San Diego State is not a great add. Fresno State isn’t really even a good add… they’re literally trying to glom onto a local sales tax increase initiative to stay afloat. San Diego State is a good add, and defends Southern California to a limited degree. Not great… you’d like to think that the revamped stadium and a P5 presence gives them more juice in their home market. What I do know is the NWSL team outdrew them on average for games played in the same stadium in 2022.
@@PCSPounder San Diego is great to have since both LA schools are leaving. Fresno is the next best with Central CA. Best for Pac 12 is to go 16 teams to keep the conference strong overall. Add SDSU/Fresno Go after Texas markets with SMU/RICE and UTSA/UNT or BYU/UNLV
@@PouonoHB The number of schools in a conference do not indicate strength of a conference. In this day and age, the payout per school does. The WAC went straight from 10 to 16 in the mid-1990s, kicking off in 1996. Three years later, 8 teams split. The WAC is a shell of its former self. The Pac has no great options because nobody you list really delivers a market.
@Paul Schmidt it does in part, and it depends upon who you are combining with. You cannot know what the combined amalgamate would be worth - you can't just add up the sum of the parts. M&As are all about the value of the combined whole exceeding the sum of the parts. To view or argue to the contrary is frankly very small minded, common wisdom (an oxymoron).
Huge loss for Pac 12 but the conference will move on with Utah/UW/Oregon/Oregon State and UofA/CU/Wazzu coming up strong. New Pac 16: UW/Wazzu Ore/OreSt Cal/Stanford AZ/ASU Utah/BYU CU/SMU SDSU/FRESNO RICE/SMU
Been attempted/looked at, the egos are too big (even though it makes total sense), one must fail, the other picks up the pieces. Right now, it's Pac12 self destructing- slow motion train wreck.
That merger would create a conference that would rival the best by sheer volume, the conference champ would be an undeniable threat to anyone. But despite the merits will it happen? Almost impossible, the coastal folks are too pretentious, too woke, too elitist. Big swing and miss imho.
Pac 12 needs to add 2 teams...San Diego State and UNLV. Both have beautiful new stadiums! SD beautiful weather. Vegas has a dome. Both markets can capture some of that So Cal Market.
Well lets see how it plays out once the expansion happens. Being in the PAC might not be so bad after all, but who knows. I would hate to see say Washington vs Washington state or Oregon vs Oregon state rivalry games each year being wrecked by this. but change does happen after all. especially when money big money is involved.
SDSU is a quality program but TV revenue wise it's not a draw to the networks. Fresno State has more interested fans but it's academics and prestige don't fit Pac standards. PAC will stay at ten and split amongst 10 will be more then 12 teams.
@@billl1127 The whisper is that San Diego State won’t dilute the PAC’s take, that they’ll be an equal partner. But a more important thought, and I bring this from Oregon’s POV. Everything Oregon does is about recruiting. San Diego State in the conference means there’s still a Southern California destination within reach. Oh, BTW, the city with the most Heisman Trophy winners is- drum roll, please- San Diego. So that’s one vote in favor.
How are the BIG12 going to act on expansion? Doesn't the universities have to approach the B12 first? The remaining teams have wanted to go the B1G or stay together. The TV money will be competitive with the Big12. The PAC doesn't need to expand. There are no viable expansion candidates for PAC expansion
@@livingforever6157 the TV money wont be competitive to big 12. Big 12 viewership is higher and the time zone they play in is more valuable. Please dont use that phony chart that take UT and OU out of big 12 viewership but not USC and UCLA out of the pac 12 numbers. espn will go with about 26 million and amazon whats big games and not teams with the lowest viewership in the nation.
You can’t get PAC12 schools or big12 and big10 cannot get schools. The schools have to show interest first and submit paperwork to the conference they are interested in and can wait till midnight hour to tell parent conference they are leaving as long as fulfillment of contracts and GORs and so on.
@@shawn8690 by competitive, I mean within 3 to 7 million of one another. Playoff money will be equal among P5 schools through the 2025-26 seasons. Take that along with the regular season deal and the number is still close to 40 million. The Big 12 is between 44-47 million annually. The PAC were making 19 million during the pandemic. They will be made mostly whole. I'm not sure it's a strong enough reason to leave or add a school to the pac.
Who will be the tv partners for the PAC . Competitive to the Big 12 . not sure that's possible. Without the LA market and The PAC comminsioner seems lost in his efforts to lead the conference and his stories if I was a fan of the conference I would want answers .
Coastal Carolina should joint the Pac-#, and San Diego State and Hawaii should join the ACC! Make all the conference names as bass-ackwards as possible!
@@shawn8690 the Big12 cannot just go grab schools. The schools have to show interest first. Then schools have to submit paperwork to apply to another conference and conference has to accept interest and then accept applications and then decide to process them. So, as it stands with what the PAC12 or 10 will be getting media deal, it will be similar but maybe less than Big12 but not by a lot. Also Fox has been adamant about not giving extra money whether P5 or G5 added to Big12 per prorata clauses. ESPN will honor and give 63% inventory revenue. But the new schools added beyond the 4 this summer of 23 will not get full share, even if at 63%, would be pro rated and distributed among the new 12 schools and any new schools would have to wait for X-amount of time before getting full share. That won’t jive with any power school moving into the Big12 in the future. A G5 school might but not P5. If FOX agreed to give their 37% to go with ESPN 63% if adding P5 to match current revenue distribution, then maybe in a few years not months but just before new deal Big12 made that kicks in 2025 expires in 2031. I think the 12 schools that Big12 will have moving forward may be only added for now.
@@michaelwall3393 Not true Michael.... FOX never said it wouldn't give more money, all they stated was that they wouldn't automatically agree to giving more money if more programs join the conference... And ESPN, I believe, stated that they would give a MINIMUM of 63% revenue to new programs if they joined the conference. The reporting of FOX absolutely refusing to give any more money is an absolute LIE. Look up the original information and don't go off of what other people have stated.
SMU and SDSU already ARE the 2-hottest Conference Realignment Expansion Target G5-programs right now,. And SMU wins that battle because they can fit into any P5 conference. Close behind SMU/SDSU are Tulane and Memphis (for similar reason of generalized fit), then come: Fresno, Boise, UNLV, and USF. Those are, the G5 Top8 ("G5-8"). If the Big12 do not move to grab these top 8 ideal long term expansion targets, then some other conference or conferences will, especially the Pac12 and ACC. Both the Pac12 and the ACC are in positions of needing to either expand smartly or mutually agreeing to a dissolution. The Pac12 & ACC are in more desperate positions than the Big12, thus a sense of urgency exists there - if the Big12 wants these schools, and they should, then they better move now. SDSU secures Southern California, Fresno sews up mid Cal (and Fresno just won the MW), Boise has brand, growth population, proximity to the Oregon and Washington schools, and Boise just played in the MW championship game. And everyone gets the UNLV "Vegas" gambling world connection - there is already talk of moving Pac12 headquarters to LV. SMU is SMU, a TCU/Baylor clone. Tulane just won the AAC conference championship, and is an SMU/TCU/Baylor clone. SMU brings Dallas - no matter what any SMU haters say. Tulane brings NOLA and all of LA really. Memphis has established a recent history of success and brings Memphis and the region around Memphis, including Arkansas, Tenn., Mississippi. USF is lagging UCF but can catch up and will catch up in short order if only the commitment is made and it appears USF has indeed "seen the light." USF will be ACC pick #1 to replace FSU whose departure is immanent. Memphis, Tulane, SMU, perhaps a few others (Coastal Carolina, ECU, FAU, Temple, Marshall, Army, Navy, etc.) will also be ACC replacements for Clemson, Notre Dame, FSU.
Being that the PAC12 got rid of the North & South division, regions don’t matter. The PAC better get SD State just so the PAC can have a SoCal presence because it’s a big market, so SDST is a must go after. The next can be a toss up between Boise St (Great rival for Oregon.) Fresno St. , Utah St. (To give Utah a rival.) If the PAC wants to expand pass the pacific time zone, they should consider, SMU, Memphis, Tulane.
@@Spitfirethedragon Who cares who’s closer, regions don’t matter at this new age of college football. The PAC just needs anyone in TX just to have a presence in TX to compete with the Big12.
@@htvlogs80 Colorado State is an R1 school, but not a member of the AAU. They still could be a good fit. Stealing Tulane or Rice from the AAU would also be good options.
Make it about football .. TV viewership is what’s important anyway.. I’m a Fresno State fan and not taking Boise State would be a mistake.. ppl watch that program and they would have instant rivalries with the Pacific Northwest teams.. SDSU, Fresno St, Boise St and one of UNLV/Colorado St/ Air Force … pay less to the new members to county the lack of revenue, with an agreement to split revenue in the future.
