Conference Realignment

[KillerKlown]

The more I read and hear about this, I get the sense that the remaining 10 will band together and that they will sign a short term deal.

It only makes sense, because this is the dumbest group of University Presidents ever collected in history, so naturally all of them would do something that would only benefit Oregon, Washington, and maybe Stanford. I'm so proud to continue on with this legacy of a conference that hasn't accomplished anything of note in a worthwhile sport in roughly two decades. Boy it'll sure be fun to be the Gonzaga of the Pac-10, I can't wait.

If the 10 PAC schools are more valuable than the BIG 12 minus OU and Texas, and the short term PAC contract is worth more than anything the BIG 12 can get, how is staying in the PAC only beneficial to UW and Oregon?

And if the SEC/ESPN decide to expand west, they will take more than UW and Oregon. The other schools that go would certainly benefit.

And if the SEC doesn't expand west, and UW and Oregon end up in the B1G, the BIG 12 will still be there for us.

There are three landing spots for Oregon and UW. If they go to the B1G, we go BIG 12. If they stay in the PAC, we stay with them. If they go SEC, if we're lucky, we go with them. No luck, we land in the BIG 12. What is truly dumb would be going to the BIG 12 now. We would make less money there short term versus a PAC contract, and would be stuck there should the SEC decide to expand west.

Jesus Fucking Christ. There you go again with rainbows and lollipops talking about the SEC expanding west. Just stop and get some help.

A short term commitment for maybe a little more money to help Oregon/UW's situation is not good for Arizona or any other school not named Oregon State or Wazzu. Stop pretending it is. Go away now.

Please explain why more money short term to stay with the PAC before likely ending up in the BIG 12 is worse for Arizona than taking less money to go to the BIG 12 now? Jesus fucking Christ, there's no logic to this decision.

If the B1G doesn't expand more, and leaves the LA schools on an island, we stay with the PAC and make more money than leaving for the BIG 12. But the B1G will expand more.

If the B1G and FOX become the big winner in the west, and grab Oregon and UW, then the BIG 12 becomes our best option.

If ESPN doesn't want to see USC, UCLA, Stanford, Oregon, and UW all ON FOX, and the B1G is expanding west, ESPN's only option is an SEC Pacific pod. We get an invite, great. If not, then again, the BIG 12 is our best option.

Just saying JFC this is stupid, without any explanation or showing flaws in the logic is a poor argument. There are good reasons why all other PAC schools see fleeing to the BIG 12 now as a silly decision. We can make more on our own, and if/when the PAC does end, the BIG 12 will still be there as a backup plan.

You know what has no logic? The SEC adding Colorado, Boise St and Fresno St to their conference. And for the fact that you think a good idea involves luck and miracles.

[azcat49]

It’s just a matter of time before Oregon and Washington get that invite. When that happens the conference is toast.

I have no idea how this conference survives long term? It seems we would go if we had a partner but no one seems to want yo finish off the conference.

It seems the B1G not has stopped its west coast invite’s for the sane reason. They would love yo see the Big 12 flip a few corner schools to make them the black hat outlaw.

I do wonder who the SEC will offer. They will need some western representation and it would seem that the Phoenix/ AZ market could be appealing

[PHXCATS]

There are zero schools that benefit the SEC west of the Mississippi anymore. It makes zero sense for them to expand that direction. The only schools the SEC will consider that aren't in the B1G are UNC, Clemson, Miami, Florida St, Notre Dame and maybe Virgina. No other school makes sense for them financially

[PHXCATS]

It’s just a matter of time before Oregon and Washington get that invite. When that happens the conference is toast.

I have no idea how this conference survives long term? It seems we would go if we had a partner but no one seems to want yo finish off the conference.

It seems the B1G not has stopped its west coast invite’s for the sane reason. They would love yo see the Big 12 flip a few corner schools to make them the black hat outlaw.

I do wonder who the SEC will offer. They will need some western representation and it would seem that the Phoenix/ AZ market could be appealing

Sorry asu and UA don't drive 30% of what every other SEC school does not named Vanderbilt

Oregon and Washington will only get invites to the Big Ten at a smaller percentage

[AzCatFan2]

It only makes sense, because this is the dumbest group of University Presidents ever collected in history, so naturally all of them would do something that would only benefit Oregon, Washington, and maybe Stanford. I'm so proud to continue on with this legacy of a conference that hasn't accomplished anything of note in a worthwhile sport in roughly two decades. Boy it'll sure be fun to be the Gonzaga of the Pac-10, I can't wait.

If the 10 PAC schools are more valuable than the BIG 12 minus OU and Texas, and the short term PAC contract is worth more than anything the BIG 12 can get, how is staying in the PAC only beneficial to UW and Oregon?

And if the SEC/ESPN decide to expand west, they will take more than UW and Oregon. The other schools that go would certainly benefit.

And if the SEC doesn't expand west, and UW and Oregon end up in the B1G, the BIG 12 will still be there for us.

There are three landing spots for Oregon and UW. If they go to the B1G, we go BIG 12. If they stay in the PAC, we stay with them. If they go SEC, if we're lucky, we go with them. No luck, we land in the BIG 12. What is truly dumb would be going to the BIG 12 now. We would make less money there short term versus a PAC contract, and would be stuck there should the SEC decide to expand west.

Jesus Fucking Christ. There you go again with rainbows and lollipops talking about the SEC expanding west. Just stop and get some help.

A short term commitment for maybe a little more money to help Oregon/UW's situation is not good for Arizona or any other school not named Oregon State or Wazzu. Stop pretending it is. Go away now.

Please explain why more money short term to stay with the PAC before likely ending up in the BIG 12 is worse for Arizona than taking less money to go to the BIG 12 now? Jesus fucking Christ, there's no logic to this decision.

If the B1G doesn't expand more, and leaves the LA schools on an island, we stay with the PAC and make more money than leaving for the BIG 12. But the B1G will expand more.

If the B1G and FOX become the big winner in the west, and grab Oregon and UW, then the BIG 12 becomes our best option.

If ESPN doesn't want to see USC, UCLA, Stanford, Oregon, and UW all ON FOX, and the B1G is expanding west, ESPN's only option is an SEC Pacific pod. We get an invite, great. If not, then again, the BIG 12 is our best option.

Just saying JFC this is stupid, without any explanation or showing flaws in the logic is a poor argument. There are good reasons why all other PAC schools see fleeing to the BIG 12 now as a silly decision. We can make more on our own, and if/when the PAC does end, the BIG 12 will still be there as a backup plan.

