Conference Realignment

[AzCatFan2]

How come Scarlett Johansson isn't marrying me?

Maybe because she's already married and doesn't want to commit polygamy? Some good inside information to have before you ask questions.

I'd image the 10 PAC University Presidents also have some inside info that we're not privy to. But with the information we do have, the ACC GOR timeline, and the fact the B1G and SEC are currently in a holding pattern, we can still make logical, educated guesses as to why no PAC school has jumped to the BIG 12. And logically, it makes sense to sign an agreement that ends 2029 or earlier, and see what parts move between now and then, knowing that in 2029, the ACC will still have 5 years left on its GOR. They aren't moving. If in 2029, things look exactly like they do today, which is possible, but highly unlikely, then a move to the BIG 12 before any ACC schools become available will likely be the right move. But today?

Sigh… You are exactly like one of those guys that was a 5, back in college, had a girl that was a 7 that was totally into you and ready to commit to a long term, permanent, loving relationship, but you couldn’t commit because there happened to be a 10 in one of your classes that you were sure if you just gave it a little time (I mean, after all you have the advantage of youth, and all the time in the world, on your side, right?) she would eventually realize what a catch you were and snap you up. All of this only to end up never having had a chance with that 10 (and honestly even if you did, you likely would have been miserable trying to compete in that world for the rest of your life), and losing out on the 7 when she realized there were some other options available to her that were a little more in her range, and who happened to have the ability to commit. Meanwhile, you sit there and look across (hopefully not too bitterly) at the 4 you married, and try to convince yourself that you were right to wait, and that you ended up exactly where you thought you’d be.

But hey, happiness comes in all shapes and sizes, right?

The BIG 12 isn't a 7 without TX and OU. It's a 5.5 or 6 at best. And they want us more than we want them. And they are willing to wait for us to strike out with the 10, and aren't going to marry anyone else before we do. That's because all the other best guys out there are contractually in a relationship until 2036.

The fact that you included the sentence “they want us more than we want them” in response to that analogy tells me everything I will ever need to know about you, my friend. Even if they were “only” a 6, to your 5, they automatically have more options than you do. And the fact that you would be willing to treat the one that wants you (one that is more of a catch than you are) with such disdain, means that you are completely deserving of the 4 that you end up with for the rest of your life. Funny thing is, you would sit there lying to yourself and pretending that things couldn’t have ended up differently if you’d grown a spine and acted taken your future into your own hands.

But what options do the BIG 12 have that are better than us? ACC teams? Not for another 14 minimum, and top teams ACC aren't dreaming about joining the BIG 12. Oregon and Washington? They want no part of the BIG 12 either. But the 4-corner PAC schools? The BIG 12 would love to add travel partners to BYU, not to mention the bigger markets, and three flagship state universities.

Get real. Tell me a scenario where Arizona gets left out of the BIG 12 as a backup option? What's the scenario? And remember, Oregon and UW only head to the BIG 12 kicking and screaming, and ACC schools have to wait over a decade to even announce a move to another conference.

Some situations call for action. Others, call for patience. A desire to take our future into our hands before we even know what other roads may be available is stupid. Especially when the one road we know is open (BIG 12), is going to be open to us for at minimum a decade. No B1G or SEC team will relegate itself down to the BIG 12, ACC teams can't afford to break their contract, and no G5 team is more valuable than the 4-corner PAC schools.

Today, the BIG 12 wants us more than we need them. Five years from now, we can reevaluate, and the ACC GOR will still be 9 years away from expiring. By this time, we should know if the B1G is expanding more west to bring travel partners to USC and UCLA, and whether or not the SEC wants a west wing. The more information you can have before making a big decision the better. And nothing is forcing us to the BIG 12 today. Why risk something better just to say at least we did something, when waiting costs you zero.

[AzCatFan2]

Former Fox Sports President was on a Utah Podcast last week. Lots of good insight, including why the 4-corner PAC schools would have value to the BIG 12. But today, it's in the best interest of Utah to stick with the PAC, because a need to move isn't imminent. Also goes over the value of G5 schools to the PAC, and its slim pickings. SDSU has a stake in S. Cal, but San Diego isn't LA. UNLV has location, but not the athletic resume.

We should consider SDSU, but it's not a slam dunk. Same with UNLV. Others? Not worth it, unless BIG 12 schools want to come west. Otherwise, best to sign a 5-year extension, which would end in 2029, and reevaluate then. We'll have more information and hopefully more options. If not, the BIG 12 will still be there.

[youtube]https://youtu.be/wILKtgmgd7E[/youtube]

[TucsonCat]

Maybe because she's already married and doesn't want to commit polygamy? Some good inside information to have before you ask questions.

I'd image the 10 PAC University Presidents also have some inside info that we're not privy to. But with the information we do have, the ACC GOR timeline, and the fact the B1G and SEC are currently in a holding pattern, we can still make logical, educated guesses as to why no PAC school has jumped to the BIG 12. And logically, it makes sense to sign an agreement that ends 2029 or earlier, and see what parts move between now and then, knowing that in 2029, the ACC will still have 5 years left on its GOR. They aren't moving. If in 2029, things look exactly like they do today, which is possible, but highly unlikely, then a move to the BIG 12 before any ACC schools become available will likely be the right move. But today?