Clock is ticking. Something needs to happen, now or next week, imo. B12 need to forget the PAC schools for now - unless they are already committed and coming - grab the Top8 G5 programs now - best 4 from MW, best 4 from AAC !!! (SDSU, SMU, Tulane, Fresno St, Memphis, Boise St, USF, UNLV) Then work up the FBS list over time as available, if ever available. I also like UConn and UMass as full basketball members and junior members for football. Combine them with Gonzaga and Villanova. Also like Loyola Marymount, Santa Clara, U. Of San Diego and Marquette, Butler, Georgetown as basketball schools. Rule College BB, compete in football. Sew up the desirable content.
Sorry to be a downer, but any chance on improving the audio? I love your content. The content consistently needs help, though. Especially from your guests
The question is media markets to make an expansion work... The two obvious candidates are San Diego State and Fresno State. They each come with major media markets (27th and 55th in the USA).. Yes, Berkeley would be pissed off that they are not "academic programs" like them, but with UCLA & USC leaving....that excuse is looking thin, especially in an era of NIL money and the transfer portal. The next two would be UNLV and Air Force. Las Vegas would bring a tasty media market (40th)....and while their FB program is poor, at least they have upgraded their facilities to develop a program. AF, while not directly bringing a great media market (82nd).....bring a nationwide following by Air Force active personal and veterans.
Unpopular opinion. The PAC will stay at 10, they will get an all/most streaming deal which will mean more money but less exposure. And the contract will be written making it very easy for any team to leave on short notice.
Local media would kill for that right now. What we really want is the 12:30 pm (PTZ) time slot. Nobody back east is watching at 7:30, and rest assured that the B1G and B12 are thinking of Pac schools in that time slot. I’m rather convinced that the current timing structure is a large part of what kills attendance out here. So I believe I’m not the only one who would accept a mostly streaming package.
@Charles M he is saying an online deal that keeps espn/fox whoever from slotting our games for a 7:30pm kickoff would help the programs and attendance. And he is saying it's not like any one east coast is staying awake until 2am to watch cal play washington state anyways.
This is a major restructuring no matter which way you slice it. The Pac12 is taking a huge gamble with streaming. They need to hedge their bet by expanding the conference to 20 or more members in order to create more content - they need to assure the transition to streaming by bringing on board to streaming as many programs as possible. Basically, you are almost looking at a merger with the MW and adding some centrally located AAC schools as well. If the Pac12 stays small out of immediate greed factors, then they seal their own doom - the streaming experiment will fail - it will be nothing more than just another test run, like the NFL on TH... They must achieve a critical mass quantum of teams to make the jump to all streaming - or they fail. 32 members is not out of the question...
Wilner is right in that Pac tries for a five or six year TV deal, stays put, and Ore, Wash, Stanford and Cal hope to join an expanded Big 10 in their new TV deal in 2031. If by then Cal and Stanford don't get Big 10 invite, they go an Ivy League route, and the others land where they can.
If PAC is unwilling to relent on their standards than there is only 5 real choices that fit their profile. SDSU (aka UCSD East), UNLV, SMU, UNR, and Wyoming.
SMU in the Pac-12 just sounds crazy. I say San Diego State first and foremost. Then maybe like a UNLV possibly. But historically the Pac-12 was meant to be teams on the Pacific Coast. You might as well rename the whole conference if you add SMU
Historically, the B1G was never supposed to leave the Midwest. I think that ship has sailed, that tight regionality among major conferences is bye-bye. The modern executive hates not raiding the outlands. I don’t want SMU in the Pac, but that’s because I doubt that partnership would work for either side… not to mention that California institutions aren’t supposed to associate within anyone in Texas right now. After all, the B1G will stretch from New Jersey to Westwood, for cripes sake. Shrug.
Perfect example of two conferences going in different directions. The Big 12 was aggressive in expansion, growing their markets, recruiting hotbed, time zones ans membership, aggressive pursued a quality TV deal both financially as well as exposure, and grant of rights, reached out beyond athletics and pursued new revenue streams. The Pac-12 has been passive, their membership has shrank, their market has shrank, they are avoiding expansion but if they do they're staying in the same markets and time zones, they're taking their time on a TV deal and it is costing them exposure, an uncertain financial future and lack of stability, no additional revenue streams including the PACN. One conference is growing the other is stagnant.
Okay but there is something to be said about patience and looking for the best option. PAC12 exploring creative solutions such as a secure ACC partnership or working with streamers. This is naturally going to take more time. One could interpret the BIG12 jumping on expansion and the media rights deal so quickly as them being panicked. Not to mention the loss of OU and TExas are going to be much larger than losing USC and a UCLA program that has been largely disappointing over the last two decades.
@@dallasmustang11 The Pac-12 was lowballed by ESPN and Fox and they're trying to dig up enough money to get the schools to commit to a grant of rights it doesn't have anything to do with patience. If the Pac-12 was in a good place Kliavkoff wouldn't be writing letters to the UC Regent and trying to get UCLA's move to the B1G blocked. As far as the Big 12's move being interpreted as the Big 12 "panicking" the ONLY people who view it that way are you, the Pac-12 media and Pac-12 leadership. Everyone else, industry leaders, considered it a master stroke. The Big 12's media deal is higher than the B1G's expiring media deal and the exposure is equal to the B1G's current exposure. If the Big 12 had "panicked" they would not have gotten more money, they wouldn't have taken the B1G's old spot, and they would have signed a 10 to 12 year deal instead of a 6 year deal. And no, USC and UCLA are MUCH bigger losses than OU and Texas mainly because it has continued to destabilize the Pac-12.
@@CatsClaw44 BIG12 people said that but reporters with PAC12 sources and media ties say that lowball story was completely false. Joan Canzano who has been reporting on the PAC12 for decades reported this. And no there are many industry leaders who viewed the BIG12s decision to pounce on this as the “safe” move. Pac12 as I said is looking for creative lucrative ways to help prevent further schools leaving.
OK, for those who want to continue with the tired and lazy "the Big 12 panicked by taking this deal" the Big 12 did what the ACC wants to do and the Pac-12 is trying to do. If you can't get a deal equal to the B1G's and SEC's new deal then you fill the vacancy left by their old deal. For all intent and purposes the Big 12 simply grabbed the B1G's old deal. The B1G's expiring contract is 6 years, 2.64 billion dollars or 31.4 million per (14) member. The Big 12's deal is 6 years, 2.28 billion or 31.7 million per (12) member. They also took most of their old TV slots and is the only conference on ESPN and FOX. The only thing the B1G has that the Big 12 doesn't have is a conference network and that can change with expansion. Either way the Big 12is projected to make 55 million per member, 9 million short of the old B1G deal with the B1GN revenue figured in, and identical to the current expiring SEC TV deal that pays 55 million per member WITH the SECN figured in. The Big 12 didn't panic it was simply being shrewd, calculating and smart.
I cannot see that happening anytime soon. They offer the Big 10 too many positives in more than just football and academics. They have basketball, baseball, and the olympic sports appeal as well. They will do okay in football and basketball, but UCLA and USC will probably be a dominant force in the conference's other sports. And USC could be a lure for Notre Dame to join.
UCLA and USC will make out like bandits. The BIG not so much. Neither UCLA or USC are dominant within the PAC and the LA market both in terms of attendance and television is apathetic. I don't see the BIG making up the money that they lost by having to split their pie up another two ways.
@@alexh4436 I think seeing both teams play new teams in the BIG 10 will make for better TV ratings AND their game times will be earlier in the day (instead of night games). USC attendance is currently in line with the Big 10 average of 67K per game. UCLA avg over the past 5 seasons 58K per. I imagine those will rise with games against the top teams in that conference. UCLA VS LSU got nearly 70K last year. USC vs ND had over 72K this year.
Except Wyoming, I don't think any of those schools qualify academically for the PAC 12. The conference requires schools to be a R1 reasearch school and a member of the AAU. I think Colorado State would be their best option at this point, and then maybe try to steal Rice University from their new agreement to join the AAC.
No reason to go to 14. Add SD St and SMU. Call it a day. But if they wanted to go to 14 they could also add UNLV and Fresno St. Plus they definitely should add Gonzaga in basketball now UCLA is leaving. Their basketball is really down now.
While I agree with the sentiment, the reality is that PAC schools can’t afford to keep falling further and further behind the other conferences with the money they are making from these deals, otherwise their facilities won’t stay on par and they won’t be able to compete on coaching salaries, etc.
@@SeaBizzy1 Oregon is considered to have the best or in the top 5 best facilities in the Nation. Stanford just built a new Stadium, all cash from donors. They just don’t seat 100k like Michigan, Ohio St. etc. the PACs problem is most of the west coast doesn’t care much about college football. If Stanford and Cal quit football, very few would care. You could give them 100 million/ yr and the fan base wouldn’t change. If the AZ schools go to the big 12 for another 20 mil/ yr it won’t change who they are . Even though Purdue and Indiana are going to get 80 million yr they will still suck.