You know what has no logic? The SEC adding Colorado, Boise St and Fresno St to their conference. And for the fact that you think a good idea involves luck and miracles.

The SEC and B1G have the same top schools left out west. Stanford, Oregon, and Washington. The B1G will only invite AAU schools, but the SEC doesn't care. If the B1G fills in their west coast pod with Stanford, CAL, Utah, and Colorado, the SEC gets Oregon, Washington, and the Arizona schools. If the SEC wants 6 out west, who is in top of the list then? Wazzu? Oregon State? Do you put them ahead of SDSU and Boise St?

Remember, the B1G would take Oregon and UW over Utah and Colorado. So Utah and Colorado only go B1G if Oregon and UW aren't available.

And luck and miracles aren't usually a good plan. But when you have a solid plan B in your pocket, why not wish for a miracle when you have time? Oregon and UW aren't ending up in the BIG 12. Neither are top ACC schools. Joining the BIG 12 before their contract runs out doesn't make financial sense. Heck, ACC schools joining the SEC or B1G might before 2036 might be a financial bridge too far.

Our current best course of action? Milk the PAC for what we can before the next round of expansion. Then, hope we get a good outcome when it happens. If not, the BIG 12 will be there with arms right open.

[AzCatFan2]

There are zero schools that benefit the SEC west of the Mississippi anymore. It makes zero sense for them to expand that direction. The only schools the SEC will consider that aren't in the B1G are UNC, Clemson, Miami, Florida St, Notre Dame and maybe Virgina. No other school makes sense for them financially

Think B1G vs. SEC game theory. The B1G won't stop at the LA schools. Eventually, they will add more out west. The B1G would prefer Stanford, Oregon, Washington, and maybe CAL. If the B1G does this, plus Notre Dame, FSU, Miami, and UNC from the ACC, the B1G becomes the top conference, coast to coast. The SEC and ESPN now becomes #2.

How can the SEC and ESPN stop this? Either hope the B1G decides not to take any more PAC teams. Or, take UW, Oregon, and a few others to create its own west coast pod.

[PHXCATS]

Tell me how much revenue Oregon and Washington bring vs the existing SEC schools (to their respective conference via TV and tickets)?

It is less than half.

There are only two goals of the SEC and Big Ten.

Dominate sports
Make as much revenue for your member schools as possible.

Bringing in every other school west of the Mississippi loses money per member. Stanford maybe is attractive for #1 but the revenue is so low it probably ain't worth it for them

The Big Ten and SEC don't care about how big their footprint is, they only care about money

[AzCatFan2]

Tell me how much revenue Oregon and Washington bring vs the existing SEC schools (to their respective conference via TV and tickets)?

It is less than half.

There are only two goals of the SEC and Big Ten.

Dominate sports
Make as much revenue for your member schools as possible.

Bringing in every other school west of the Mississippi loses money per member. Stanford maybe is attractive for #1 but the revenue is so low it probably ain't worth it for them

The Big Ten and SEC don't care about how big their footprint is, they only care about money

FOX and ESPN care about money too. And they are the ones pulling the strings behind the conference scenes. The late night start has value for FOX, but having only 2 teams out west isn't enough to cover the slot a full season.

In addition, USC and UCLA are likely not going to be happy out on a B1G island with no conference foe closer than Nebraska. Football may not matter, but all other sports may not enjoy the extra travel.

Add these together and the LA schools want closer partners, and FOX wants more west schools for the late night start, and the B1G expanding to include more west schools makes sense. It will be profitable for FOX, and keep the LA schools happy.

[KillerKlown]

AzCatFan2 I still don't understand what you are saying. Can you convey what you are saying with more detail please.

[PHXCATS]

Tell me how much revenue Oregon and Washington bring vs the existing SEC schools (to their respective conference via TV and tickets)?

It is less than half.

There are only two goals of the SEC and Big Ten.

Dominate sports
Make as much revenue for your member schools as possible.

Bringing in every other school west of the Mississippi loses money per member. Stanford maybe is attractive for #1 but the revenue is so low it probably ain't worth it for them

The Big Ten and SEC don't care about how big their footprint is, they only care about money

FOX and ESPN care about money too. And they are the ones pulling the strings behind the conference scenes. The late night start has value for FOX, but having only 2 teams out west isn't enough to cover the slot a full season.

In addition, USC and UCLA are likely not going to be happy out on a B1G island with no conference foe closer than Nebraska. Football may not matter, but all other sports may not enjoy the extra travel.

Add these together and the LA schools want closer partners, and FOX wants more west schools for the late night start, and the B1G expanding to include more west schools makes sense. It will be profitable for FOX, and keep the LA schools happy.

Anytime UCLA or USC ain’t playing Penn St Ohio St.or Michigan at home it is gonna be a late kickoff

Of the 10 conference weeks I bet 7 or 8 feature a late kick in LA. Fox doesn’t need anyone else to fill that slot. The two non conference weeks will probably have playoff baseball in that slot

[Merkin]

In addition, USC and UCLA are likely not going to be happy out on a B1G island with no conference foe closer than Nebraska. Football may not matter, but all other sports may not enjoy the extra travel.

I imagine going to Ann Arbor and Columbus is easier than going to Corvallis or Pullman.

[AzCatFan2]

Tell me how much revenue Oregon and Washington bring vs the existing SEC schools (to their respective conference via TV and tickets)?

It is less than half.

There are only two goals of the SEC and Big Ten.

Dominate sports
Make as much revenue for your member schools as possible.

Bringing in every other school west of the Mississippi loses money per member. Stanford maybe is attractive for #1 but the revenue is so low it probably ain't worth it for them

The Big Ten and SEC don't care about how big their footprint is, they only care about money

FOX and ESPN care about money too. And they are the ones pulling the strings behind the conference scenes. The late night start has value for FOX, but having only 2 teams out west isn't enough to cover the slot a full season.

In addition, USC and UCLA are likely not going to be happy out on a B1G island with no conference foe closer than Nebraska. Football may not matter, but all other sports may not enjoy the extra travel.

Add these together and the LA schools want closer partners, and FOX wants more west schools for the late night start, and the B1G expanding to include more west schools makes sense. It will be profitable for FOX, and keep the LA schools happy.