Sigh… You are exactly like one of those guys that was a 5, back in college, had a girl that was a 7 that was totally into you and ready to commit to a long term, permanent, loving relationship, but you couldn’t commit because there happened to be a 10 in one of your classes that you were sure if you just gave it a little time (I mean, after all you have the advantage of youth, and all the time in the world, on your side, right?) she would eventually realize what a catch you were and snap you up. All of this only to end up never having had a chance with that 10 (and honestly even if you did, you likely would have been miserable trying to compete in that world for the rest of your life), and losing out on the 7 when she realized there were some other options available to her that were a little more in her range, and who happened to have the ability to commit. Meanwhile, you sit there and look across (hopefully not too bitterly) at the 4 you married, and try to convince yourself that you were right to wait, and that you ended up exactly where you thought you’d be.

But hey, happiness comes in all shapes and sizes, right?

The BIG 12 isn't a 7 without TX and OU. It's a 5.5 or 6 at best. And they want us more than we want them. And they are willing to wait for us to strike out with the 10, and aren't going to marry anyone else before we do. That's because all the other best guys out there are contractually in a relationship until 2036.

The fact that you included the sentence “they want us more than we want them” in response to that analogy tells me everything I will ever need to know about you, my friend. Even if they were “only” a 6, to your 5, they automatically have more options than you do. And the fact that you would be willing to treat the one that wants you (one that is more of a catch than you are) with such disdain, means that you are completely deserving of the 4 that you end up with for the rest of your life. Funny thing is, you would sit there lying to yourself and pretending that things couldn’t have ended up differently if you’d grown a spine and acted taken your future into your own hands.

But what options do the BIG 12 have that are better than us? ACC teams? Not for another 14 minimum, and top teams ACC aren't dreaming about joining the BIG 12. Oregon and Washington? They want no part of the BIG 12 either. But the 4-corner PAC schools? The BIG 12 would love to add travel partners to BYU, not to mention the bigger markets, and three flagship state universities.

Get real. Tell me a scenario where Arizona gets left out of the BIG 12 as a backup option? What's the scenario? And remember, Oregon and UW only head to the BIG 12 kicking and screaming, and ACC schools have to wait over a decade to even announce a move to another conference.

Some situations call for action. Others, call for patience. A desire to take our future into our hands before we even know what other roads may be available is stupid. Especially when the one road we know is open (BIG 12), is going to be open to us for at minimum a decade. No B1G or SEC team will relegate itself down to the BIG 12, ACC teams can't afford to break their contract, and no G5 team is more valuable than the 4-corner PAC schools.

Today, the BIG 12 wants us more than we need them. Five years from now, we can reevaluate, and the ACC GOR will still be 9 years away from expiring. By this time, we should know if the B1G is expanding more west to bring travel partners to USC and UCLA, and whether or not the SEC wants a west wing. The more information you can have before making a big decision the better. And nothing is forcing us to the BIG 12 today. Why risk something better just to say at least we did something, when waiting costs you zero.

Good Lord! I’ll say it again, this time without the apparently complicated analogies, I Disagree With Your OPINION! (As do the majority of the posters on this board, I might hazard.) Absolutely nothing you are going to post is going to get me to change my point of view, just as nothing I am going to post is going to change your mind. But do yourself, and everybody else here a big favor, and simply stop shouting in the wind. We get it. We know what you want. You know what we want. Now we should all just sit and wait to see what happens. Anything beyond that is just provoking others for the sake of being the loudest voice in the room. You don’t want to be that guy (or girl).

[azgreg]

[AzCatFan2]

Sigh… You are exactly like one of those guys that was a 5, back in college, had a girl that was a 7 that was totally into you and ready to commit to a long term, permanent, loving relationship, but you couldn’t commit because there happened to be a 10 in one of your classes that you were sure if you just gave it a little time (I mean, after all you have the advantage of youth, and all the time in the world, on your side, right?) she would eventually realize what a catch you were and snap you up. All of this only to end up never having had a chance with that 10 (and honestly even if you did, you likely would have been miserable trying to compete in that world for the rest of your life), and losing out on the 7 when she realized there were some other options available to her that were a little more in her range, and who happened to have the ability to commit. Meanwhile, you sit there and look across (hopefully not too bitterly) at the 4 you married, and try to convince yourself that you were right to wait, and that you ended up exactly where you thought you’d be.

But hey, happiness comes in all shapes and sizes, right?

The BIG 12 isn't a 7 without TX and OU. It's a 5.5 or 6 at best. And they want us more than we want them. And they are willing to wait for us to strike out with the 10, and aren't going to marry anyone else before we do. That's because all the other best guys out there are contractually in a relationship until 2036.