@@teeduck I agree with you about Cal and Stanford but I don’t know a lot of B12 fans/media folks talking about adding either one of those schools for the reasons you mentioned. And I’m aware that Oregon has some pretty sick facilities, but unless Phil Knight decides to start throwing some of that Nike money at Washington as well, my guess is that they are going to need a strong tv deal to remain competitive. As for the AZ schools, this tv money doesn’t just fund football. I would imagine Arizona would care if they started losing basketball coaches/recruits to schools like Purdue and Indiana because they have that extra $80mill a year to spend on coaching salaries and facilities. But since all of this is driven by football though, I think all you need to do is look at Colorado. Their AD just flat out said they didn’t have the money to pay Deion Sanders before hiring him. How long do you think he stays in Boulder if an SEC team shows up with their big fat checkbook? Colorado probably wants to secure as lucrative a tv deal as they can before this bites them in the ass. And then there’s Utah. It wasn’t so long ago that they were stuck in the Mountain West. I’m sure any reasonable Utah fan can attest to what a difference greater exposure and resources can do for a program that cares about competing at a high level. But who knows, maybe Stanford and Cal’a donors can take care of them as well. Oh wait I forgot, Stanford and Cal don’t care about their own teams let alone Utah’s…
@@SeaBizzy1 look, the PAC is what it is. If it’s dooms day like you predict,then the AZ schools move to the big 12. Maybe Utes and CU too. Stanford and Cal move to Div 2 or drop football. WSU and OSU move to Mtn west. Ducks and UW go Independent. My prediction is the pac stays the PAC , way less money and they accept being the worst conference. But I bet you the Ducks get back to the playoffs before Indiana, Purdue, Rutgers, Maryland.
A better question is if SDSU leaves the MWC for the PAC will they have to share revenue with Fresno. The answer of course is no because the Dem Governor ignores the Red Silicon Valley. It’s why the Valley should be their own state.
I’m a diehard College Football fan born and raised in Pasadena, and I can say without a doubt that a Big 12 mainly comprised of TCU, Oklahoma State, Utah, Colorado, Baylor, BYU, Kansas State, Iowa State is much more interesting and worth my time than anything the PAC-12 has to offer.
I hope so. If I had a choice I would have the LA schools stay in the Pac but they aren’t, so I say the B1G should (and i think would, eventually) add the 2 Bay Area schools & the 2 Pacific Northwest Powers.
@@lordrayden3045 on another post you claim Hawaii adds value but then you question whether Oregon does!!! WTF?? Ask any conference who they would rather have. In your world Hawaii = value and Oregon = no value. Glad you aren’t running my favorite conference, it would be bankrupt in a year!!
@@fadercreek they already tried that. The ACC tv deal is too long, the flagship members of the ACC dont want it, and one of their TV partners shot it down because it adds money to neither league.
PAC will stay at 10. Can't add SDSU without someone else. Whether it's Boise St, UNLV, SMU, Fresno State doesn't matter. No additions add to the TV package.
@@billl1127 but it does save your league from extinction. Sometimes, restructuring and survival are more important. Right now, you have no TV deal because everyone expects 8 of 10 to leave, and Cal to be left standing there holding their puds.
@Charles M if all those teams leave and it's just Cal and Stanford and Oregon St, Wash St, the Pac is toast regardless if you add 4 or 6 or 8 G5 Mountain West teams. Whatever new blend of teams you create will not generate a competitive Power 5 TV deal.
A trillion isn’t that much to Amazon… and, yes, they are too big and deserve to lose some scratch. But they can cut costs in some foreign markets (which is what’s causing the devaluation) and still have a lucrative presence in richer markets. That won’t have anything to do with this decision. But it’s Apple who’s been making splashes like this. And they’re heavily in the data biz, which is one reason why they’re seemingly overpaying for Major League Soccer, and could very well make a deal with the Pac.
@@rodneydurrett8604 Streaming is the way of the future. Traditional tv is dying away. And you’re stupid if you think Amazon is honestly going anywhere barring Congressional action
@@guicyg7942, I’m not saying streaming is in the future. But not in the next 6 years. The B1G commissioner even believes that streaming is of the future but not right now. He turned down streaming to ensure his conference has 100% visibility. The pac is just isolating itself in Amazon just as their idiocy of the pac network isolated the conference. ESPN and Fox gives the greatest exposure to college football. The pac has to go with streaming because they have no value for espn or fox to bid seriously on.
The PAC 12 should merge with the MWC and others and form a league ladder with promotion and relegation. They could really spice it up by making each team the bottom half of a league have to play a playoff game with the top half of the league below to see who goes up and who goes down. It would make every game meaningful and a pro-rel playoff would be something no other league could offer. Of course a meritocracy is the last thing any conference wants so this is just a pipe dream.
Interesting that the Pac10 is interested in Gonzaga and SMU, both being religious institutions and the reason BYU is not in the Pac10 is because the schools didn’t want a religious institution
SMU is not religious. Like USC it is formerly Methodist. Gonzaga wouldn't be a full member, but there's some disputation on whether inviting them is a good idea.
Would the Ivies even have Cal ? Cal is a public school. STAN might could join the Ivies, maybe. Maybe not though. STAN may need to found a National Big (FBS) Ivy League and invite other colleges, like Rice, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, Duke, Wake Forest, Notre Dame, BC, SYR, MIA, to join. Maybe they include "Public Ivies" like Cal, W&M, UNC, UVA, GaTech, Washington, Colorado, Arizona...
You can take to the bank that the discussions between the ACC and the Pac started with Stanford and Cal, and that an “FBS Ivy” you speak of is one possible outcome of those talks. Listen back to Wilner’s comments about Stanford here… Stanford is neither set up nor suited nor have the will to play in the age of the transfer portal or NIL. Thing is, for being public and Stanford’s rival, Cal is a kindred spirit in this regard. I lived in the Bay Area a couple years. There’s a couple stories to tell if you don’t mind taking the time.
@@mikebronicki8264 Having had a friend invite over a Stanford basketball player after a game in Eugene, I can certainly tell you how many athletes end up with an inferiority complex about going to Stanford. I only mention that to establish the focus on The Farm. A handful of years later, Cal gets a stud running back named Russell White. There was never a lack of mention in Bay Area media about how frustrated other students were with his presence there. That’s certainly not something that would EVER make news in Eugene or Portland about a UO athlete. Around that same time, Bay Area columnists had something of an obsessive preoccupation with NCAA investigations going on at Washington. The investigations led to sanctions that prompted Don James to resign. But the media by the Bay were screaming for Washington to be punished for what they saw as insufficient GPA among football players. And I know this attitude stems from the media coverage of Stanford and Cal. Nothing since has persuaded me of anything other than a quite large desire there to emphasize the academics at both schools and ask why other schools are such sellouts.
@@PCSPounder I think there's a market to be had for true Amateur Athletics at schools like: Notre Dame, Stanford, Rice, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Duke, Wake Forest, BC, SMU, Tulane, MIA, USC, SYR, TCU, Baylor, Tulsa, and over time, it opens up for others like: Villanova, Holy Cross, Fordham, Georgetown, Lehigh, Lafayette, Bucknell, Colgate, Bentley, Stonehill, Davidson, Richmond, Furman, U. of San Diego ... the Ivies, and maybe other "Little Ivies" and "Hidden Ivies." And there's just as many "Public Ivies" like Cal & W&M, etc.
Or will CFB kill themselves by remaining linear when the kids and recent graduates never had a cord to start with? I do believe your argument needs to be flipped on its head. I’m guessing you’re as close to being as old as I am, if not older. I’m used to cable, I grew up with 5-channel television. My daughter, in grad school… streams. Her classmates… stream. Their goal… not to feed sports contracts or otherwise pay less to watch. ALL sports will require word-of-mouth and social media to thrive… if you want to know how American soccer went from “not on the radar” to “most big cities now have a soccer stadium,” it certainly wasn’t done with mass ESPN exposure. They showed games, but not the in-depth coverage the other major sports here get. So it can be done, but the marketing, the approach, has to change.
The truth is that UCLA is a prize and Cal is not, for one thing. For another, the B1G is done expanding. There comes a point beyond which the slices of the pie are too thin and members start to balk, and I'm pretty sure 16 schools is that point. It may even turn out to be too aggressive, we shall see. I'm not sure contractually how it would work, but the obvious thing to do is figure out some way to stitch together the best properties from the Big 12 and Pac 12, or Pac 10 or whatever they will call it now. I'm a little surprised at the Colorado talk coming out, because I'm not sure they are that big a prize either, but things are obviously afoot. Something pretty dramatic has to happen if a bunch of schools are to avoid football marginalization, and adding Boise and Fresno is not that thing.
I am disappointed to say I agree. Unless some major unforeseen shake up occurs, I think expansion is completely done for perhaps years. As a Boise State fan I think we're stuck in the Mountain West for a long time.
My take on PAC 12 expansion is outside of the box. If the Big 10 can take west coast schools, the PAC 12 should also consider some excellent programs outside of just the west. I think they should consider adding Navy, Air Force, Army, SMU, Memphis, USF, Boise State, San Diego State and Fresno State. If I were to narrow it down to 4 schools: Air Force, Fresno State, San Diego State, and SMU (reluctantly, they’re not all that good so I’m not sure why they’re such a hot topic lately). Talk of adding UNLV should die. They are just not a good program and not even very popular in Las Vegas so there’s really no interest in UNLV in their own market.