Anytime UCLA or USC ain’t playing Penn St Ohio St.or Michigan at home it is gonna be a late kickoff

Of the 10 conference weeks I bet 7 or 8 feature a late kick in LA. Fox doesn’t need anyone else to fill that slot. The two non conference weeks will probably have playoff baseball in that slot

Baseball regular season ends in October. That leaves 7 or 8 weeks when FOX won't have a baseball game g to fill the time slot. Nobody likes the late start time. But west coast teams deal with it because it's our advantage. But you really think the LA schools are going to be happy with 4 home games every year that start at 10 pm Eastern or later each, just to keep FOX happy? And what happens, middle Oct, UCLA is on the road and USC has a bye? FS1 going to show motocross or something against ESPN featuring a P5 football matchup?

FOX isn't paying all this money not to be able to maximize their investment. Part of that is securing a pod of teams out west to ensure late night content every week, without pissing off the schools by making them play a majority of their home games in this time slot.

[PHXCATS]

Bro I agree with you more than anyone else here and now I think you have gone crazy

If ucla and usc play 8 home games each year not vs each other's in Big Ten play at least 6 will be late slots. That is all Fox needs. Broadcast AL or NL playoffs in western division ballparks and they are set for the fall schedule in that slot. No need to bring in anyone else who won't bring in the eyeballs or revenue

[AzCatFan2]

Bro I agree with you more than anyone else here and now I think you have gone crazy

If ucla and usc play 8 home games each year not vs each other's in Big Ten play at least 6 will be late slots. That is all Fox needs. Broadcast AL or NL playoffs in western division ballparks and they are set for the fall schedule in that slot. No need to bring in anyone else who won't bring in the eyeballs or revenue

I looked. There were no MLB playoff games that started 10 pm Eastern or later. 5 total that started 9 pm, all divisional games, with only 1 on a Saturday night. It was televised on TBS, by the way. All other late games started at 8 pm Eastern.

FOX and FS1 is going to need more games than 6 for the 10 pm East time slot. They may have 1 late baseball playoff game max to show. They will want shoulder content to show after the 8 pm Eastern playoff games finish. West coast college football is the best option.

[Merkin]

Just another stat, perhaps useless, but number of fans per team, based on watching a game in 2021. However just anecdotally, having lots of relatives in/from Ohio, have to say the tOSU number is probably correct.

https://bamahammer.com/2022/07/30/data- ... NmG49O0xU8

ACC – FSU, 2.7M; Duke, 2.6M; UNC, 1.9M; Boston College, 1.5M; Georgia Tech, 1.4M; Clemson, 1.5M and Miami 1.1M
Big 12 – Texas, 3.1M; Oklahoma, 1.7M; Kansas, 1M
Big Ten – Ohio State, 6.3M; Penn State, 4M; Michigan State, 2.9M; Michigan, 2.9M; Illinois, 1.7M; Wisconsin, 1.6M; Minnesota, 1.4M; Iowa, 1.3M; Nebraska, 1.2M
Pac 12 – UCLA, 2.7M; Arizona State, 1.5M; USC, 1.5M
SEC – Alabama, 4.1M; Georgia, 2.8M; LSU, 2.3M; Florida, 2.1M; Auburn, 2M; Texas A&M, 2M; Kentucky, 1.5M; Tennessee 1.3M; Missouri, 1.1M; Arkansas, 1.1M
Notre Dame – 3.5M

[KaibabKat]

Perhaps it was not as "prestigious" but for me personally I got just as much, if not more, enjoyment when we played in the WAC. Games were every bit as exciting. Rivalries were every bit as intense.

[AzCatFan2]

Former Utah AD, Chris Hill, who was AD when Utah joined the PAC, and also hired coaches like Urban Meyer and Kyle Whittingham, stated there is no reason for any PAC team to join the BIG 12, unless the desire is to destroy the PAC. https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/08/03/ ... he-pac-12/

There is no monetary reason to move, and the PAC schools are more aligned with each other than the BIG 12 schools. Now, if Oregon, UW, and Stanford all eventually bolt for the B1G, and the PAC is dead, then we'll have reason to join the BIG 12. It will be our best option. But until that's the only option, we should be patient, stick with the PAC, and see what presents itself for us in the future.

[ChooChooCat]

Former Utah AD, Chris Hill, who was AD when Utah joined the PAC, and also hired coaches like Urban Meyer and Kyle Whittingham, stated there is no reason for any PAC team to join the BIG 12, unless the desire is to destroy the PAC. https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/08/03/ ... he-pac-12/

There is no monetary reason to move, and the PAC schools are more aligned with each other than the BIG 12 schools. Now, if Oregon, UW, and Stanford all eventually bolt for the B1G, and the PAC is dead, then we'll have reason to join the BIG 12. It will be our best option. But until that's the only option, we should be patient, stick with the PAC, and see what presents itself for us in the future.

Lol I love it, the article literally admitted that the Big12 is likely to get a bigger TV deal than the Pac12 yet "there's no reason for any PAC team to join the Big12."

Yeah ok.

[SabinoDrifter]

Former Utah AD, Chris Hill, who was AD when Utah joined the PAC, and also hired coaches like Urban Meyer and Kyle Whittingham, stated there is no reason for any PAC team to join the BIG 12, unless the desire is to destroy the PAC. https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/08/03/ ... he-pac-12/

There is no monetary reason to move, and the PAC schools are more aligned with each other than the BIG 12 schools. Now, if Oregon, UW, and Stanford all eventually bolt for the B1G, and the PAC is dead, then we'll have reason to join the BIG 12. It will be our best option. But until that's the only option, we should be patient, stick with the PAC, and see what presents itself for us in the future.

I'm sure the Jacksonville Jaguars thought Urban Meyer's Utah track record was more important than winning national championships at Florida and Ohio State.

You are delusional.

[azcat49]

This conference is dead. The B1G just doesn’t want to kill it yet but it will happen. We shouldn’t wait for what will be at best equal money we need to be proactive like USC was and take care of #1, us.

The Bay Area schools will eventually be pulled into the B1G, just a matter of time. Maybe the NW schools also.

The NCAA is toast as well. They will maybe manage the minor sports but the B1G and SEC will align to create a group of schools that play for it all. I doubt we get a seat at that table

[Alieberman]

Conference Realignment talk bores the fuck out of me.