The fact that you included the sentence “they want us more than we want them” in response to that analogy tells me everything I will ever need to know about you, my friend. Even if they were “only” a 6, to your 5, they automatically have more options than you do. And the fact that you would be willing to treat the one that wants you (one that is more of a catch than you are) with such disdain, means that you are completely deserving of the 4 that you end up with for the rest of your life. Funny thing is, you would sit there lying to yourself and pretending that things couldn’t have ended up differently if you’d grown a spine and acted taken your future into your own hands.

But what options do the BIG 12 have that are better than us? ACC teams? Not for another 14 minimum, and top teams ACC aren't dreaming about joining the BIG 12. Oregon and Washington? They want no part of the BIG 12 either. But the 4-corner PAC schools? The BIG 12 would love to add travel partners to BYU, not to mention the bigger markets, and three flagship state universities.

Get real. Tell me a scenario where Arizona gets left out of the BIG 12 as a backup option? What's the scenario? And remember, Oregon and UW only head to the BIG 12 kicking and screaming, and ACC schools have to wait over a decade to even announce a move to another conference.

Some situations call for action. Others, call for patience. A desire to take our future into our hands before we even know what other roads may be available is stupid. Especially when the one road we know is open (BIG 12), is going to be open to us for at minimum a decade. No B1G or SEC team will relegate itself down to the BIG 12, ACC teams can't afford to break their contract, and no G5 team is more valuable than the 4-corner PAC schools.

Today, the BIG 12 wants us more than we need them. Five years from now, we can reevaluate, and the ACC GOR will still be 9 years away from expiring. By this time, we should know if the B1G is expanding more west to bring travel partners to USC and UCLA, and whether or not the SEC wants a west wing. The more information you can have before making a big decision the better. And nothing is forcing us to the BIG 12 today. Why risk something better just to say at least we did something, when waiting costs you zero.

Good Lord! I’ll say it again, this time without the apparently complicated analogies, I Disagree With Your OPINION! (As do the majority of the posters on this board, I might hazard.) Absolutely nothing you are going to post is going to get me to change my point of view, just as nothing I am going to post is going to change your mind. But do yourself, and everybody else here a big favor, and simply stop shouting in the wind. We get it. We know what you want. You know what we want. Now we should all just sit and wait to see what happens. Anything beyond that is just provoking others for the sake of being the loudest voice in the room. You don’t want to be that guy (or girl).

So no realistic scenario where worst case isn't a BIG 12 invite. Gotcha.

[azgreg]

[ChooChooCat]

Yeah that probably means the PAC 12 survives for now. We’re going to be ESPN’s west coast branch, while ACC is their East coast, and SEC is their primary product. Throw in the fact they’ll probably carry Big12 games too and we’re priority 3.5 or so for ESPN.

[RondaeShimmy]

PAC 12 failing upwards

[TucsonCat]

The BIG 12 isn't a 7 without TX and OU. It's a 5.5 or 6 at best. And they want us more than we want them. And they are willing to wait for us to strike out with the 10, and aren't going to marry anyone else before we do. That's because all the other best guys out there are contractually in a relationship until 2036.

The fact that you included the sentence “they want us more than we want them” in response to that analogy tells me everything I will ever need to know about you, my friend. Even if they were “only” a 6, to your 5, they automatically have more options than you do. And the fact that you would be willing to treat the one that wants you (one that is more of a catch than you are) with such disdain, means that you are completely deserving of the 4 that you end up with for the rest of your life. Funny thing is, you would sit there lying to yourself and pretending that things couldn’t have ended up differently if you’d grown a spine and acted taken your future into your own hands.

But what options do the BIG 12 have that are better than us? ACC teams? Not for another 14 minimum, and top teams ACC aren't dreaming about joining the BIG 12. Oregon and Washington? They want no part of the BIG 12 either. But the 4-corner PAC schools? The BIG 12 would love to add travel partners to BYU, not to mention the bigger markets, and three flagship state universities.

Get real. Tell me a scenario where Arizona gets left out of the BIG 12 as a backup option? What's the scenario? And remember, Oregon and UW only head to the BIG 12 kicking and screaming, and ACC schools have to wait over a decade to even announce a move to another conference.

Some situations call for action. Others, call for patience. A desire to take our future into our hands before we even know what other roads may be available is stupid. Especially when the one road we know is open (BIG 12), is going to be open to us for at minimum a decade. No B1G or SEC team will relegate itself down to the BIG 12, ACC teams can't afford to break their contract, and no G5 team is more valuable than the 4-corner PAC schools.

Today, the BIG 12 wants us more than we need them. Five years from now, we can reevaluate, and the ACC GOR will still be 9 years away from expiring. By this time, we should know if the B1G is expanding more west to bring travel partners to USC and UCLA, and whether or not the SEC wants a west wing. The more information you can have before making a big decision the better. And nothing is forcing us to the BIG 12 today. Why risk something better just to say at least we did something, when waiting costs you zero.

