Larry Scott

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 7:31 am

... is doing a heck of a job!

ElGatoBlanco · Post by **ElGatoBlanco** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:23 am

For the love of god sell off half the network to FOX already and just collect money. Larry Scott is absolutely worthless. The blueprint for success lies with the B1G Network, just copy and paste!

CatnapTom · Post by **CatnapTom** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:29 am

Chicat wrote:... is doing a heck of a job!

Could you be inferring that Larry Scott is a lying, corrupt, fraud ....

... ditto.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:55 am

In 2011/2012 Larry Scott "earned" $1,575,000 in base salary, a $1,376,000 bonus and additional compensation of $71,462. That's a total of $3,022,462 for the year.

And when people asked why they were told, "the TV deal!". Yeah, that great TV deal that has sucked for fans and apparently isn't paying out what it should to the schools either.

Time to get rid of this charlatan.

CalStateTempe · Post by **CalStateTempe** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 12:06 pm

Latin American governments have greater transparency than Larry Scott's Pac-12 regime.

CatnapTom · Post by **CatnapTom** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 12:09 pm

Chicat wrote:In 2011/2012 Larry Scott "earned" $1,575,000 in base salary, a $1,376,000 bonus and additional compensation of $71,462. That's a total of $3,022,462 for the year.

And when people asked why they were told, "the TV deal!". Yeah, that great TV deal that has sucked for fans and apparently isn't paying out what it should to the schools either.

Time to get rid of this charlatan.

Didn't he also receive a 6 million dollar no interest loan from the PAC-12 ?

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 12:14 pm

CatnapTom wrote:
Chicat wrote:In 2011/2012 Larry Scott "earned" $1,575,000 in base salary, a $1,376,000 bonus and additional compensation of $71,462. That's a total of $3,022,462 for the year.

And when people asked why they were told, "the TV deal!". Yeah, that great TV deal that has sucked for fans and apparently isn't paying out what it should to the schools either.

Time to get rid of this charlatan.

Didn't he also receive a 6 million dollar no interest loan from the PAC-12 ?

I didn't know that until I read your post, but it looks like he actually got $1.9 million.

The Pac-12's return also shows that Scott continues to have the benefit of a nearly $1.9 million loan from the conference. The balance reported due on the loan -- $1,861,842 – is the same as the original principal amount, the return says. The loan was first reported on the tax records the conference filed in May 2011, which covered a fiscal year ending June 30, 2010.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc ... n/2324799/

Another interesting tidbit from that article is that the Pac12 Deputy Commissioner was paid more than the commissioners of the Big East and Conference USA.

These guys are stealing money...

CalStateTempe · Post by **CalStateTempe** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 12:24 pm

take to twitter?

CalStateTempe · Post by **CalStateTempe** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 12:24 pm

I want to bring down scott like we brought down MAO.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 12:28 pm

If actively conspiring to cover up the fixing of tournament basketball games won't bring Larry Scott down, I'm not sure that this issue will. The dude is a cockroach.

But let the revenues come in lower than expected next year and watch out Larry. You'll be back on the women's tennis circuit in no time.

ElGatoBlanco · Post by **ElGatoBlanco** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 2:51 pm

Somehow he's the most paid Commissioner in the NCAA and he hasn't done half the shit that Jim Delaney and Mike Slive have. He's made one good decision his entire tenure as a commissioner and it's something that message board posters have suggested for years and that was getting the Pac-12 bball tournament out of LA and put it in Vegas.

SCCat · Post by **SCCat** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 7:09 pm

Big Ten -- 93.6 percent back to members (24.8 million average per school)

SEC -- 92.8 percent ($20.7 million per school)

Big 12 -- 92.2 percent ($18.5 million)

ACC -- 90.8 percent ($16.9 million)

Pac-12 -- 68.3 percent ($19 million)

The totality of my analysis on this is: WTF???

93%
92%
92%
91%
68%

UAEebs86 · Post by **UAEebs86** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 7:15 pm

Waiting for Salty to come in and tell us how lucky we are to have Larry Scott. If this was a charity he would have been investigated by now.

CalStateTempe · Post by **CalStateTempe** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 7:42 pm

SCCat wrote:Big Ten -- 93.6 percent back to members (24.8 million average per school)

SEC -- 92.8 percent ($20.7 million per school)

Big 12 -- 92.2 percent ($18.5 million)

ACC -- 90.8 percent ($16.9 million)

Pac-12 -- 68.3 percent ($19 million)

The totality of my analysis on this is: WTF???

93%
92%
92%
91%
68%

Someone please tweet this to Wilner and/or Goodman, or that ESPN Pac-12 football guy who lives in Scottsdale (Ted?)

catgrad97 · Post by **catgrad97** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 7:47 pm

What the hell does Scott need a personal $1M loan for anyway?