[AzCatFan2]

Former Utah AD, Chris Hill, who was AD when Utah joined the PAC, and also hired coaches like Urban Meyer and Kyle Whittingham, stated there is no reason for any PAC team to join the BIG 12, unless the desire is to destroy the PAC. https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/08/03/ ... he-pac-12/

There is no monetary reason to move, and the PAC schools are more aligned with each other than the BIG 12 schools. Now, if Oregon, UW, and Stanford all eventually bolt for the B1G, and the PAC is dead, then we'll have reason to join the BIG 12. It will be our best option. But until that's the only option, we should be patient, stick with the PAC, and see what presents itself for us in the future.

I'm sure the Jacksonville Jaguars thought Urban Meyer's Utah track record was more important than winning national championships at Florida and Ohio State.

You are delusional.

WTF does Meyer's record at Jacksonville in the NFL have anything to do with anything relatable on this thread? Meyer is damaged goods. Has been since he ignored the allegation one of his coaches committed abuse while he was at Florida. Ohio St. hired knew this and hired him anyway. But before this Meyer at Bowling Green, Utah, and Florida, he was one of the best coaches. And I've said before. We need to stop hiring retreads on their way down from Texas or TAMU, and start looking for the next Meyer at Bowling Green.

Regardless, I agree the PAC is dead. But why not milk it for all it's worth and see if there are potential other options before we bail? If our only option to bail today is the BIG 12, and that's still an option once the B1G takes more PAC schools, what's the benefit of bailing now? Maybe the BIG 12 gets more money per school, but as the former Utah AD states, if it does, it will be nominal and won't move the needle for PAC schools. And, there's no guarantee that any of the 4 corner PAC schools would add value enough to make the BIG 12 deal bigger. We may just add more schools? May even dilute the deal? Who knows. Just like, who knows what the PAC deal will end up being? The only certainty seems to be, any PAC deal will be short term, meaning we won't have any issue bailing to the BIG 12 if the B1G raids the PAC in a few years.

We lose nothing by waiting. The nightmare scenario of Oregon, Washington, Utah, and Colorado heading to the BIG 12 and shutting us out is not happening. The only way this happens is if the B1G only takes Stanford and CAL, and leaves Oregon and UW, which makes little sense. Oregon and UW are worth more than the combination of both Bay area schools. And hell will have to freeze over before Oregon and UW agree to be in the BIG 12.

[azcat49]

Why take that chance though if the ultimate destination is the Big 12. The Bay Area schools will be included because kid UCLA and that TV market. I think they are ahead of the NW schools so your dire scenario might play out. We need to be proactive now

[AzCatFan2]

Why take that chance though if the ultimate destination is the Big 12. The Bay Area schools will be included because kid UCLA and that TV market. I think they are ahead of the NW schools so your dire scenario might play out. We need to be proactive now

Because the odds of the nightmare scenario are almost absolute zero. Like USC and UCLA talking to the B1G, a lot of these negotiations happen through proxies, behind closed doors, and without anyone on the outside knowing what's going on. Do UW and Oregon seem panicked that they are going to be left out of the B1G if and when they do expand? Fact is, Stanford has value, especially with their relationship to Notre Dame, but CAL? They are worth less than the Arizona schools. CAL only gets an invite to keep the CBOR and UCLA happy.

To the B1G, no team moves the needle in the right direction except Notre Dame. Stanford, Oregon, Washington, FSU, and Miami, all mentioned as potential B1G targets, come the closest. But unlike the ACC schools, which are stuck with a huge contract not expiring until 2036, the PAC NW schools aren't going to be locked into anything long term.

Last, remember, it's FOX and ESPN pulling the strings behind the scenes. And if you don't think they value the 10 PM Eastern or later starts, just look at the future broadcast schedule for this year: https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/colleg ... s-nbc-abc/

Week 1, both ESPN and FS1 feature PAC schools starting 10:30 PM Eastern
Week 2, FS1 is carrying our game against Miss State at 11:00 PM, while ESPN is showing a future BIG12 matchup, Baylor at BYU
Week 3, ESPN 2 has a 10 PM PAC game with SDSU at Utah, we're on FS1 again at 11:00 PM, and at 10:30 PM, FOX (over the air), is showing Fresno St. at USC.

After week 4, the schedule really isn't laid out, and most games are TBD.

Very interesting that FOX is choosing it's OTA channel to showcase a USC game that starts at 10:30 PM Eastern, is it not? Pretty soon, all USC games will be FOX exclusive when they go to the B1G. Probably mean more late night games for the west coast teams in the B1G. Think USC and UCLA will be happy with a ton of home games that all start this late? Me neither. This is why the B1G will eventually expand more west, and will need more than just 4 schools. And again, Oregon and UW are much more valuable than CAL.

[BBQ wildcat]

IMO, we gain absolutely nothing by waiting. It's like working for a company and they cut 15% of the employees, but you don't get cut. Then it becomes obvious that they will eventually (maybe soon, maybe later) cut 20% to 40% of the remaining employees. Do you wait to see if you will be one of the unlucky cutees? Not me. As soon as it becomes obvious the company will be pared down to the point it won't survive, I am out actively looking for another job. I don't want to be left hanging out to dry next year if I cdan find another job this year with a competitive salary. I would probably even be willing to take a bit of a cut in salary, if it would mean stability.

And don't say "it doesn't hurt to wait", because it absolutely does hurt. You end up being paranoid, looking over your shoulder, waiting for the hammer to fall. Because it will eventually fall. So waiting only prolongs the agony and the uncertainty.

[AzCatFan2]

IMO, we gain absolutely nothing by waiting. It's like working for a company and they cut 15% of the employees, but you don't get cut. Then it becomes obvious that they will eventually (maybe soon, maybe later) cut 20% to 40% of the remaining employees. Do you wait to see if you will be one of the unlucky cutees? Not me. As soon as it becomes obvious the company will be pared down to the point it won't survive, I am out actively looking for another job. I don't want to be left hanging out to dry next year if I cdan find another job this year with a competitive salary. I would probably even be willing to take a bit of a cut in salary, if it would mean stability.

And don't say "it doesn't hurt to wait", because it absolutely does hurt. You end up being paranoid, looking over your shoulder, waiting for the hammer to fall. Because it will eventually fall. So waiting only prolongs the agony and the uncertainty.

If you already have an equivalent job for equal pay in your back pocket, do you bail at the first cut? Or, do you milk the current company for all its worth, and maybe see if something better comes along?