Good Lord! I’ll say it again, this time without the apparently complicated analogies, I Disagree With Your OPINION! (As do the majority of the posters on this board, I might hazard.) Absolutely nothing you are going to post is going to get me to change my point of view, just as nothing I am going to post is going to change your mind. But do yourself, and everybody else here a big favor, and simply stop shouting in the wind. We get it. We know what you want. You know what we want. Now we should all just sit and wait to see what happens. Anything beyond that is just provoking others for the sake of being the loudest voice in the room. You don’t want to be that guy (or girl).

So no realistic scenario where worst case isn't a BIG 12 invite. Gotcha.

Yay!! You win!! I’m sure you’ll sleep a whole lot better tonight. Well done, my friend!

Now that you’ve claimed a victim will you please just stop? Do a big favor for the recently deceased and spare everyone else anymore of your ridiculous attempts to justify your (quite honestly) unjustifiable opinion.

[AzCatFan2]

The fact that you included the sentence “they want us more than we want them” in response to that analogy tells me everything I will ever need to know about you, my friend. Even if they were “only” a 6, to your 5, they automatically have more options than you do. And the fact that you would be willing to treat the one that wants you (one that is more of a catch than you are) with such disdain, means that you are completely deserving of the 4 that you end up with for the rest of your life. Funny thing is, you would sit there lying to yourself and pretending that things couldn’t have ended up differently if you’d grown a spine and acted taken your future into your own hands.

But what options do the BIG 12 have that are better than us? ACC teams? Not for another 14 minimum, and top teams ACC aren't dreaming about joining the BIG 12. Oregon and Washington? They want no part of the BIG 12 either. But the 4-corner PAC schools? The BIG 12 would love to add travel partners to BYU, not to mention the bigger markets, and three flagship state universities.

Get real. Tell me a scenario where Arizona gets left out of the BIG 12 as a backup option? What's the scenario? And remember, Oregon and UW only head to the BIG 12 kicking and screaming, and ACC schools have to wait over a decade to even announce a move to another conference.

Some situations call for action. Others, call for patience. A desire to take our future into our hands before we even know what other roads may be available is stupid. Especially when the one road we know is open (BIG 12), is going to be open to us for at minimum a decade. No B1G or SEC team will relegate itself down to the BIG 12, ACC teams can't afford to break their contract, and no G5 team is more valuable than the 4-corner PAC schools.

Today, the BIG 12 wants us more than we need them. Five years from now, we can reevaluate, and the ACC GOR will still be 9 years away from expiring. By this time, we should know if the B1G is expanding more west to bring travel partners to USC and UCLA, and whether or not the SEC wants a west wing. The more information you can have before making a big decision the better. And nothing is forcing us to the BIG 12 today. Why risk something better just to say at least we did something, when waiting costs you zero.

Good Lord! I’ll say it again, this time without the apparently complicated analogies, I Disagree With Your OPINION! (As do the majority of the posters on this board, I might hazard.) Absolutely nothing you are going to post is going to get me to change my point of view, just as nothing I am going to post is going to change your mind. But do yourself, and everybody else here a big favor, and simply stop shouting in the wind. We get it. We know what you want. You know what we want. Now we should all just sit and wait to see what happens. Anything beyond that is just provoking others for the sake of being the loudest voice in the room. You don’t want to be that guy (or girl).

So no realistic scenario where worst case isn't a BIG 12 invite. Gotcha.

Yay!! You win!! I’m sure you’ll sleep a whole lot better tonight. Well done, my friend!

Now that you’ve claimed a victim will you please just stop? Do a big favor for the recently deceased and spare everyone else anymore of your ridiculous attempts to justify your (quite honestly) unjustifiable opinion.

If my opinion is unjustifiable, prove it with a scenario where our worst case isn't a BIG 12 invite. If not, please stop posting we should act today, instead of doing the logical thing and wait until the next contract cycle is over.

I'll win gracefully if you lose gracefully. Telling me my opinion isn't justifiable without a counter argument to justify yourself doesn't count.

[EastCoastCat]

Can we please shut down this thread.

For the love of God!

[TucsonCat]

But what options do the BIG 12 have that are better than us? ACC teams? Not for another 14 minimum, and top teams ACC aren't dreaming about joining the BIG 12. Oregon and Washington? They want no part of the BIG 12 either. But the 4-corner PAC schools? The BIG 12 would love to add travel partners to BYU, not to mention the bigger markets, and three flagship state universities.

Get real. Tell me a scenario where Arizona gets left out of the BIG 12 as a backup option? What's the scenario? And remember, Oregon and UW only head to the BIG 12 kicking and screaming, and ACC schools have to wait over a decade to even announce a move to another conference.

Some situations call for action. Others, call for patience. A desire to take our future into our hands before we even know what other roads may be available is stupid. Especially when the one road we know is open (BIG 12), is going to be open to us for at minimum a decade. No B1G or SEC team will relegate itself down to the BIG 12, ACC teams can't afford to break their contract, and no G5 team is more valuable than the 4-corner PAC schools.