Getting a media deal before any expansion, hence negotiating a deal while your conference has less value. SMH Where can I apply to be the commissioner? I can't do any worse than these clowns.
San Diego State lost the best DB in college ball to Texas Tech! He transfered a day or two ago. He got homesick. Wreck 'Em! Guns up! San Diego State's stock just dropped!
@@shawn8690 UCLA is part of the University of California system, with 11 schools. It was actually “illegal” (or at least immoral) for UCLA not to tell the Board of Regents that they considered the offer. The Board could have fired everyone at UCLA who was involved. In the end, they decided that Cal would only lose so much (the amount of the “tax” is conditional, based on the next Pac contract) and the B1G money will be nice enough to go ahead. The upper bound of that “tax” covers the annual debt on Memorial Stadium, and the Regents are apparently happy with that.
@@brandonwhitney1189 That’s not how Vegas adds value. Cheapest place to fly. Not necessarily more hotel rooms than they’d ever hope to fill, but it seems like it does. I believe the only western conference NOT to play their basketball championship in Vegas is the Big Sky.
Personally I believe that the Pac-12(10) should expand into the Pac-16. PAC North: Washington Washington State Oregon Oregon St Boise St. Wyoming Stanford California PAC South Arizona Arizona St Utah Colorado Fresno St San Diego St UNLV Nevada
You don’t understand the money aspect. Not one team you added will add value. The current members would lose money by adding teams. Say you have 10 teams and a $100,000,000 TV deal and then add 4 schools who add $20,000,000 combined. You are now dividing 120,000,000 14 ways. That’s about 8.5 million instead of 10 million. Why would you do that? You’re better off staying at 10 schools at that point. No school will give up revenue.
@@STC987 Just because the introduction of the mountain West is a short-term negative does not mean that it will not progress to be a long-term benefit. That's like saying that none of those programs would ever increase in its marketing value while being in the PAC. Fresno States, for example, across all its programs for sporting entertainment is a relatively good program. They have shown throughout the years that they can play ball. They have winning records, bowl, game wins, and they already have shown on multiple occasions that they can beat members of the Pac-12. If you think the Pac-12 can ever pull a team like Texas A&M, Nebraska, Texas Tech, Ohio State, then you sir are crazy. No huge name. Caliber program is going to want to leave the Big Ten or the SEC to come to the pack. So in order to boost the PAX profitability, you have to expand it.
@@danielpaoli1093 you also have no concept of how things work. Wins and losses have little to do with it. All that matters is what a program can bring financially. Texas has been horrible the last 15 years but yet bring a ton of value. Wyoming has had decent records of late, but adding them loses money for the conference. You do not get it. No PAC schools are going to subsidize Wyoming, Boise, etc… Unless you think the schools that bring little to no value will take a cut rate, you are simply dreaming. Some schools, will never become relevant. The schools listed will never bring value to require a massive TV deal. As a matter of fact, Oregon State and Washington State aren’t very attractive financially, so the solution is to add schools far less profitable than that. Again, a lot of people like you are ignorant. That isn’t a derogatory term btw. You, and others, are extremely ignorant as to what goes into profitable business models. You have no concept of math. If the PAC is losing money by the departures of UCLA and USC, your solution is to add more teams for the sake of it and in turn bring in less money for each school. You clearly did not read, or cannot comprehend my previous post. Your approach would 100% lead to the end of the PAC. You think Oregon, Washington, Colorado, ASU, Arizona and Utah are going to stick around to subside mountain west schools? They would rather not add schools. That is ignorance at the highest level. It’s always quality, not so much quantity.
I know to many this is still laughable, but I think the PAC-12 has no other choice but to bring in programs like Boise State, UNLV, and New Mexico State. It's either they bring in such programs or the conference is gone within a few years. I assume San Diego State is going to the PAC-12 eventually, so if they add 3 more programs like the aforementioned they'll stay afloat.
Boise is worthless. The big 12, in need to schools before they died, went and annexed cincy and UCF instead of Boise in their back yard. (I get the Houston and byu additions). They passed on Boise, that tells you all you need to know
The PAC-12 does not need to expand just for the sake of expansion. None of the expansion teams move the needle what so ever. They just water down what would be a competitive conference. Just let the 10 remaining teams share all the revenue rather than burden them with lesser teams.
If they do not vastly expand contemporaneously with the switch to streaming, the streaming experiment is doomed to fail. They must bring on board enough quantum of programs to make the switch a movement instead of just another experiment. They are almost better off bringing 32 teams with them over to streaming. They must accumulate a critical mass to make the switch a success.
This is why the pac 12 should’ve added Boise state and Fresno state while they were hot. They could’ve made so much money off them in the kellen Moore era. And when Davonte Adams and Derek car at Fresno state would’ve brought their tv revenue up
Pac-12 adds SDSU and SMU. There is NOBODY else that helps the conference in any way. And, for those that keep saying Boise State, Fresno State, UNLV .... You have no idea what you're talking about. For academic reasons those schools will NEVER be in the conference. Period.
SEC, ACC and Big 12 do not care about academics, and they are a much better conference than PAC 12. San Diego State is stuck at a high R2. Boise State can get there to an R1 and they already are in a working relationship with University of Washington and they could reach an R1 status that SDSU can't. UNLV is already an R1, but UNR is the better R1 academics, and it is the flagship school.
@Dirk Hartman yes, a stronger P12. The only team that adds any strength is TCU and they have no reason to join. You really think Hawaii and Colo St add value to where the per school split would be higher than it is without them?
You do not understand the money situation. Adding schools does not add value in most circumstances. How would adding the schools listed improve the PACs negotiations with networks? You think Fox and ESPN are demanding more Hawaii and Colorado State? Unless the teams increase value, it lowers the payout per team.
No......those schools supported trying to force UCLA to stay for their personal gains. Knowing UCLA had 100 million dollar debt. Those aren't good people. You do not merge with snakes. They'll destroy you eventually.
Conference members would lose money merging with the PAC 12. Oregon and Washington would make sense but they will be in the Big 10 at some point. Colorado, ASU, Arizona and Utah are the only real possibilities.
Same could be said about the BIG12. In the end we are moving toward two main conferences and then a few on the secondary level. BIG10 and SEC on top and then the remnants of the PAC12, BIG12 and ACC
The Big 12 has positioned itself as third in revenue and has landed with both feet planted. The ACC is on the edge of the bay door of a plane and almost ready to jump. The Pac is already at free fall mode and can't get the parachute to eject.
@@purplehaze9793 that’s your opinion. It’s not fact. And I disagree 100%. The value of UCF, Cincy and especially Houston are NOWHERE near what OU and Texas would have brought long term
What you fail to realize is USC and UCLA are bigger hits to their conference in comparison to OU and TX. The LA market the PAC lost was massive. Yes OU and TX are Big names but their market don't come close to USC and UCLA. The 4 schools coming in are not high brand names but.. they open the Big 12 more market wise across the U.S. Before the Big 12 squeezed themselves by being to central with one another. Hence the problem with the PAC. Geography does not bode well for the PAC. BIG 12 has survived so many times because how well positioned it is (central) the PAC has built itself in a corner where fan bases aren't as passionate about football. Hence low turnouts.
I see a lot of B12 fans say grab the 4 corners like they bring so much value to B12 when in fact they dont. Why arent fans wanting Oregon and U Dub? Is it bc of the perceived forgone conclusion they are big10 bound? Or are they really just scared of the major NIL player that is Oregon? Lots of major talent snubbing SWC/New B12 schools and are already flocking to the Ducks, no pun intended. New B12 should also be leery of SMU to PAC. And 5 stars have been avoidng B12 for many many years anyways. Jimmy's and Joe's over X's and O's. New B12 might be in trouble. Big 12 Natty drought continues....
The big 12 would love both uw and Oregon. Both programs want the B1G, and they will not sign a GOR. 5 star talent is concentrated among 10 programs. There are very few schools who have won a championship in the last decade so there is no need to fear anyone. The B12 tv deal will net members the most money they have ever made, they have a team in the playoff, they have strong competent leadership, and they have strong tv ratings. The Big12 is competitive.