We're not missing out on a BIG 12 invite if we wait. Accepting a BIG 12 invite now is like committing to go to ASu months before you find out if you got accepted to Stanford with a scholarship.

We have the BIG 12 invite in our back pocket. That should be Plan B. And there's time before we need to act.

Oregon and UW aren't panicking. That's because they likely know they either end up in the B1G or an SEC Pacific pod one day. When this happens, we either tag along, or accept the BIG 12 as our best option. If Oregon and Washington were worried about being left out completely, they would've bailed to the BIG 12 already, and the PAC would be dead.

[azgreg]

If you made me bet a paycheck on what's going to happen I bet we'll be in the PAC-10/X for a 4 or 5 year period and then do this all over again.

[BBQ wildcat]

IMO, we gain absolutely nothing by waiting. It's like working for a company and they cut 15% of the employees, but you don't get cut. Then it becomes obvious that they will eventually (maybe soon, maybe later) cut 20% to 40% of the remaining employees. Do you wait to see if you will be one of the unlucky cutees? Not me. As soon as it becomes obvious the company will be pared down to the point it won't survive, I am out actively looking for another job. I don't want to be left hanging out to dry next year if I cdan find another job this year with a competitive salary. I would probably even be willing to take a bit of a cut in salary, if it would mean stability.

And don't say "it doesn't hurt to wait", because it absolutely does hurt. You end up being paranoid, looking over your shoulder, waiting for the hammer to fall. Because it will eventually fall. So waiting only prolongs the agony and the uncertainty.

If you already have an equivalent job for equal pay in your back pocket, do you bail at the first cut? Or, do you milk the current company for all its worth, and maybe see if something better comes along?

We're not missing out on a BIG 12 invite if we wait. Accepting a BIG 12 invite now is like committing to go to ASu months before you find out if you got accepted to Stanford with a scholarship.

We have the BIG 12 invite in our back pocket. That should be Plan B. And there's time before we need to act.

Oregon and UW aren't panicking. That's because they likely know they either end up in the B1G or an SEC Pacific pod one day. When this happens, we either tag along, or accept the BIG 12 as our best option. If Oregon and Washington were worried about being left out completely, they would've bailed to the BIG 12 already, and the PAC would be dead.

I do bail, becauser there are no guarantees that the job will still be there next year or thereafter. There is absolutely no upside to waiting, only to once again get screwed over by two (or more) schools bailing at the first opportunity. All it does is prolong the inevitable with really no benefit. And at this point it is obvious, even to a casual follower, that the demise of the PAC is inevitable. So the smart thing to do is GTFO now and settle it once and for all. By staying, we will just be doing the same thing 2, 3, or 4 years from now.

You say there is no downside from waiting. I say there is no upside.

[AzCatFan2]

IMO, we gain absolutely nothing by waiting. It's like working for a company and they cut 15% of the employees, but you don't get cut. Then it becomes obvious that they will eventually (maybe soon, maybe later) cut 20% to 40% of the remaining employees. Do you wait to see if you will be one of the unlucky cutees? Not me. As soon as it becomes obvious the company will be pared down to the point it won't survive, I am out actively looking for another job. I don't want to be left hanging out to dry next year if I cdan find another job this year with a competitive salary. I would probably even be willing to take a bit of a cut in salary, if it would mean stability.

And don't say "it doesn't hurt to wait", because it absolutely does hurt. You end up being paranoid, looking over your shoulder, waiting for the hammer to fall. Because it will eventually fall. So waiting only prolongs the agony and the uncertainty.

If you already have an equivalent job for equal pay in your back pocket, do you bail at the first cut? Or, do you milk the current company for all its worth, and maybe see if something better comes along?

We're not missing out on a BIG 12 invite if we wait. Accepting a BIG 12 invite now is like committing to go to ASu months before you find out if you got accepted to Stanford with a scholarship.

We have the BIG 12 invite in our back pocket. That should be Plan B. And there's time before we need to act.

Oregon and UW aren't panicking. That's because they likely know they either end up in the B1G or an SEC Pacific pod one day. When this happens, we either tag along, or accept the BIG 12 as our best option. If Oregon and Washington were worried about being left out completely, they would've bailed to the BIG 12 already, and the PAC would be dead.

I do bail, becauser there are no guarantees that the job will still be there next year or thereafter. There is absolutely no upside to waiting, only to once again get screwed over by two (or more) schools bailing at the first opportunity. All it does is prolong the inevitable with really no benefit. And at this point it is obvious, even to a casual follower, that the demise of the PAC is inevitable. So the smart thing to do is GTFO now and settle it once and for all. By staying, we will just be doing the same thing 2, 3, or 4 years from now.

You say there is no downside from waiting. I say there is no upside.

I'd bail if I firmly believed there was a chance the BIG 12 might not take us. But Oregon, UW, Colorado, and Utah all have shown they would rather stick in the PAC than bail to the BIG 12. Would they act this way if they didn't believe short term, this was in their best interest? And long term, either something better comes their way, and if not, the BIG 12 will still be there?

What's the difference if we enter the BIG 12 now or in 5 years? Meanwhile, while we wait, there is a chance ESPN doesn't like seeing all the best west coast schools on FOX, and pushes the SEC to grab a west coast pod, headlined by Oregon and UW. Maybe we tag along? Maybe not? Or maybe, ESPN balks and UW and Orego go B1G. And if we left out, why wouldn't the BIG 12 take us in then?

Five years from now, ACC schools would still have 9 years left on their contract with a huge buyout. And after Stanford, UW and Oregon, the 4 corner PAC schools would have the most value to any conference that wouldn't owe the ACC hundred of millions, and not in the B1G, SEC or BIG 12.

What we gain from waiting is the possibility of getting into an SEC Pacific pod. If that doesn't happen, it means Oregon, UW, and Stanford went B1G. That happens, we lose nothing, because we'd be among the most valuable and available schools for the BIG 12. Who already expressed their interest in adding us. No reason not to make them wait and see if something better comes along. If not, we can settle for the BIG 12, who really don't have better options. ACC schools are locked into their contract, and top PAC schools aren't going to the BIG 12.

[BBQ wildcat]

LOL. Sorry, but you are just delusional about any possibility of getting into the SEC. So go ahead and pontificate. Everyone here knows you are delusional, so there is no point in even trying to reason with you. UA needs to dump the PAC, and sooner, rather than later.

[azcat49]

I will say media negotiations should be in kliavkoffs wheel house. That after all is what he did in Vegas and why he was hired I think.