Today, the BIG 12 wants us more than we need them. Five years from now, we can reevaluate, and the ACC GOR will still be 9 years away from expiring. By this time, we should know if the B1G is expanding more west to bring travel partners to USC and UCLA, and whether or not the SEC wants a west wing. The more information you can have before making a big decision the better. And nothing is forcing us to the BIG 12 today. Why risk something better just to say at least we did something, when waiting costs you zero.

Good Lord! I’ll say it again, this time without the apparently complicated analogies, I Disagree With Your OPINION! (As do the majority of the posters on this board, I might hazard.) Absolutely nothing you are going to post is going to get me to change my point of view, just as nothing I am going to post is going to change your mind. But do yourself, and everybody else here a big favor, and simply stop shouting in the wind. We get it. We know what you want. You know what we want. Now we should all just sit and wait to see what happens. Anything beyond that is just provoking others for the sake of being the loudest voice in the room. You don’t want to be that guy (or girl).

So no realistic scenario where worst case isn't a BIG 12 invite. Gotcha.

Yay!! You win!! I’m sure you’ll sleep a whole lot better tonight. Well done, my friend!

Now that you’ve claimed a victim will you please just stop? Do a big favor for the recently deceased and spare everyone else anymore of your ridiculous attempts to justify your (quite honestly) unjustifiable opinion.

If my opinion is unjustifiable, prove it with a scenario where our worst case isn't a BIG 12 invite. If not, please stop posting we should act today, instead of doing the logical thing and wait until the next contract cycle is over.

I'll win gracefully if you lose gracefully. Telling me my opinion isn't justifiable without a counter argument to justify yourself doesn't count.

If I “lose” gracefully, and allow you to (ahem, ahem) “win”, will you go away and stop subjecting people to your endless posts about the benefits of waiting? Serious question. If you are willing to do so, I’ll be more than happy to bite the bullet and say that I don’t have a concrete counter argument.

[TucsonCat]

Can we please shut down this thread.

For the love of God!

I agree. It is well past time!

[azgreg]

[AZCatGirl]

I think the Big 10 news just puts a bandaid on the Pac. It still won't survive long term and I wish we had someone to move to the Big 12 with.

[AzCatFan2]

Good Lord! I’ll say it again, this time without the apparently complicated analogies, I Disagree With Your OPINION! (As do the majority of the posters on this board, I might hazard.) Absolutely nothing you are going to post is going to get me to change my point of view, just as nothing I am going to post is going to change your mind. But do yourself, and everybody else here a big favor, and simply stop shouting in the wind. We get it. We know what you want. You know what we want. Now we should all just sit and wait to see what happens. Anything beyond that is just provoking others for the sake of being the loudest voice in the room. You don’t want to be that guy (or girl).

So no realistic scenario where worst case isn't a BIG 12 invite. Gotcha.

Yay!! You win!! I’m sure you’ll sleep a whole lot better tonight. Well done, my friend!

Now that you’ve claimed a victim will you please just stop? Do a big favor for the recently deceased and spare everyone else anymore of your ridiculous attempts to justify your (quite honestly) unjustifiable opinion.

If my opinion is unjustifiable, prove it with a scenario where our worst case isn't a BIG 12 invite. If not, please stop posting we should act today, instead of doing the logical thing and wait until the next contract cycle is over.

I'll win gracefully if you lose gracefully. Telling me my opinion isn't justifiable without a counter argument to justify yourself doesn't count.

If I “lose” gracefully, and allow you to (ahem, ahem) “win”, will you go away and stop subjecting people to your endless posts about the benefits of waiting? Serious question. If you are willing to do so, I’ll be more than happy to bite the bullet and say that I don’t have a concrete counter argument.

Sure. As long as others understand we have no reason to panic right now. We'll be in the PAC through the next agreement. While that is expiring, we can reevaluate the situation. Dr. Robbins is actually following the correct course of action this time.

[RondaeShimmy]

[UAEebs86]

[AzCatFan2]

Really not much of a shock ESPN lost all B1G rights. ESPN isn't made of money, already paid for SEC rights, and paying $330 million for Tier 2 B1G rights would have potentially diluted the value of the Tier 2 SEC rights. For Tier 2 games, ESPN still has the ACC, and can negotiate a number likely smaller than $330 million for BIG 12 and/or PAC rights, whose Tier 2 viewership numbers are significantly lower than the B1G. NBC and CBS can pay the higher fee because if they don't, they run the risk of being shut out completely.

My guess is the ACC is hungry to augment their payments, since it doesn't seem they will be able to get out of their GoR early. An alliance with the PAC won't bring in tons of money for either conference, but every little thing helps both sides. And an ACC-PAC alliance could help the PAC make more than the BIG 12. An ACC-BIG 12 alliance is possible, but unlikely, since all these conference schools are either in the Eastern or Central time zone, except BYU. Not enough late night start content to make a BIG-12/ACC alliance valuable.