The talent that has snubbed the new B12 members may begin reconsidering those schools once they are in a P5 conference with P5 exposure/resources. Schools that have been elevated from G5 (or whatever it was referred to previously) have done fine, just look at TCU and Utah. And while of course talent matters, the amount of 5 star recruits a school manages to land year in and year out is not the most accurate measure of success. Obviously Oregon and Washington would be huge gets for the B12 but anyone who is having a realistic conversation about B12 expansion knows it’s not likely to happen. They don’t want to commit to the B12 long term and the B12 doesn’t need them as a rental to be okay. As for the B12’s natty drought, the PAC hasn’t won a title since before Texas beat USC in 2005. Even after OU and TX leave, the new Big 12 will still have 2 members that have reached the CFP in TCU and Cincy. So if a title drought is something the B12 should be concerned about, then it’s a concern that the PAC should share and I highly doubt that adding SMU will do much to change that for them. Unlike TCU and Utah before they moved up, SMU has had one noteworthy season in the last 3+ decades at the G5 level. If the PAC is considering them it isn’t about adding a quality team, it’s just to get into the DFW market which is already split with TCU and dominated by the B12 and SEC. SMU to the PAC shouldn’t concern anyone but PAC fans because it is a desperation move.
Oregon and Washington wouldn’t be a good fit and would eventually bolt anyways if the Big 10 ever ends up looking their way. Oregon St and Washington St wouldn’t do much in terms of bringing any value to the Big 12 so no. The only Pac-12 schools that make any sense are the 4 corners if the Pac doesn’t survive.
@@lordrayden3045 Nope. Oregon wants to recruit in California. That means a conference with California schools. The B12 ain’t that. I tend to think the other northwest schools think similarly. I’ll put it another way… there were already merger talks. If anyone took that seriously, something should have happened then.
Both the Pac-12 and the Big 12 have completely been destroyed. The Pac-12 destroyed itself and the Big 12 destruction is a mystery because it was the only conference a few years ago that could rival the SEC. The Pac-12 for some reason thinks it's smart to air their games only at 3:00 am. in the morning on the Eastern Seaboard which is where most of the viewers are. The Pac-12 also makes their games incredibly exclusive and expensive to watch. They are just not very smart people running that conference. If Oklahoma and Texas had stayed and not to mention Nebraska in the Big 12 and bringing Colorado back now that Deion Sanders is there we would have been a better conference than the SEC without question.
@@RAJohns Utah State is Tier One, Carnegie 1, R1 and Nevada and two other Mountain West schools are and all are better total athletics than UNLV. PAC12 made it clear no religious colleges and BYU will be in Big12. True not in yet, but would be a bigger penalty than when schools backed out of being or staying in the AAC in the beginning of the name change from Big East. Again PAC12/10/8 will not take religious schools. That means no Gonzaga or SMU or Tulsa. The PAC12 could add Utah State, Nevada, San Diego State (not R1 yet), Colorado State and then flirt with the idea of adding Hawaii which is Tier1, Carnegie 1, R1 and Fresno State; which is not. I not sure about what Wilner is talk about as far as television partners; maybe two of those will be on board but not FOX based on what has been reported.
@@RAJohns Keep smoking. BYU is 100% Big 12. The fact you'd say BYU says the position the Pac 12 is in. Get over it buddy. That ship has sailed. Better hope SDSU and UNLV sees value in going to the Pac. That's your best shot.
Tulane and Rice not going to that train wreck. SMU the only goofy school ready to go to that conference knowing Oregon and Washington on a jet out to the first thing that makes sense.
Hawaii?? They don’t even have adequate facilities. Aren’t they playing home games at their practice facility because their home stadium is condemned????
The PAC 12 is DONE!! How can ppl not see this? Oregon, Washington, Colorado and Utah are not going to stick around in this conference for San Diego State or Boise or Fresno State. The Big 12 will gobble them up if the Big 10 doesn't take them. The last year for the PAC 12
B12 fans are so happy to not have their conference broken up that they’re having delusions of grandeur. There’s no value in having a 1 in 16 chance at the football playoffs in a conference losing their two big money draws when you can have a 1 in 10 (or 12) chance in a conference that has a couple big markets and an emerging power. It might make $4 million less per year per school (though I doubt it’ll pay that way), but out west, that’s eaten up with travel costs and another trade off or two. Also, if the ACC contract were up at this time, they’d get paid more, even if they lost Florida State and Clemson. Not a whole lot more (I will assume a couple schools get poached), but more. ESPN was very fortunate to lock the ACC into a long-term contract, and if the GOR is voted out, the real first move is a renegotiation of media rights. The real reasons the B12 got an increase are (1) a make nice after ESPN almost killed the conference, and (2) a last stand towards justifying any sort of linear broadcasting aimed at a mostly male audience. The goal here isn’t for conferences to match B12 money, it’s for schools to match B1G money.
@@danielbitzer652 Duh, that’s a bigger market and a major program. Nobody with any sense about the subject believes that’s going to happen. Just as important, for all of UO and UW’s attributes, they’re not going to get B1G money from the B12… nor the Pac. So many B12 fans I’m seeing think they’re going to be on their way to B1G money by adding those two, but besides these schools not going anyway, even if they did, it wouldn’t actually increase a per school B12 take.
@@PCSPounder lol.... They already begged the Big 10 to take them and the Big 10 said NO!!! So there you sit with this great recruiting class in the unknown. Will the PAC 12 once USC and UCLA leave? Will Oregon be stuck in the PAC 12 with San Diego State and Boise State or maybe Fresno State? Will Oregon jump to the Big 12 or the Mountain West Conference? Will the Big 10 throw them a bone? I heard that the Big 10 might take Oregon and Washington on a pay cut basis because Oregon doesn't create enough revenue? Experts are saying Oregon would take the deal because they still would get more then the PAC 12 could give them... The question is will the Big 10 in fact allow Oregon in?
The Pac is going to leverage Deion and the new Colorado to get an enhanced TV deal. The Pac will stay at 10 teams. That will limit the split. SDSU, UNLV, SMU add no value. In SDSU case, absolutely no one in LA/Orange Cty/Inland Empire watches or cares about SDSU.
I’m sure the Pac will try and stick with 10 teams but Deion isn’t going to make up for losing USC/UCLA unless Colorado wins 3 out of the next 5 national championships, which they won’t because Deion either flops in Boulder or, more likely, gets hired at a bigger program like Florida St or somewhere in the SEC. In fact, I think it’s more likely that Colorado went out and hired someone like Deion not to help prop up the PAC but rather to try and make themselves more attractive to another conference should the PAC fail to stay together.
San Diego St would be a great add and Fresno St?
San Diego State is not a great add. Fresno State isn’t really even a good add… they’re literally trying to glom onto a local sales tax increase initiative to stay afloat.
San Diego State is a good add, and defends Southern California to a limited degree. Not great… you’d like to think that the revamped stadium and a P5 presence gives them more juice in their home market. What I do know is the NWSL team outdrew them on average for games played in the same stadium in 2022.
@@PCSPounder San Diego is great to have since both LA schools are leaving. Fresno is the next best with Central CA. Best for Pac 12 is to go 16 teams to keep the conference strong overall.
Add SDSU/Fresno
Go after Texas markets with SMU/RICE and UTSA/UNT or BYU/UNLV
@@PouonoHB The number of schools in a conference do not indicate strength of a conference. In this day and age, the payout per school does.
The WAC went straight from 10 to 16 in the mid-1990s, kicking off in 1996. Three years later, 8 teams split. The WAC is a shell of its former self.
The Pac has no great options because nobody you list really delivers a market.
@@PCSPounder San Diego market is large enough. But makes sense what you’re saying. Maybe a Pac-12/Big10 merger in the future
@Paul Schmidt it does in part, and it depends upon who you are combining with. You cannot know what the combined amalgamate would be worth - you can't just add up the sum of the parts. M&As are all about the value of the combined whole exceeding the sum of the parts. To view or argue to the contrary is frankly very small minded, common wisdom (an oxymoron).
The PAC-12 ended with 6 ranked teams, 12 All-Americans, and a Heisman all while the conference was in limbo and many trumpeting their imminent demise.
Correct and USC/UCLA make up 2 ranked teams, 5 All Americans and a Heisman. PAC 12 is losing a lot.
@@peters822 what really matters is who was the Champ? Not the LA schools
@@guicyg7942 the LA schools matter because they bring in a lot of money
Huge loss for Pac 12 but the conference will move on with Utah/UW/Oregon/Oregon State and UofA/CU/Wazzu coming up strong.
New Pac 16:
UW/Wazzu
Ore/OreSt
Cal/Stanford
AZ/ASU
Utah/BYU
CU/SMU
SDSU/FRESNO
RICE/SMU
A big 12 - pac 12 merger would be very sensible to me !
Been attempted/looked at, the egos are too big (even though it makes total sense), one must fail, the other picks up the pieces. Right now, it's Pac12 self destructing- slow motion train wreck.
That merger would create a conference that would rival the best by sheer volume, the conference champ would be an undeniable threat to anyone. But despite the merits will it happen? Almost impossible, the coastal folks are too pretentious, too woke, too elitist. Big swing and miss imho.
@John Faris Indeed. Agree, on all counts.
The colossal 24
PAC-10 needs to add San Diego State. Its basketball team is ranked in the top 25 and the football team will thrive later.
Pac 12 needs to add 2 teams...San Diego State and UNLV. Both have beautiful new stadiums! SD beautiful weather. Vegas has a dome. Both markets can capture some of that So Cal Market.