[AzCatFan2]

LOL. Sorry, but you are just delusional about any possibility of getting into the SEC. So go ahead and pontificate. Everyone here knows you are delusional, so there is no point in even trying to reason with you. UA needs to dump the PAC, and sooner, rather than later.

FOX is broadcasting a USC game at 10:30 pm Eastern week two, on its over the air channel this year. Do you think ESPN/ABC wants to see USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, and Stanford regularly on FOX in this time slot, as members of the B1G? If not, what are ESPN's options to counter?

The original fear when USC and UCLA bailed was there would be 4, 16-team conferences. SEC, B1G, and ACC are either there or will be soon. And the BIG12 would get there adding Oregon, UW, Colorado, and Utah, and we'd be left out. But that's not happening. Oregon and UW aren't going BIG 12. And even if they are forced to, it's only because the B1G took Stanford, the SEC isn't expanding, and the PAC is crumbling. It would also mean the B1G would have more than 16 teams, so the BIG 12 would take all valuable PAC teams left, even if it meant being larger than 16.

There is no logic charging head first into the BIG 12 today. The option to join the BIG 12 when the PAC dies. And the PAC dies if/when Oregon and Washington go B1G or SEC. Maybe Oregon and UW have to enter the BIG 12 kicking and screaming, but even then, it's highly likely the BIG 12 still takes us.

[RondaeShimmy]

LOL. Sorry, but you are just delusional about any possibility of getting into the SEC. So go ahead and pontificate. Everyone here knows you are delusional, so there is no point in even trying to reason with you. UA needs to dump the PAC, and sooner, rather than later.

FOX is broadcasting a USC game at 10:30 pm Eastern week two, on its over the air channel this year. Do you think ESPN/ABC wants to see USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, and Stanford regularly on FOX in this time slot, as members of the B1G? If not, what are ESPN's options to counter?

The original fear when USC and UCLA bailed was there would be 4, 16-team conferences. SEC, B1G, and ACC are either there or will be soon. And the BIG12 would get there adding Oregon, UW, Colorado, and Utah, and we'd be left out. But that's not happening. Oregon and UW aren't going BIG 12. And even if they are forced to, it's only because the B1G took Stanford, the SEC isn't expanding, and the PAC is crumbling. It would also mean the B1G would have more than 16 teams, so the BIG 12 would take all valuable PAC teams left, even if it meant being larger than 16.

There is no logic charging head first into the BIG 12 today. The option to join the BIG 12 when the PAC dies. And the PAC dies if/when Oregon and Washington go B1G or SEC. Maybe Oregon and UW have to enter the BIG 12 kicking and screaming, but even then, it's highly likely the BIG 12 still takes us.

The bolded is wtf, that was never a possibility for anyone at any time after usc and ucla left.

Everyone thought that Oregon and Washington would leave for the B1G soon after the LA schools which would effectively mean the end of the PAC.

Which is what started the 4 corners schools preemptively leaving for the big 12 talk and spawned multiple delusional posts from you saying they shouldn't do that just to effectively give Oregon and Washington a favor to stay in the conference until they get the B1G offer.

You just keep making shit up in your mind and think it's reality.

[AzCatFan2]

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.

I'm bringing this post back from page 11 on this thread made a month ago to show I'm not making shit up. There was fear we'd be the odd man out if the BIG12 took only 4, and Oregon and UW were two of them. There were more than one poster with this fear too. But one post is enough. You can go back and read the nightmare scenarios that aren't going to happen yourselves.

If the B1G doesn't expand ever again, the PAC survives. Oregon and UW have no desire whatsoever to go to the BIG 12. And if the PAC survives with Oregon and UW, we should stay too.

But odds are B1G standing pat long term is low. Stanford will be one of the new B1G teams. If Oregon and UW are too, then the BIG 12 will be our best option. We go with the other 4 corner PAC schools.

The wildcard is if ESPN pushes the SEC to expand west, Oregon and UW are the top targets. I don't see CAL and Stanford in the SEC, and the SEC isn't just taking 2 teams located as far as possible and leave them on an island. Who else comes along is up for debate. And even if we don't get an invite to the SEC, there is always the BIG 12.

Our future options are stay in the PAC, because the B1G decides not to expand. Get lucky and grab an SEC invite because ESPN doesn't want FOX to have a monopoly on all the best west coast brands. Or, land softly in the BIG 12.

[SabinoDrifter]

Former Utah AD, Chris Hill, who was AD when Utah joined the PAC, and also hired coaches like Urban Meyer and Kyle Whittingham, stated there is no reason for any PAC team to join the BIG 12, unless the desire is to destroy the PAC. https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/08/03/ ... he-pac-12/

There is no monetary reason to move, and the PAC schools are more aligned with each other than the BIG 12 schools. Now, if Oregon, UW, and Stanford all eventually bolt for the B1G, and the PAC is dead, then we'll have reason to join the BIG 12. It will be our best option. But until that's the only option, we should be patient, stick with the PAC, and see what presents itself for us in the future.

I'm sure the Jacksonville Jaguars thought Urban Meyer's Utah track record was more important than winning national championships at Florida and Ohio State.

You are delusional.

WTF does Meyer's record at Jacksonville in the NFL have anything to do with anything relatable on this thread? Meyer is damaged goods. Has been since he ignored the allegation one of his coaches committed abuse while he was at Florida. Ohio St. hired knew this and hired him anyway. But before this Meyer at Bowling Green, Utah, and Florida, he was one of the best coaches. And I've said before. We need to stop hiring retreads on their way down from Texas or TAMU, and start looking for the next Meyer at Bowling Green.

Regardless, I agree the PAC is dead. But why not milk it for all it's worth and see if there are potential other options before we bail? If our only option to bail today is the BIG 12, and that's still an option once the B1G takes more PAC schools, what's the benefit of bailing now? Maybe the BIG 12 gets more money per school, but as the former Utah AD states, if it does, it will be nominal and won't move the needle for PAC schools. And, there's no guarantee that any of the 4 corner PAC schools would add value enough to make the BIG 12 deal bigger. We may just add more schools? May even dilute the deal? Who knows. Just like, who knows what the PAC deal will end up being? The only certainty seems to be, any PAC deal will be short term, meaning we won't have any issue bailing to the BIG 12 if the B1G raids the PAC in a few years.