An ACC-PAC alliance could also be the potential start of a third power conference. ESPN doesn't care what conference banner the PAC schools are carrying. ESPN just cares that there's enough good, late night content to broadcast. While I still think the B1G will poach PAC schools and the conference will dissolve, if the ratings are solid, and money is good enough, the PAC can mostly stay together and combine with ACC schools, plus poach a few top BIG 12 schools, and a BIG-PAC-ACC may be sustainable. Not likely to happen, but can't rule out the possibility either. A conference anchored by Clemson, UNC, and Miami on the East coast, Baylor, Kansas, and OK State in the middle, and Oregon and UW on west would still be third behind the SEC and B1G, but not a distant third.

[GlobalCat]

ESPN isn't made of money, but Disney is a hell of a parent company and hell bent on owning a big part of future streaming revenues. The current ESPN app is a dud and could see a major college conference deal eventually being expanded from broadcast to streaming services.

[dmjcat]

[azcat49]

I think all this realignment stuff is done. I think that with the B1G presumably finalizing their contracts that it stabilizes things for the rest of these TV contract periods and maybe u til the end of this decade.

[ChooChooCat]

I think all this realignment stuff is done. I think that with the B1G presumably finalizing their contracts that it stabilizes things for the rest of these TV contract periods and maybe u til the end of this decade.

There will be clauses in the contract to either A. reopen negotiations with current partners if there is expansion or B. A money amount that will be paid based on teams added. This isn't over if the B1G doesn't want it to be. The TV deal doesn't prevent anything, if anything it almost pushes further realignment.

[azcat49]

No doubt if the B1G calls you are picking up the phone to get the moving trucks ready.

I was hoping with the finalized contracts we could have some normalcy for awhile but it doesn’t sound like it.

[threenumberones]

Wait, this isn't over yet? Going back to sleep.

[AzCatFan2]

This latest round of expansion by the SEC and B1G was about money. The BIG 12 expanded to survive. The PAC? Can likely survive with 10, and no school out there available moves the needle for us in the right direction. No other school out there moves the needle in the right direction for the SEC and B1G except for Notre Dame. If ND stays independent, as expected, we won't likely won't see any movement for a while. No until the next round of contracts are close to being over. I would expect the PAC and BIG 12 to both sign shorter term contracts that expire no later than 2030.

By this time, we'll know if the LA schools non-football sports programs are happy about the additional in-conference travel, or if they wish to have some of their old PAC buddies back with them. We'll also have more information on how the PAC-12 minus 2 is working out, and assuming we sign an ACC agreement, how that's working out as well.

[84Cat]

Schill was chair of the Pac-12 CEO board.

[PHXCATS]

Canzano on his podcast with Wilner said an idea being discussed is if the remaining PAC schools stay together is that the TV revenue would be shared evenly but any bowl game and NCAA tournament units would benefit the earning school much more going forward.

I still think if the money is close you go to the Big 12 but that would make staying much better for Arizona for how many Tournament Units that should be earned over the next several years (gotta make bowl games consistently though as well)

[EastCoastCat]

Wait, we are banking on our FB team consistently making bowl games?

That’s just rich…

[azcat49]

So tired of those two NW honks spouting info. No one knows shit.

The surest thing is the conference is toast, just a matter of time. It will be sliced and diced. Move ASAP

Yes ECC, we will be going bowling soon enough. In Jed we trust

[PHXCATS]

Wait, we are banking on our FB team consistently making bowl games?

That’s just rich…

Why? We did under Rich Rod

[Merkin]

Outside of the Fiesta Bowl, every bowl game in the RichRod and Stoops' eras were money losing bowls.

If schools get to keep the bowl winnings, does that mean each one has to cover the losses too?

Schools that do not share bowl revenue have declined bowl invites that are not contractually required, since they can't afford to pay the costs to play. The New Mexico Bowl for example, has required the UA to purchase a minimum number of seats, which they have not met, but use the money they get from the major money making bowl games other Pac teams have played in.

I can't imagine Robbins or any other PAC president outside of the few elite schools to go for that.

[EastCoastCat]

Wait, we are banking on our FB team consistently making bowl games?

That’s just rich…

Why? We did under Rich Rod

You must not have been watching our program for very long.

Look at our historical bowl resume. In the last 42 years we have been to only 18 bowl games.

[azgreg]

Wait, we are banking on our FB team consistently making bowl games?

That’s just rich…

Why? We did under Rich Rod

You must not have been watching our program for very long.

Look at our historical bowl resume. In the last 42 years we have been to only 18 bowl games.

That's not his point. Rich Rod showed that with just a decent coach Arizona can regularly go to bowls (5 in 6 years under RR). With the same bowl schedule we would've gone to more bowl games under Tomey and Smith.

[AzCatFan2]

Wait, we are banking on our FB team consistently making bowl games?

That’s just rich…

Why? We did under Rich Rod

You must not have been watching our program for very long.

Look at our historical bowl resume. In the last 42 years we have been to only 18 bowl games.

That's not his point. Rich Rod showed that with just a decent coach Arizona can regularly go to bowls (5 in 6 years under RR). With the same bowl schedule we would've gone to more bowl games under Tomey and Smith.