UNLV? Smh That will never happen.
No one care about those teams.
Well lets see how it plays out once the expansion happens. Being in the PAC might not be so bad after all, but who knows. I would hate to see say Washington vs Washington state or Oregon vs Oregon state rivalry games each year being wrecked by this. but change does happen after all. especially when money big money is involved.
Go get SDSU now!!
Exactly. Add San Diego State. Couldn’t agree more.
why it brings no increase in $$$
SDSU is a quality program but TV revenue wise it's not a draw to the networks. Fresno State has more interested fans but it's academics and prestige don't fit Pac standards.
PAC will stay at ten and split amongst 10 will be more then 12 teams.
@@billl1127 The whisper is that San Diego State won’t dilute the PAC’s take, that they’ll be an equal partner.
But a more important thought, and I bring this from Oregon’s POV. Everything Oregon does is about recruiting. San Diego State in the conference means there’s still a Southern California destination within reach. Oh, BTW, the city with the most Heisman Trophy winners is- drum roll, please- San Diego. So that’s one vote in favor.
@@billl1127 both are bad tv they just dont have the following
Time for the Big 12 to act on expansion . Go get the 4. Corner schools .
How are the BIG12 going to act on expansion? Doesn't the universities have to approach the B12 first? The remaining teams have wanted to go the B1G or stay together. The TV money will be competitive with the Big12. The PAC doesn't need to expand. There are no viable expansion candidates for PAC expansion
@@livingforever6157 the TV money wont be competitive to big 12. Big 12 viewership is higher and the time zone they play in is more valuable. Please dont use that phony chart that take UT and OU out of big 12 viewership but not USC and UCLA out of the pac 12 numbers. espn will go with about 26 million and amazon whats big games and not teams with the lowest viewership in the nation.
You can’t get PAC12 schools or big12 and big10 cannot get schools. The schools have to show interest first and submit paperwork to the conference they are interested in and can wait till midnight hour to tell parent conference they are leaving as long as fulfillment of contracts and GORs and so on.
@@shawn8690 by competitive, I mean within 3 to 7 million of one another. Playoff money will be equal among P5 schools through the 2025-26 seasons. Take that along with the regular season deal and the number is still close to 40 million. The Big 12 is between 44-47 million annually. The PAC were making 19 million during the pandemic. They will be made mostly whole. I'm not sure it's a strong enough reason to leave or add a school to the pac.
Who will be the tv partners for the PAC .
Competitive to the Big 12 . not sure that's possible. Without the LA market and The PAC comminsioner seems lost in his efforts to lead the conference and his stories if I was a fan of the conference I would want answers .
Coastal Carolina should joint the Pac-#, and San Diego State and Hawaii should join the ACC! Make all the conference names as bass-ackwards as possible!
I hate the fact that USC and UCLA will be leaving the Pac 12. I hope they lose every game they play.
Same here, can’t wait for USC to lose every game they play to Ohio State
Agreed. I hope USC and UCLA have thier collective asses handed to them.
USC is overrated and ucla a basketball school
@@Goyarxrd exactly they should stay in the PAC 12
This is going to be interesting what the PAC 12 does next.
nothing because people know the big 12 wants to expand
@@shawn8690 the Big12 cannot just go grab schools. The schools have to show interest first. Then schools have to submit paperwork to apply to another conference and conference has to accept interest and then accept applications and then decide to process them. So, as it stands with what the PAC12 or 10 will be getting media deal, it will be similar but maybe less than Big12 but not by a lot. Also Fox has been adamant about not giving extra money whether P5 or G5 added to Big12 per prorata clauses. ESPN will honor and give 63% inventory revenue. But the new schools added beyond the 4 this summer of 23 will not get full share, even if at 63%, would be pro rated and distributed among the new 12 schools and any new schools would have to wait for X-amount of time before getting full share. That won’t jive with any power school moving into the Big12 in the future. A G5 school might but not P5. If FOX agreed to give their 37% to go with ESPN 63% if adding P5 to match current revenue distribution, then maybe in a few years not months but just before new deal Big12 made that kicks in 2025 expires in 2031. I think the 12 schools that Big12 will have moving forward may be only added for now.
@@michaelwall3393 Fox will have to either pay or forego any rights to the new members games. They can bring in another partner for them.
Crumble
@@michaelwall3393 Not true Michael.... FOX never said it wouldn't give more money, all they stated was that they wouldn't automatically agree to giving more money if more programs join the conference... And ESPN, I believe, stated that they would give a MINIMUM of 63% revenue to new programs if they joined the conference. The reporting of FOX absolutely refusing to give any more money is an absolute LIE. Look up the original information and don't go off of what other people have stated.
Add San Diego State, Fresno State, Boise State and BYU. This lineup will be exciting
Yea but usc and ucla have alot of wins, history, and alot of great tradition. Unlv and san diego doesn't have it. Pac will hurt alot.
SMU and SDSU already ARE the 2-hottest Conference Realignment Expansion Target G5-programs right now,.
And SMU wins that battle because they can fit into any P5 conference.
Close behind SMU/SDSU are Tulane and Memphis (for similar reason of generalized fit), then come: Fresno, Boise, UNLV, and USF. Those are, the G5 Top8 ("G5-8").
If the Big12 do not move to grab these top 8 ideal long term expansion targets, then some other conference or conferences will, especially the Pac12 and ACC.
Both the Pac12 and the ACC are in positions of needing to either expand smartly or mutually agreeing to a dissolution.
The Pac12 & ACC are in more desperate positions than the Big12, thus a sense of urgency exists there - if the Big12 wants these schools, and they should, then they better move now.
SDSU secures Southern California, Fresno sews up mid Cal (and Fresno just won the MW), Boise has brand, growth population, proximity to the Oregon and Washington schools, and Boise just played in the MW championship game.
And everyone gets the UNLV "Vegas" gambling world connection - there is already talk of moving Pac12 headquarters to LV.
SMU is SMU, a TCU/Baylor clone. Tulane just won the AAC conference championship, and is an SMU/TCU/Baylor clone. SMU brings Dallas - no matter what any SMU haters say. Tulane brings NOLA and all of LA really.
Memphis has established a recent history of success and brings Memphis and the region around Memphis, including Arkansas, Tenn., Mississippi.
USF is lagging UCF but can catch up and will catch up in short order if only the commitment is made and it appears USF has indeed "seen the light." USF will be ACC pick #1 to replace FSU whose departure is immanent. Memphis, Tulane, SMU, perhaps a few others (Coastal Carolina, ECU, FAU, Temple, Marshall, Army, Navy, etc.) will also be ACC replacements for Clemson, Notre Dame, FSU.
Being that the PAC12 got rid of the North & South division, regions don’t matter. The PAC better get SD State just so the PAC can have a SoCal presence because it’s a big market, so SDST is a must go after. The next can be a toss up between Boise St (Great rival for Oregon.) Fresno St. , Utah St. (To give Utah a rival.) If the PAC wants to expand pass the pacific time zone, they should consider, SMU, Memphis, Tulane.
SMU is an R2. North Texas and UTSA along with UTEP are R1. UTSA is much closer to the PAC 12 than SMU.
Long Beach State needs to bring back football along with Fullerton State and Pacific U?
@@dirkhartman1271 Those schools are like Division 3 status 😂
@@Spitfirethedragon Who cares who’s closer, regions don’t matter at this new age of college football. The PAC just needs anyone in TX just to have a presence in TX to compete with the Big12.
@@htvlogs80 Colorado State is an R1 school, but not a member of the AAU. They still could be a good fit. Stealing Tulane or Rice from the AAU would also be good options.
Make it about football .. TV viewership is what’s important anyway.. I’m a Fresno State fan and not taking Boise State would be a mistake.. ppl watch that program and they would have instant rivalries with the Pacific Northwest teams.. SDSU, Fresno St, Boise St and one of UNLV/Colorado St/ Air Force … pay less to the new members to county the lack of revenue, with an agreement to split revenue in the future.
Counter * the lack of revenue
Clock is ticking.
Something needs to happen, now or next week, imo.
B12 need to forget the PAC schools for now - unless they are already committed and coming - grab the Top8 G5 programs now - best 4 from MW, best 4 from AAC !!! (SDSU, SMU, Tulane, Fresno St, Memphis, Boise St, USF, UNLV)
Then work up the FBS list over time as available, if ever available.
I also like UConn and UMass as full basketball members and junior members for football. Combine them with Gonzaga and Villanova. Also like Loyola Marymount, Santa Clara, U. Of San Diego and Marquette, Butler, Georgetown as basketball schools. Rule College BB, compete in football. Sew up the desirable content.
I remember Jon Wilner said BYU would go 0-5 against the PAC-12 in 2021. Lol look what happened
Sorry to be a downer, but any chance on improving the audio? I love your content. The content consistently needs help, though. Especially from your guests
The question is media markets to make an expansion work...