We lose nothing by waiting. The nightmare scenario of Oregon, Washington, Utah, and Colorado heading to the BIG 12 and shutting us out is not happening. The only way this happens is if the B1G only takes Stanford and CAL, and leaves Oregon and UW, which makes little sense. Oregon and UW are worth more than the combination of both Bay area schools. And hell will have to freeze over before Oregon and UW agree to be in the BIG 12.

I'm merely pointing out that while the former Utah AD has a successful track record of hiring football coaches, Utah is not even remotely on the same level of Florida (SEC) or Ohio State (B1G). I think it's short-sighted for the Pac 12 ADs not in the Pacific NW to explore all options.

[CardiacCats97]

Not even sure why this is even a debate. The Pac10 is dead. No reason to delay that fact by hoping and praying Oregon and Stanford don’t screw us over in five years. Just bury the carcass and move on to the Big12.

[AzCatFan2]

Nobody knows the future, but short term, with the B1G announcing no further expansion at this time, short term, what is most likely to happen is the PAC stays together and signs a short term media agreement. Whether or not the BIG 12 agreement is larger or smaller is to be determined, but the former Utah AD is likely correct saying any difference between the next PAC and next BIG 12 contracts won't be large enough to move the needle, and cause schools to switch conferences either way.

Long term, things are more cloudy for sure. But here are the most likely scenarios to happen in my opinion.

Scenario 1: 16 is the max for the SEC and B1G. If this happens, the PAC survives longer than just the length of the next contract. Not likely to happen, because I don't see the B1G leaving the LA schools on an island. Football drives the bus, but that doesn't mean the other passengers won't complain. If the B1G doesn't expand to include more west schools, the LA schools went to a conference where the longest plane ride in conference was under 3 hours, to a conference where the shortest plane ride in conference is 3 hours! Won't make a big difference in football. But it could in other sports.

Scenario 2: Top ACC schools find a way out of their contract, the B1G and SEC aren't biting, so the top ACC, BIG 12, and PAC schools create a BIGPACACC super conference. A 24 conference featuring Clemson, FSU, Miami, UNC, Baylor, OK State, Kansas, Oregon, and Washington among others could be competitive against the B1G and SEC. We'd almost assuredly be included as well. But there are problems with this creation. One, the ACC contract doesn't expire until 2036. Two, top schools not in the B1G or SEC today all want to be. A BIGPACACC doesn't work if Clemson, FSU, Kansas, Oregon, and Washington all get picked off by the big 2. This would mean a BIGPACACC super conference would have a long term deal with a large buyout, a la the ACC today, and I doubt schools agree to this

Scenario 3: The B1G becomes the first super conference, and takes the best of the rest in the west, including Stanford, Oregon, and UW, plus some of the best of the ACC like FSU and Miami, adds, Notre Dame, and two more like UNC and Kansas to reach 24. The SEC reacts by taking the best of the rest of the ACC and BIG 12 to get to 24, and whoever is left out scrambles to create a third, large conference that is a distant 3rd. The SEC likely never expands out west, because there are no headliner schools left for them. The 4-corner PAC schools have value, but aren't enough to anchor a SEC Pacific division.

Scenario 4: The SEC expands west. Some think this is delusional, but the SEC didn't get to the top by be reactionary, but rather proactive. They were the first to expand to 12 and add a Conference Championship game. First to 14, and first to 16, and did so by grabbing two of the most valuable schools available. Think the SEC would sit back and watch scenario 3 unfold, causing them to react to a B1G that would then have top labels coast to coast, leaving the SEC no great options out west? In this scenario, the SEC takes 4 to 6 schools from the PAC, and adds a couple of more from the BIG 12 and ACC to get to 24. If the SEC takes 6 out west, and maybe adds Clemson plus OK State to get to 24, we're in. If the SEC only takes 4, maybe we're left out. At which point, we join the BIG 12.

Today, leaving the PAC-12 outcasts for the BIG 12 misfits just doesn't make sense. It's a lateral move at best, and one that closes the door on other options. And why no PAC schools is chomping at the bit to make the move.

[UAEebs86]

tl;dr

[CardiacCats97]

There are people out there that think the SEC wants Arizona? That’s wild.

[Merkin]

Conference Realignment talk bores the fuck out of me.

I feel like Bill Murray in "Groundhog Day". The same arguments keep getting rehashed every day.


Welcome to fan boards during the off season.

[AzCatFan2]

There are people out there that think the SEC wants Arizona? That’s wild.

Not exactly. The SEC and ESPN which holds the SEC purse strings, doesn't want to see the B1G become the first super conference with top teams from coast to coast. And if the B1G takes the top remaining west coast teams, which are Oregon, Washington, and Stanford, this will basically lock out the SEC and ESPN from having top west coast content.

If the SEC, pushed by ESPN decides to expand west, it means taking Oregon and UW. Stanford is unlikely due to ivory tower arrogance, as Stanford won't be in the same conference as Auburn or the Miss schools. After OU and UW, the SEC would need more schools out west to fill out their pod. Arizona would be one of the candidates for potential selection after Oregon and UW.

[FreeSpiritCat]

Conference Realignment talk bores the fuck out of me.

I feel like Bill Murray in "Groundhog Day". The same arguments keep getting rehashed every day.


Welcome to fan boards during the off season.

I stopped reading AzCatFan2 posts awhile ago. They are long winded and basically say the same thing. I get the gist of what he is saying, I don't need to read more. I know he will read this, but I doubt he will get the point. Some people just like arguing. They aren't trying to be open-minded and changing their opinion. They just like to argue a point. I had a friend like that who used to do that in politics. There came a point I had enough. When he wouldn't agree to disagree, I moved on. There comes a point that the arguing itself is the problem.

[AzCatFan2]

Conference Realignment talk bores the fuck out of me.

I feel like Bill Murray in "Groundhog Day". The same arguments keep getting rehashed every day.


Welcome to fan boards during the off season.

I stopped reading AzCatFan2 posts awhile ago. They are long winded and basically say the same thing. I get the gist of what he is saying, I don't need to read more. I know he will read this, but I doubt he will get the point. Some people just like arguing. They aren't trying to be open-minded and changing their opinion. They just like to argue a point. I had a friend like that who used to do that in politics. There came a point I had enough. When he wouldn't agree to disagree, I moved on. There comes a point that the arguing itself is the problem.