We also went to bowl games 3 out of Stoops' last 3 years. That's 9 bowl games in 11 years. Tomey would've had a similar streak had there been the number bowl games back then as there are today. Three times under Tomey Arizona won at least 6 games and didn't make a bowl game.

[Merkin]

Three times under Tomey Arizona won at least 6 games and didn't make a bowl game.

Check out Larry Smith's record, although the team was on probation when he was hired.

Also, back during the Smith/Tomey years, playing a FCS team only counted once every 4 years as a victory for bowl wins. Not like now when it counts yearly.

Just showing my age here, but I grew up in South Central Michigan and was a huge UM fan. Back then, there was only one bowl game for the Big 10, the Rose Bowl. You win the conference, you go to the Rose Bowl. You don't, you stay home.

The UM/OSU football game was the biggest sporting event of the year, especially the Bo/Woody battles. The Rose Bowl was actually secondary, and really didn't count since the PAC generally had the home field advantage.

From 1881 until 1978 the only bowl game Michigan played in was The Rose Bowl.

From Wiki:

Bowl games originally featured the very best teams in college football, with strict bowl eligibility requirements for teams to receive an invitation to a bowl game in a particular year; as of 1971, there were only 10 team-competitive (as compared to all-star) bowl games. The number of bowl games has grown, reaching 20 games by the 1997 season, then rapidly expanding beyond 30 games by the 2006 season and 40 team-competitive games (not including the College Football Playoff National Championship) by the 2015 season. The increase in bowl games has necessitated a significant easing of the NCAA bowl eligibility rules, since reduced to allow teams with non-winning 6–6 records (numerous teams since 2002 season) and even losing 5–6 and 5–7 seasons (10 teams since the 2001 season) to fill some of the many available bowl slots.

[EastCoastCat]

Wait, we are banking on our FB team consistently making bowl games?

That’s just rich…

Why? We did under Rich Rod

You must not have been watching our program for very long.

Look at our historical bowl resume. In the last 42 years we have been to only 18 bowl games.

That's not his point. Rich Rod showed that with just a decent coach Arizona can regularly go to bowls (5 in 6 years under RR). With the same bowl schedule we would've gone to more bowl games under Tomey and Smith.

We also went to bowl games 3 out of Stoops' last 3 years. That's 9 bowl games in 11 years. Tomey would've had a similar streak had there been the number bowl games back then as there are today. Three times under Tomey Arizona won at least 6 games and didn't make a bowl game.

You can certainly cherry pick to make it look good or bad. The point is over the long haul Arizona is not a consistent yearly bowl participant so to me assuming things are magically going to turn around to bank a higher conference $ value is not a safe bet as things stand today.

We have won 1 game in 2 years…

[EastCoastCat]

Three times under Tomey Arizona won at least 6 games and didn't make a bowl game.

Check out Larry Smith's record, although the team was on probation when he was hired.

Also, back during the Smith/Tomey years, playing a FCS team only counted once every 4 years as a victory for bowl wins. Not like now when it counts yearly.

Just showing my age here, but I grew up in South Central Michigan and was a huge UM fan. Back then, there was only one bowl game for the Big 10, the Rose Bowl. You win the conference, you go to the Rose Bowl. You don't, you stay home.

The UM/OSU football game was the biggest sporting event of the year, especially the Bo/Woody battles. The Rose Bowl was actually secondary, and really didn't count since the PAC generally had the home field advantage.

From 1881 until 1978 the only bowl game Michigan played in was The Rose Bowl.

From Wiki:

Bowl games originally featured the very best teams in college football, with strict bowl eligibility requirements for teams to receive an invitation to a bowl game in a particular year; as of 1971, there were only 10 team-competitive (as compared to all-star) bowl games. The number of bowl games has grown, reaching 20 games by the 1997 season, then rapidly expanding beyond 30 games by the 2006 season and 40 team-competitive games (not including the College Football Playoff National Championship) by the 2015 season. The increase in bowl games has necessitated a significant easing of the NCAA bowl eligibility rules, since reduced to allow teams with non-winning 6–6 records (numerous teams since 2002 season) and even losing 5–6 and 5–7 seasons (10 teams since the 2001 season) to fill some of the many available bowl slots.

My fondest childhood memory was a Michigan game and coincidentally my daughter will be heading to Ann Arbor in a week to start her freshman year.

1972 Rose Bowl where my father’s Stanford Indians defeated the undefeated and fourth ranked Michigan team. With the game tied 10-10 late in the 4th quarter the Wolverines attempted a long field goal which was short and caught by a Stanford player who retreated and was pushed back in the end zone for what was called a safety but replay clearly showed forward progress was at the 3 ( this was obviously way before replay challenges). Stanford then had to punt but got the 3 and out, then Dan Bunce the Stanford QB and eventual MVP drove the Indians miraculously down the field and Rod Garcia hit the game winning FG which I still remember watching as our seats were at the 10 yard line close to the field.

The best part was running onto the field with my father celebrating the win with the Stanford band playing their usual All Right Now.

[Merkin]

Without a doubt I saw that game on TV, although I don't remember it at all, probably intentionally.