ElGatoBlanco · Post by **ElGatoBlanco** » Tue Jun 17, 2014 8:24 pm

CalStateTempe wrote:
SCCat wrote:Big Ten -- 93.6 percent back to members (24.8 million average per school)

SEC -- 92.8 percent ($20.7 million per school)

Big 12 -- 92.2 percent ($18.5 million)

ACC -- 90.8 percent ($16.9 million)

Pac-12 -- 68.3 percent ($19 million)

The totality of my analysis on this is: WTF???

93%
92%
92%
91%
68%
Someone please tweet this to Wilner and/or Goodman, or that ESPN Pac-12 football guy who lives in Scottsdale (Ted?)

I'm pretty sure they're all aware of that considering it was a cbs sports article.

Sage&Silver · Post by **Sage&Silver** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 2:27 am

He may be crooked for all I know and I've read other reports of extravagance at the head office, but you're all making mountains out of mole hills focusing on this percentage stuff:

SCCat wrote:Big Ten -- 93.6 percent back to members (24.8 million average per school)

SEC -- 92.8 percent ($20.7 million per school)

Big 12 -- 92.2 percent ($18.5 million)

ACC -- 90.8 percent ($16.9 million)

Pac-12 -- 68.3 percent ($19 million)

The totality of my analysis on this is: WTF???

93%
92%
92%
91%
68%

First off these are numbers from the year the conference launched the network. The conference spent $31M on the network before it even hit the air.

As alluded to in the story, the PAC12 revenue number isn't calculated the same way the other conferences do it. TV money is the single largest revenue source, but the rest are only reporting what they get from TV contracts as media revenue, the PAC is reporting TV contracts + network revenue. Think gross income vs net income. Divide the two numbers by 12 and you've got very different percentages. Until another conference owns a network, the percentages are going to by very different. Not this different but once again, this was the first year, lots of expenses.

From day one everyone was told that the upfront costs would cut into everyone's take because they had large upfront cost of:

1. Buying out each individual university's media rights deals on all platforms
2. Start a new TV network from scratch

Still, UA's cut of the ESPN/FOX money was under $16M for the year in question, but received $19.8M from the PAC12.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 4:42 am

Sage&Silver wrote:He may be crooked for all I know and I've read other reports of extravagance at the head office, but you're all making mountains out of mole hills focusing on this percentage stuff:

You make some good points, except that CBS Sports seems to think its a big enough deal to warrant an article, so I think it's a big enough deal to warrant a conversation about it.

As for the schools knowing from day one that revenues wouldn't be as high as promised in year one, it's the promise that's the issue. Scott talked about Year 5 money like it was already in the pockets of ADs. From an Oregon Live article in March:

"It's great that Larry Scott, commissioner, cut a sweet new deal and that he wants to market that but the ADs have apparently been feeling a little like Lottery winners who got their pictures snapped and put on the front page. They'd like long, lost relatives to know that the money wasn't quite what they'd hoped..."

Scummy Dick Douglas · Post by **Scummy Dick Douglas** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 6:19 am

Chicat wrote:
Sage&Silver wrote:He may be crooked for all I know and I've read other reports of extravagance at the head office, but you're all making mountains out of mole hills focusing on this percentage stuff:

You make some good points, except that CBS Sports seems to think its a big enough deal to warrant an article, so I think it's a big enough deal to warrant a conversation about it.

You are right. There is no way a media giant like CBS could possibly exaggerate or not thorougly present a story.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 6:39 am

Scummy Dick Douglas wrote:You are right. There is no way a media giant like CBS could possibly exaggerate or not thorougly present a story.

So all stories in the media should be ignored on the possibility they might exaggerate or not thoroughly present a story? How about message board posts?

RazorsEdgeAZ · Post by **RazorsEdgeAZ** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:29 am

Wilner did post his thoughts on this subject this week. He tries to explain / detail expenses vs revenues. Does it in a way to compare apples to apples with other conferences. You can read and gauge if you think Wilner concerned about it:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespo ... e-figures/

Last month Wilner gave a more detaile review of the reported $334 million Pac12 revenues.
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespo ... 2167968750

Also maybe worth noting, Pac12 board just gave Scott a 5 year extension (including UA prez). So there's that.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:35 am

Makes you wonder what the revenue/expenses numbers would have been if a deal with DirectTV had been worked out . . . and why so many of the numbers that other conferences report are super secret in the Pac12.

As for Scott getting a 5 year extension, nothing says "this whole TV deal is a joke" like firing your commissioner in year one. Like I said earlier, it will be interesting to see what the per-school payout is next year and what that means for Larry's job security.

Olsondogg · Post by **Olsondogg** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:39 am

Remember in March, in Vegas...when 97 had a chance to punch him in the face and instead made out with Larry and posted the photos on the board?

