC or Oregon, and what they bring on Saturday in the Fall far outpaces anything Arizona has to offer. But compare us with ASu or Colorado? The football differences are minimal. But the spring difference are not, and they are in our favor.

The differences in spring sports revenue are far more "minimal" than the football differences. Again, football accounts for around 80% of total revenue and thats why AZ is ranked below most of the teams mentioned........and thats not my opinion. Its the opinion of the media outlets (Fox/ESPN) that are driving the re-alignment.

Sure. Compare Arizona with any of the top 35 revenue generating programs in football and we can't offer anything in the spring to compare. But the next 35 football programs? In terms of revenue and eyeballs, not much of a difference. So if you're ESPN, and all the top 35 football programs are taken up in long-term contracts, who has more value to you? The 45th best football team, with spring sports to match? Or the 55th best football program, but top 10 in all springs sports? The answer is the latter.

You are not spending significant time and money promoting the 45th best football team over the 55th. Both teams are empty calories, and the meat and potatoes are the top programs. The only way the 45th or 55th best team gets prime tv in the fall is if they are playing one of the big guys. Football may be 80%, but programs 45 and 55 don't have enough the pie to significantly move the needle.

But a school that is top 10 in spring sports to fill out a conference has some value to the TV networks. This is a school the network can ignore in the fall, but promote the hell out of in the spring. Versus say ASu. Think they will ever get top billing in football? Or in the spring?

ESPN/Fox/Networks don't agree with you.

Actually, they do. Which cost more for a 30 second commercial. A 11:00 PM Eastern spot on ESPNU in the Fall? Or a 4:00 PM Eastern spot on ESPN in the Spring?

The first round of expansions have involved the top tiers in football. They are most valuable. The football also-rans will be lumped into the next group. And Arizona has a lot to offer, because our percentage we can garner from the 20% for spring sports is more valuable than the miniscule percentages of the 80% schools like Arizona and Colorado have when it comes to football.

[PHXCATS]

Football is king. And when it comes to football, programs like Arizona, ASu, Colorado, and Utah are all in the same boat. It's why we aren't first choices when it comes to conference expansion. But don't discount the other sports in the spring. Kentucky is a valuable member of the SEC, despite having a poor to middling football team for decades. Why? Because Kentucky makes the SEC relevant in the Spring. And ESPN spends plenty of money promoting Kentucky basketball once the calendar changes years. If ESPN didn't expect a ROI, do they spend all that money promoting big time college basketball programs?

Arizona is part of the football also-rans. A network isn't going to spend big money on promoting Arizona vs. California football. Just like they aren't going to promote Cal-Colorado. No ROI. Sure, if a conference picks Colorado over Arizona, they may get a few extra eyeballs in the fall on ESPNU, 11:00 PM EST start. But that's not prime TV real estate, and not a big money maker for the TV network.

But 4:00 PM EST Saturday in February, and Arizona Basketball is playing, and we're top 10 like we were last year, that's prime TV real estate, and will get plenty of promotion. Again, it comes down to which has more value to a TV network. Last game of the day, on ESPNU or Conference Network, that starts when most of the East coast is in bed, and the biggest games of the day are long over? Or a Game of the Week basketball game that is being promoted as the biggest game of the week in February. Following the marketing dollars. The also-ran football game gets no promo time, except for maybe listed on a slate of games at the bottom. The basketball game? Gets plenty of promotion.

Football is king, and compare Arizona with USC or Oregon, and what they bring on Saturday in the Fall far outpaces anything Arizona has to offer. But compare us with ASu or Colorado? The football differences are minimal. But the spring difference are not, and they are in our favor.

The differences in spring sports revenue are far more "minimal" than the football differences. Again, football accounts for around 80% of total revenue and thats why AZ is ranked below most of the teams mentioned........and thats not my opinion. Its the opinion of the media outlets (Fox/ESPN) that are driving the re-alignment.

Sure. Compare Arizona with any of the top 35 revenue generating programs in football and we can't offer anything in the spring to compare. But the next 35 football programs? In terms of revenue and eyeballs, not much of a difference. So if you're ESPN, and all the top 35 football programs are taken up in long-term contracts, who has more value to you? The 45th best football team, with spring sports to match? Or the 55th best football program, but top 10 in all springs sports? The answer is the latter.

You are not spending significant time and money promoting the 45th best football team over the 55th. Both teams are empty calories, and the meat and potatoes are the top programs. The only way the 45th or 55th best team gets prime tv in the fall is if they are playing one of the big guys. Football may be 80%, but programs 45 and 55 don't have enough the pie to significantly move the needle.

But a school that is top 10 in spring sports to fill out a conference has some value to the TV networks. This is a school the network can ignore in the fall, but promote the hell out of in the spring. Versus say ASu. Think they will ever get top billing in football? Or in the spring?

ESPN/Fox/Networks don't agree with you.

Actually, they do. Which cost more for a 30 second commercial. A 11:00 PM Eastern spot on ESPNU in the Fall? Or a 4:00 PM Eastern spot on ESPN in the Spring?

The first round of expansions have involved the top tiers in football. They are most valuable. The football also-rans will be lumped into the next group. And Arizona has a lot to offer, because our percentage we can garner from the 20% for spring sports is more valuable than the miniscule percentages of the 80% schools like Arizona and Colorado have when it comes to football.

What is the average viewership of U of A softball in the regular season on espn? How many millions of people?

[dmjcat]

Interesting.........multiple credible PAC12 sources are saying the Big12 meeting with the 4 corner schools is blatantly false. Someone is full of crap....wonder who?