[TheCatInTheHat]

Yeah, I remember that. IIRC, Jim Plunkett to Randy "The Rabbit" Vataha won Stanford (then called the Indians) the previous year's RB, and then it was a surprise the following year when Don Bunce led them to another. Bunce eventually became a medical doctor.

[pc in NM]

Three times under Tomey Arizona won at least 6 games and didn't make a bowl game.

Check out Larry Smith's record, although the team was on probation when he was hired.

Also, back during the Smith/Tomey years, playing a FCS team only counted once every 4 years as a victory for bowl wins. Not like now when it counts yearly.

Just showing my age here, but I grew up in South Central Michigan and was a huge UM fan. Back then, there was only one bowl game for the Big 10, the Rose Bowl. You win the conference, you go to the Rose Bowl. You don't, you stay home.

The UM/OSU football game was the biggest sporting event of the year, especially the Bo/Woody battles. The Rose Bowl was actually secondary, and really didn't count since the PAC generally had the home field advantage.

From 1881 until 1978 the only bowl game Michigan played in was The Rose Bowl.

From Wiki:

Bowl games originally featured the very best teams in college football, with strict bowl eligibility requirements for teams to receive an invitation to a bowl game in a particular year; as of 1971, there were only 10 team-competitive (as compared to all-star) bowl games. The number of bowl games has grown, reaching 20 games by the 1997 season, then rapidly expanding beyond 30 games by the 2006 season and 40 team-competitive games (not including the College Football Playoff National Championship) by the 2015 season. The increase in bowl games has necessitated a significant easing of the NCAA bowl eligibility rules, since reduced to allow teams with non-winning 6–6 records (numerous teams since 2002 season) and even losing 5–6 and 5–7 seasons (10 teams since the 2001 season) to fill some of the many available bowl slots.

Going to a bowl doesn't mean shit anymore!!! 6 wins???? Total TV bs...

... In fact, any truly credible program would refuse a 6-win invite!!!

[EastCoastCat]

Yeah, I remember that. IIRC, Jim Plunkett to Randy "The Rabbit" Vataha won Stanford (then called the Indians) the previous year's RB, and then it was a surprise the following year when Don Bunce led them to another. Bunce eventually became a medical doctor.

And I was at the game too. Defense was called the “thunder chickens”. Plunkett kicked Woody Hayes’ ass that day.

My Dad was friends with the coach John Ralston as well as BB coach Howie Del Mar. Boy those guys could throw them down. Lol.

[BBQ wildcat]

Yeah, I remember that. IIRC, Jim Plunkett to Randy "The Rabbit" Vataha won Stanford (then called the Indians) the previous year's RB, and then it was a surprise the following year when Don Bunce led them to another. Bunce eventually became a medical doctor.

And I was at the game too. Defense was called the “thunder chickens”. Plunkett kicked Woody Hayes’ ass that day.

My Dad was friends with the coach John Ralston as well as BB coach Howie Del Mar. Boy those guys could throw them down. Lol.

Didn't Woody Hayes coach tOSU?

[UAEebs86]

Yeah, I remember that. IIRC, Jim Plunkett to Randy "The Rabbit" Vataha won Stanford (then called the Indians) the previous year's RB, and then it was a surprise the following year when Don Bunce led them to another. Bunce eventually became a medical doctor.

And I was at the game too. Defense was called the “thunder chickens”. Plunkett kicked Woody Hayes’ ass that day.

My Dad was friends with the coach John Ralston as well as BB coach Howie Del Mar. Boy those guys could throw them down. Lol.

Didn't Woody Hayes coach tOSU?

You are correct sir.

[EastCoastCat]

Yeah, I remember that. IIRC, Jim Plunkett to Randy "The Rabbit" Vataha won Stanford (then called the Indians) the previous year's RB, and then it was a surprise the following year when Don Bunce led them to another. Bunce eventually became a medical doctor.

And I was at the game too. Defense was called the “thunder chickens”. Plunkett kicked Woody Hayes’ ass that day.

My Dad was friends with the coach John Ralston as well as BB coach Howie Del Mar. Boy those guys could throw them down. Lol.

Didn't Woody Hayes coach tOSU?

You are correct sir.

That was the Rex Kern, John Brockington #2 ranked tOSU team that the Indians took down.

[UAEebs86]

Wonder if this will affect negotiations:

[azgreg]

[PHXCATS]

Outkick?

[PHXCATS]

[ChooChooCat]

Arizona currently has no Pac-12 partner to move with them, so yes this is the default position, but not because Arizona just absolutely loves the Pac-12. I have it on great fucking authority that if Arizona had a partner it valued it would leave today with both middle fingers up pointed at Walnut Creek. In the end the B1G may just force everybody's hand here and it happens regardless. It inevitably will, but maybe we're lucky and it happens sooner rather than 8 years down the line.

This all ends one way in due time and that's either a dead Pac-12 conference or a zombie Pac-12 conference with the Beavers/Cougs and a bunch of MWC schools.

Also interesting B1G thought from Wilner.