CatnapTom · Post by **CatnapTom** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 8:02 am

J. Wilner -

" Scott runs the conference like a corporation — like a professional sports league — which means he brings in the cash and he spends it, too."

" But the presidents and chancellors gave Scott the keys to the kingdom in five years ago and told him to run the show however he saw fit – provided he brought in the cash."

Unfortunately, until there is indisputable hard evidence that Scott has abused his authority or proved incompetent in performing his job , we are stuck with him.

Scummy Dick Douglas · Post by **Scummy Dick Douglas** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 9:28 am

Chicat wrote:
Scummy Dick Douglas wrote:You are right. There is no way a media giant like CBS could possibly exaggerate or not thorougly present a story.
So all stories in the media should be ignored on the possibility they might exaggerate or not thoroughly present a story? How about message board posts?

You were the one who credited the story based on its source. I am simply pointint out that even the main stream media can, at times, not tell the whole story.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 10:05 am

Scummy Dick Douglas wrote:
Chicat wrote:
Scummy Dick Douglas wrote:You are right. There is no way a media giant like CBS could possibly exaggerate or not thorougly present a story.
So all stories in the media should be ignored on the possibility they might exaggerate or not thoroughly present a story? How about message board posts?
You were the one who credited the story based on its source. I am simply pointint out that even the main stream media can, at times, not tell the whole story.

Actually what I said was in response to Sage&Silver's take that WE were making a mountain out of a molehill. My point was that CBS seemed to find the story worthy enough of publishing, so therefore it's probably worth some discussion.

Maybe you and Sage&Silver feel like the CBS Story isn't complete or is exaggerated, but that doesn't mean that we're doing the exaggerating. In my opinion, all aspects are worthy of discussion. Dennis Dodd not telling the whole story in this article doesn't mean that Larry Scott isn't an underhanded scumbag. Both things can be true.

Sage&Silver · Post by **Sage&Silver** » Wed Jun 18, 2014 8:02 pm

There was nothing wrong with the story. The linked story and the second article linked within it gave just about everything I put in my post.

Yes, CBS could be acting as watchdog here. I think more likely they saw the disparity and knew it would generate some clicks. If they don't spell out the reason for the disparity, all the better. But like I said, all the info was there to be plucked out.

As for mountains out of mole hills... for obvious reasons the name Larry Scott gets a lot of Arizona fans seeing red.

Maybe a little too eager to gore someone.

azcat49 · Post by **azcat49** » Sat Jun 21, 2014 3:34 pm

I think I may have been the first too call him corrupt and the guy is sleazy, creepy weird. Can't wait to see him gone.

Merkin · Post by **Merkin** » Thu Jul 10, 2014 7:58 am

Salty · Post by **Salty** » Mon Jul 14, 2014 3:01 am

$19 million is solid.

I'm happy. The conference leadership has done nothing but provide us the tools and income we need to remain competitive.

Merkin · Post by **Merkin** » Mon Jul 14, 2014 8:29 am

Salty wrote:$19 million is solid.

I'm happy. The conference leadership has done nothing but provide us the tools and income we need to remain competitive.

Did you catch where Larry Scott kept over $100M from the schools? Next greediest conference was the ACC where they kept $23M.

Big 10 gave each school $25M.

Most conferences return 90% or more, the PAC only returned 68%.

jollything · Post by **jollything** » Mon Jul 14, 2014 11:05 am

Larry Scott needs to go.

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Mon Jul 14, 2014 5:43 pm

Merkin wrote:
Salty wrote:$19 million is solid.

I'm happy. The conference leadership has done nothing but provide us the tools and income we need to remain competitive.

Did you catch where Larry Scott kept over $100M from the schools? Next greediest conference was the ACC where they kept $23M.

Big 10 gave each school $25M.

Most conferences return 90% or more, the PAC only returned 68%.

Damn. That's a lot of money every year. Do you have a link for this?

Sage&Silver · Post by **Sage&Silver** » Mon Jul 14, 2014 6:04 pm

That's just the first year Bug. Mostly went to starting the network.

Merkin · Post by **Merkin** » Mon Jul 14, 2014 6:04 pm

MrBug708 wrote:
Merkin wrote:
Salty wrote:$19 million is solid.

I'm happy. The conference leadership has done nothing but provide us the tools and income we need to remain competitive.

Did you catch where Larry Scott kept over $100M from the schools? Next greediest conference was the ACC where they kept $23M.

Big 10 gave each school $25M.

Most conferences return 90% or more, the PAC only returned 68%.
Damn. That's a lot of money every year. Do you have a link for this?

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... to-schools

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:24 pm

Sage&Silver wrote:That's just the first year Bug. Mostly went to starting the network.

Oh. That makes sense. Not sure why there is an outrage there then

CalStateTempe · Post by **CalStateTempe** » Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:35 pm

Larry Scott taking a page from FIFA.