The two obvious candidates are San Diego State and Fresno State. They each come with major media markets (27th and 55th in the USA).. Yes, Berkeley would be pissed off that they are not "academic programs" like them, but with UCLA & USC leaving....that excuse is looking thin, especially in an era of NIL money and the transfer portal.
The next two would be UNLV and Air Force. Las Vegas would bring a tasty media market (40th)....and while their FB program is poor, at least they have upgraded their facilities to develop a program. AF, while not directly bringing a great media market (82nd).....bring a nationwide following by Air Force active personal and veterans.
Cal to the MW ... if the MW will have them.
I see Fresno state going to the pac 12
Unpopular opinion.
The PAC will stay at 10, they will get an all/most streaming deal which will mean more money but less exposure. And the contract will be written making it very easy for any team to leave on short notice.
Local media would kill for that right now.
What we really want is the 12:30 pm (PTZ) time slot. Nobody back east is watching at 7:30, and rest assured that the B1G and B12 are thinking of Pac schools in that time slot. I’m rather convinced that the current timing structure is a large part of what kills attendance out here. So I believe I’m not the only one who would accept a mostly streaming package.
@@PCSPounder huh ?
Can somebody translate West coast for me please.
@Charles M he is saying an online deal that keeps espn/fox whoever from slotting our games for a 7:30pm kickoff would help the programs and attendance. And he is saying it's not like any one east coast is staying awake until 2am to watch cal play washington state anyways.
This is a major restructuring no matter which way you slice it. The Pac12 is taking a huge gamble with streaming. They need to hedge their bet by expanding the conference to 20 or more members in order to create more content - they need to assure the transition to streaming by bringing on board to streaming as many programs as possible. Basically, you are almost looking at a merger with the MW and adding some centrally located AAC schools as well.
If the Pac12 stays small out of immediate greed factors, then they seal their own doom - the streaming experiment will fail - it will be nothing more than just another test run, like the NFL on TH...
They must achieve a critical mass quantum of teams to make the jump to all streaming - or they fail.
32 members is not out of the question...
Wilner is right in that Pac tries for a five or six year TV deal, stays put, and Ore, Wash, Stanford and Cal hope to join an expanded Big 10 in their new TV deal in 2031. If by then Cal and Stanford don't get Big 10 invite, they go an Ivy League route, and the others land where they can.
Ivy League is not planning expansion.
If PAC is unwilling to relent on their standards than there is only 5 real choices that fit their profile. SDSU (aka UCSD East), UNLV, SMU, UNR, and Wyoming.
SMU in the Pac-12 just sounds crazy. I say San Diego State first and foremost. Then maybe like a UNLV possibly. But historically the Pac-12 was meant to be teams on the Pacific Coast. You might as well rename the whole conference if you add SMU
smu has l less viewers than UH
Wasn’t the PAC12 always against religious schools?…
@@dacokc SMU is not religious. Like USC, it used to be Methodist.
Historically, the B1G was never supposed to leave the Midwest. I think that ship has sailed, that tight regionality among major conferences is bye-bye. The modern executive hates not raiding the outlands.
I don’t want SMU in the Pac, but that’s because I doubt that partnership would work for either side… not to mention that California institutions aren’t supposed to associate within anyone in Texas right now. After all, the B1G will stretch from New Jersey to Westwood, for cripes sake. Shrug.
@@TheFranchiseCA what does SMU stand for?
Perfect example of two conferences going in different directions. The Big 12 was aggressive in expansion, growing their markets, recruiting hotbed, time zones ans membership, aggressive pursued a quality TV deal both financially as well as exposure, and grant of rights, reached out beyond athletics and pursued new revenue streams.
The Pac-12 has been passive, their membership has shrank, their market has shrank, they are avoiding expansion but if they do they're staying in the same markets and time zones, they're taking their time on a TV deal and it is costing them exposure, an uncertain financial future and lack of stability, no additional revenue streams including the PACN.
One conference is growing the other is stagnant.
Okay but there is something to be said about patience and looking for the best option. PAC12 exploring creative solutions such as a secure ACC partnership or working with streamers. This is naturally going to take more time.
One could interpret the BIG12 jumping on expansion and the media rights deal so quickly as them being panicked.
Not to mention the loss of OU and TExas are going to be much larger than losing USC and a UCLA program that has been largely disappointing over the last two decades.
@@dallasmustang11 The Pac-12 was lowballed by ESPN and Fox and they're trying to dig up enough money to get the schools to commit to a grant of rights it doesn't have anything to do with patience. If the Pac-12 was in a good place Kliavkoff wouldn't be writing letters to the UC Regent and trying to get UCLA's move to the B1G blocked.
As far as the Big 12's move being interpreted as the Big 12 "panicking" the ONLY people who view it that way are you, the Pac-12 media and Pac-12 leadership. Everyone else, industry leaders, considered it a master stroke. The Big 12's media deal is higher than the B1G's expiring media deal and the exposure is equal to the B1G's current exposure. If the Big 12 had "panicked" they would not have gotten more money, they wouldn't have taken the B1G's old spot, and they would have signed a 10 to 12 year deal instead of a 6 year deal. And no, USC and UCLA are MUCH bigger losses than OU and Texas mainly because it has continued to destabilize the Pac-12.
@@CatsClaw44 BIG12 people said that but reporters with PAC12 sources and media ties say that lowball story was completely false. Joan Canzano who has been reporting on the PAC12 for decades reported this.
And no there are many industry leaders who viewed the BIG12s decision to pounce on this as the “safe” move. Pac12 as I said is looking for creative lucrative ways to help prevent further schools leaving.
OK, for those who want to continue with the tired and lazy "the Big 12 panicked by taking this deal" the Big 12 did what the ACC wants to do and the Pac-12 is trying to do. If you can't get a deal equal to the B1G's and SEC's new deal then you fill the vacancy left by their old deal. For all intent and purposes the Big 12 simply grabbed the B1G's old deal.
The B1G's expiring contract is 6 years, 2.64 billion dollars or 31.4 million per (14) member. The Big 12's deal is 6 years, 2.28 billion or 31.7 million per (12) member. They also took most of their old TV slots and is the only conference on ESPN and FOX. The only thing the B1G has that the Big 12 doesn't have is a conference network and that can change with expansion. Either way the Big 12is projected to make 55 million per member, 9 million short of the old B1G deal with the B1GN revenue figured in, and identical to the current expiring SEC TV deal that pays 55 million per member WITH the SECN figured in. The Big 12 didn't panic it was simply being shrewd, calculating and smart.
The Big 12 has not panicked and they moved with purpose and will continue to flourish . Yormark knows what he is doing .
I love Jon Wilner's interviews.
How about Fresno State and San Diego State--ask Boise State if they are interested.
I hope this move blows up in UCLA and USC’s face.
I cannot see that happening anytime soon. They offer the Big 10 too many positives in more than just football and academics. They have basketball, baseball, and the olympic sports appeal as well. They will do okay in football and basketball, but UCLA and USC will probably be a dominant force in the conference's other sports. And USC could be a lure for Notre Dame to join.
100 million a year to 20 million
UCLA and USC will make out like bandits. The BIG not so much. Neither UCLA or USC are dominant within the PAC and the LA market both in terms of attendance and television is apathetic. I don't see the BIG making up the money that they lost by having to split their pie up another two ways.
@@alexh4436 I think seeing both teams play new teams in the BIG 10 will make for better TV ratings AND their game times will be earlier in the day (instead of night games). USC attendance is currently in line with the Big 10 average of 67K per game. UCLA avg over the past 5 seasons 58K per. I imagine those will rise with games against the top teams in that conference. UCLA VS LSU got nearly 70K last year. USC vs ND had over 72K this year.
Are you serious? SC and UCLA are going to be at the bottom of the conference every season. I'll put my income on it.
Boise State and Fresno State. They have a long history of being competative against the Pac-10/12
Lots of potential teams, San Diego State, UNLV, Utah State, San Jose State, Idaho, Wyoming.
Fresno State, San Diego State, Boise State Plus one of the others you mentioned would make for an interesting new look PAC.
Except Wyoming, I don't think any of those schools qualify academically for the PAC 12. The conference requires schools to be a R1 reasearch school and a member of the AAU. I think Colorado State would be their best option at this point, and then maybe try to steal Rice University from their new agreement to join the AAC.
No reason to go to 14. Add SD St and SMU. Call it a day. But if they wanted to go to 14 they could also add UNLV and Fresno St. Plus they definitely should add Gonzaga in basketball now UCLA is leaving. Their basketball is really down now.
Dude. PAC is fine at 10. So they get less money than the other conferences.
much less money than big 12
While I agree with the sentiment, the reality is that PAC schools can’t afford to keep falling further and further behind the other conferences with the money they are making from these deals, otherwise their facilities won’t stay on par and they won’t be able to compete on coaching salaries, etc.
@@SeaBizzy1 Oregon is considered to have the best or in the top 5 best facilities in the Nation. Stanford just built a new Stadium, all cash from donors. They just don’t seat 100k like Michigan, Ohio St. etc. the PACs problem is most of the west coast doesn’t care much about college football. If Stanford and Cal quit football, very few would care. You could give them 100 million/ yr and the fan base wouldn’t change.