I do enjoy arguing and logic puzzles. Logic dictates we wait to see if something better comes along before we bail to the BIG 12. So far, nobody has made a cogent argument as to why we bail, other than we should take control of our own destiny! Which isn't logical. It's a lateral move to the BIG 12 at best, and could shoot ourselves in the foot if we end up missing out on better things that come along. And there are few, if any scenarios out there where at worst, we don't end up in the BIG 12 anyway.

[azcat49]

In life, you don’t want to control your own destiny? Yikes if so. Yes it may be lateral but it’s stable.

I actually think others have made a perfect argument as to why. They make sense to me. The wishing and hoping by waiting confuses me

[UAEebs86]

This conference died 12 years ago thanks to LS.

Put it down.

[CardiacCats97]

There are people out there that think the SEC wants Arizona? That’s wild.

Not exactly. The SEC and ESPN which holds the SEC purse strings, doesn't want to see the B1G become the first super conference with top teams from coast to coast. And if the B1G takes the top remaining west coast teams, which are Oregon, Washington, and Stanford, this will basically lock out the SEC and ESPN from having top west coast content.

If the SEC, pushed by ESPN decides to expand west, it means taking Oregon and UW. Stanford is unlikely due to ivory tower arrogance, as Stanford won't be in the same conference as Auburn or the Miss schools. After OU and UW, the SEC would need more schools out west to fill out their pod. Arizona would be one of the candidates for potential selection after Oregon and UW.

You’re assuming a lot. Like that ESPN won’t win the bid for the B1G’s media rights and therefore won’t have west coast major sports. Or, from your previous post, that ACC schools can magically get out of a TV contract that runs into the 2030s, or would even want to without just trying to renegotiate it.

As AZCat49 wrote, it’s better to control your own destiny. Playing the “what-if” game just puts us behind the eight ball and lets Oregon and other supposedly big schools control our destiny for us. Seems dumb to me.

[AzCatFan2]

In life, you don’t want to control your own destiny? Yikes if so. Yes it may be lateral but it’s stable.

I actually think others have made a perfect argument as to why. They make sense to me. The wishing and hoping by waiting confuses me

I'd rather make the best, most informed decision possible for us. If by controlling your own destiny means potentially shooting yourself in the foot and missing better opportunities that might come along, then we'd be foolish to act now, just to say at least we acted. Wishing and hoping isn't usually the best strategy, but in this case, it is, because we lose nothing by waiting. What difference does it make if we join the BIG 12 in 2025, or sign a 3-year contract with ESPN and move when that one is over because the B1G expanded to more PAC teams? Meanwhile, if we wait, there's a chance our hopes and wishes come true. Move now, and we all but squash those.

As for ESPN bidding on the B1G contract, that's unlikely. First, FOX owns a 60% stake in the B1G Network. Second, I'm not sure ESPN has the money for both the SEC and the B1G. In addition, the SEC/ESPN contract is a 10-year deal starting in 2024, and if ESPN also signed the B1G, it would dilute the value of the SEC contract. Many of the top SEC and B1G already, and will continue to fight for prime time TV slots. And there are only so many games ESPN can show on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 at the same time.

Last, the BIG 12 is only stable as long as the PAC is stable. And that stability crumbles if/when the B1G and/or the SEC decide to expand again. Just like every school in the PAC would jump at the chance to go to the SEC or B1G, same goes for the BIG 12. If the B1G takes all the top schools out west, and essentially shuts the SEC out in the west, the SEC will counter by taking the best remaining schools they can. These would be mostly BIG 12 schools, and possibly ACC schools, depending on their contract situation.

[CardiacCats97]

.
As for ESPN bidding on the B1G contract, that's unlikely. First, FOX owns a 60% stake in the B1G Network. Second, I'm not sure ESPN has the money for both the SEC and the B1G. In addition, the SEC/ESPN contract is a 10-year deal starting in 2024, and if ESPN also signed the B1G, it would dilute the value of the SEC contract. Many of the top SEC and B1G already, and will continue to fight for prime time TV slots. And there are only so many games ESPN can show on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 at the same time.

Doesn’t ESPN own or broadcast like 80% of football bowl games? And you think they wouldn’t want to dominate the regular season the same way by bidding on the B1G because they don’t want to have to choose between matchups to put on ESPN2? That seems illogical. The B1G existing as a conference doesn’t dilute the value of the SEC contract. Why would ESPN broadcasting B1G games do the same?

[AzCatFan2]

.
As for ESPN bidding on the B1G contract, that's unlikely. First, FOX owns a 60% stake in the B1G Network. Second, I'm not sure ESPN has the money for both the SEC and the B1G. In addition, the SEC/ESPN contract is a 10-year deal starting in 2024, and if ESPN also signed the B1G, it would dilute the value of the SEC contract. Many of the top SEC and B1G already, and will continue to fight for prime time TV slots. And there are only so many games ESPN can show on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 at the same time.

Doesn’t ESPN own or broadcast like 80% of football bowl games? And you think they wouldn’t want to bid on the B1G because they don’t want to have to choose between matchups to put on ESPN2? That seems illogical. The B1G existing as a conference doesn’t dilute the value of the SEC contract. Why would ESPN broadcasting B1G games do the same?

There are only so many channels ESPN/ABC can use to broadcast a game. And college football games are often played the same time ESPN is obligated to show a MLB playoff game, which takes away a channel. So, MLB on ESPN, SEC on ABC, and B1G on ESPN2, where does that leave for the Tier 2 SEC and B1G games? ESPNU? ESPNews? ESPN+? Remove the B1G from the equation, and SEC Tier 2 is now on ESPN2, which has a much larger distribution and potential audience. More eyeballs, more money. More SEC games on EPSNU or + means less eyeballs per game, meaning less value per game. In other words, a dilution of value of the SEC contract.

Bowl games are much different than regular season games. They have no competition, other than other Bowl games, and regular season NHL or NBA. Can't really equate to Bowl season to college football regular season.

I'll reiterate my stance that there is no logic in making a move today, just to say we made a move, before we know all the facts. We know the B1G and SEC are standing pat for now, and can safely assume the BIG12 and PAC deals will be very close to one another in value. What we don't know are the B1G and SEC's potential future moves. And waiting for the SEC and B1G to act doesn't cost us anything, unless you think joining the BIG 12 today has more value than potentially joining it in a few years, after we know what else is going on.

[CardiacCats97]

Not sure why you think streaming equals less revenue and people watching. That’s odd to me. You think Alabama fans are going to decide not to Roll Tide because they have to find the game online?