Sage&Silver · Post by **Sage&Silver** » Mon Jul 14, 2014 8:11 pm

MrBug708 wrote:
Sage&Silver wrote:That's just the first year Bug. Mostly went to starting the network.
Oh. That makes sense. Not sure why there is an outrage there then

Didn't you hear? It's been all over the interwebs.

Larry Scott, a cyborg assassin, has been sent back in time from the year 2029 to terminate Sean Miller before he can rally an army to defeat the machines (big market schools).

ElGatoBlanco · Post by **ElGatoBlanco** » Thu Jul 17, 2014 6:15 pm

Can we fire the piece of shit yet? Can we? Can we just boot him and tell him how worthless he really is?

http://msn.foxsports.com/college-footba ... oon-071714

Olsondogg · Post by **Olsondogg** » Fri Jul 18, 2014 8:56 am

ElGatoBlanco wrote:Can we fire the piece of shit yet? Can we? Can we just boot him and tell him how worthless he really is?

http://msn.foxsports.com/college-footba ... oon-071714

I made the switch to Dish, and DirecTV actually refunded me back the $$ that I paid to get out from under their contract. Now they send me a monthly "please come back" offer. Not going back.

Larry went head to head, and I actually agree with him on what he wanted. Someday someone will offer an "a la carte" TV option and it will make sense.

But to your point, fire Larry sure. But make sure that someone is in place who isn't worse...

scumdevils86 · Post by **scumdevils86** » Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:25 am

I still get mailers and emails from DTV at least 2-3 times a week begging me to come back.

Olsondogg · Post by **Olsondogg** » Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:28 am

scumdevils86 wrote:I still get mailers and emails from DTV at least 2-3 times a week begging me to come back.

Got a call about coming back from Direct, a while back. He asked what he could do to get me back. I told him "nothing". He stated that there has to be something that he could do to win back my business. I asked if he had the power to make a deal with the PAC 12 happen. He said he didn't, and I told him thanks, and to call me back only when that deal happens.

Merkin · Post by **Merkin** » Fri Jul 18, 2014 12:20 pm

ElGatoBlanco wrote:Can we fire the piece of shit yet? Can we? Can we just boot him and tell him how worthless he really is?

http://msn.foxsports.com/college-footba ... oon-071714

So the PAC will be making half what the SEC does? Nice job Larry!

or in the neighborhood of $20 million a school. Combine that with the $20 million that the SEC already distributes to member institutions and you're talking about $40 million or more in television revenue in the near future, half of which will come from the SEC Network.

84Cat · Post by **84Cat** » Fri Jul 18, 2014 7:59 pm

Has does the SEC deal compare with what the PAC-12 was asking from DirectTV?

ElGatoBlanco · Post by **ElGatoBlanco** » Fri Jul 18, 2014 10:16 pm

84Cat wrote:Has does the SEC deal compare with what the PAC-12 was asking from DirectTV?

ESPN is asking for more money than the Pac-12 is asking for. The primary difference is that the entire SEC fanbase would all drop DTV in a heartbeat to get the network.

Salty · Post by **Salty** » Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:11 pm

Anyone who thinks the PAC-12 is worth the same as the SEC is kidding themselves.

Tuscaloosa is a more valuable TV market for college football than Los Angeles.

Merkin · Post by **Merkin** » Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:33 am

Top CFB TV markets:

http://www.goodbullhunting.com/2013/12/ ... m-missouri

Larry was asking for Big-10 money without the Big-10 TV rankings.

Biggest surprise, Stanford at 15.

ElGatoBlanco · Post by **ElGatoBlanco** » Sun Jul 20, 2014 9:46 am

Merkin wrote:Top CFB TV markets:

http://www.goodbullhunting.com/2013/12/ ... m-missouri

Larry was asking for Big-10 money without the Big-10 TV rankings.

Biggest surprise, Stanford at 15.

People want to watch good teams play. Stanford is a good team.

Merkin · Post by **Merkin** » Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:12 am

ElGatoBlanco wrote:
Merkin wrote:Top CFB TV markets:

http://www.goodbullhunting.com/2013/12/ ... m-missouri

Larry was asking for Big-10 money without the Big-10 TV rankings.

Biggest surprise, Stanford at 15.
People want to watch good teams play. Stanford is a good team.

And a huge fair weather fan base. Averaged more attendance than Arizona did last year after years of being near the bottom.

MrBug708 · Post by **MrBug708** » Tue Jul 29, 2014 3:55 pm

Apparently TWC wants 4 dollars a subscriber for their Dodger network. I heard on the radio that it would be the second highest package (sports?) behind only ESPN. They offered to go to arbitration but it looks like DTV is turning them down.

This probably has some sort of ramification for DTV and the P12 network.

Login • Register