If the AZ schools go to the big 12 for another 20 mil/ yr it won’t change who they are . Even though Purdue and Indiana are going to get 80 million yr they will still suck.
@@teeduck I agree with you about Cal and Stanford but I don’t know a lot of B12 fans/media folks talking about adding either one of those schools for the reasons you mentioned. And I’m aware that Oregon has some pretty sick facilities, but unless Phil Knight decides to start throwing some of that Nike money at Washington as well, my guess is that they are going to need a strong tv deal to remain competitive. As for the AZ schools, this tv money doesn’t just fund football. I would imagine Arizona would care if they started losing basketball coaches/recruits to schools like Purdue and Indiana because they have that extra $80mill a year to spend on coaching salaries and facilities. But since all of this is driven by football though, I think all you need to do is look at Colorado. Their AD just flat out said they didn’t have the money to pay Deion Sanders before hiring him. How long do you think he stays in Boulder if an SEC team shows up with their big fat checkbook? Colorado probably wants to secure as lucrative a tv deal as they can before this bites them in the ass. And then there’s Utah. It wasn’t so long ago that they were stuck in the Mountain West. I’m sure any reasonable Utah fan can attest to what a difference greater exposure and resources can do for a program that cares about competing at a high level. But who knows, maybe Stanford and Cal’a donors can take care of them as well. Oh wait I forgot, Stanford and Cal don’t care about their own teams let alone Utah’s…
@@SeaBizzy1 look, the PAC is what it is. If it’s dooms day like you predict,then the AZ schools move to the big 12. Maybe Utes and CU too. Stanford and Cal move to Div 2 or drop football. WSU and OSU move to Mtn west. Ducks and UW go Independent. My prediction is the pac stays the PAC , way less money and they accept being the worst conference. But I bet you the Ducks get back to the playoffs before Indiana, Purdue, Rutgers, Maryland.
A better question is if SDSU leaves the MWC for the PAC will they have to share revenue with Fresno. The answer of course is no because the Dem Governor ignores the Red Silicon Valley. It’s why the Valley should be their own state.
Big UCLA fan living in the mitten so happy bruins going to big 10. Christmas came early!!Oh last thing Newsome sucks!!!
Yal are gonna go 2-10 ery year 😂
Good luck losing every year
As a life long Michigan fan, we're only accepting your outcasts as additional punching bags like Northwestern and Indiana.
@chris122176 never going to happen they bring no value to the big 10
Jon is such a pac homer
DUH! He works and lives in the Bay Area. That’s like knocking a reporter in Kansas for being a Big 12. homer.
I’m a diehard College Football fan born and raised in Pasadena, and I can say without a doubt that a Big 12 mainly comprised of TCU, Oklahoma State, Utah, Colorado, Baylor, BYU, Kansas State, Iowa State is much more interesting and worth my time than anything the PAC-12 has to offer.
No PAC 12 team would be better off in the Big 12. A team would only go there if the PAC were to go extinct (i.e. Oregon and Washington head to big X.)
SDSU for sure
Cal Stanford Oregon UW all will be going to the B1G????
I hope so. If I had a choice I would have the LA schools stay in the Pac but they aren’t, so I say the B1G should (and i think would, eventually) add the 2 Bay Area schools & the 2 Pacific Northwest Powers.
LOL
People still think Oregon has value
That’s so cute
@@lordrayden3045Can’t tell if you’re taking a jab at U of O, or the state of Oregon as a whole. Either way, I like your style… lol.
yes and the big 10 will subsidize the 40 million a year for each team .
@@lordrayden3045 on another post you claim Hawaii adds value but then you question whether Oregon does!!! WTF?? Ask any conference who they would rather have. In your world Hawaii = value and Oregon = no value. Glad you aren’t running my favorite conference, it would be bankrupt in a year!!
Fresno State is an easy move for the PAC-12. We just smoked Washington State with ease. Mountain West Champions!
Uh WSU had 8 players not play and the D and O coordinators a week before the bowl….slow your roll
It wouldn’t have mattered if Wassu had everyone available.. Fresno States defense was playing at a very high level
If you are going after the likes of Boise State and SMU, you might as well try to merge with Big 12
or acc
@@fadercreek they already tried that. The ACC tv deal is too long, the flagship members of the ACC dont want it, and one of their TV partners shot it down because it adds money to neither league.
PAC will stay at 10. Can't add SDSU without someone else. Whether it's Boise St, UNLV, SMU, Fresno State doesn't matter. No additions add to the TV package.
@@billl1127 but it does save your league from extinction. Sometimes, restructuring and survival are more important. Right now, you have no TV deal because everyone expects 8 of 10 to leave, and Cal to be left standing there holding their puds.
@Charles M if all those teams leave and it's just Cal and Stanford and Oregon St, Wash St, the Pac is toast regardless if you add 4 or 6 or 8 G5 Mountain West teams. Whatever new blend of teams you create will not generate a competitive Power 5 TV deal.
The phone audio really stinks. With today's technology, you would think there would be better quality‼️
How 'bout live streaming quality for Pac12 games ???
Amazon has lost 1 trillion dollar value this year. That shouldn’t bold well for the pac.
A trillion isn’t that much to Amazon… and, yes, they are too big and deserve to lose some scratch. But they can cut costs in some foreign markets (which is what’s causing the devaluation) and still have a lucrative presence in richer markets. That won’t have anything to do with this decision.
But it’s Apple who’s been making splashes like this. And they’re heavily in the data biz, which is one reason why they’re seemingly overpaying for Major League Soccer, and could very well make a deal with the Pac.
@@PCSPounder , both apple and Amazon have lost huge money this year. Will be interesting to see how this blows up in the pac 12 commissioner face.
@@rodneydurrett8604 Streaming is the way of the future. Traditional tv is dying away. And you’re stupid if you think Amazon is honestly going anywhere barring Congressional action
@@guicyg7942, I’m not saying streaming is in the future. But not in the next 6 years.
The B1G commissioner even believes that streaming is of the future but not right now. He turned down streaming to ensure his conference has 100% visibility.
The pac is just isolating itself in Amazon just as their idiocy of the pac network isolated the conference.
ESPN and Fox gives the greatest exposure to college football. The pac has to go with streaming because they have no value for espn or fox to bid seriously on.
FRESNO STATE A NO-BRAINER!
The PAC 12 should merge with the MWC and others and form a league ladder with promotion and relegation. They could really spice it up by making each team the bottom half of a league have to play a playoff game with the top half of the league below to see who goes up and who goes down. It would make every game meaningful and a pro-rel playoff would be something no other league could offer. Of course a meritocracy is the last thing any conference wants so this is just a pipe dream.
The board saw the money involved....
Two of these five teams SDSU , BYU , Fresno St , Boise St & Colorado st should be considered to fill SC & UCLA spots .
BYU is Big 12-bound. San Diego St is probably waiting to see Pac 12 media deal. Anything less than $30 million and they are off to the Big 12.
Colorado is already in the PAC & BYU is already BIG12 Bound.
Bruh Colorado St they have a brand new stadium like SDSU . Thanks for reminding me that BYU is going To the Big 12 .
They can’t fill their spots. Just leave it ten teams.
Interesting that the Pac10 is interested in Gonzaga and SMU, both being religious institutions and the reason BYU is not in the Pac10 is because the schools didn’t want a religious institution
There are no good options for expansion.
SMU is not religious. Like USC it is formerly Methodist. Gonzaga wouldn't be a full member, but there's some disputation on whether inviting them is a good idea.
At this point the PAC is desperate and trying to survive. They better put pride and tradition aside and go along with others to survive.
@@htvlogs80 they don't need to add anyone. They will have a competitive tv deal with the acc and big 12. Any add will dilute the pot.
@@livingforever6157 That is indeed the problem. What schools are available that would not substantially reduce the per school media payouts?
16:45 SDSU SMU Gonzaga
San Diego State and UNLV.
Hopefully they go to the eastern time zone and grab USF over in Tampa
Jon will never admit that the Big12 is better off
Would the Ivies even have Cal ? Cal is a public school. STAN might could join the Ivies, maybe. Maybe not though.
STAN may need to found a National Big (FBS) Ivy League and invite other colleges, like Rice, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, Duke, Wake Forest, Notre Dame, BC, SYR, MIA, to join.
Maybe they include "Public Ivies" like Cal, W&M, UNC, UVA, GaTech, Washington, Colorado, Arizona...
You can take to the bank that the discussions between the ACC and the Pac started with Stanford and Cal, and that an “FBS Ivy” you speak of is one possible outcome of those talks.
Listen back to Wilner’s comments about Stanford here… Stanford is neither set up nor suited nor have the will to play in the age of the transfer portal or NIL. Thing is, for being public and Stanford’s rival, Cal is a kindred spirit in this regard.
I lived in the Bay Area a couple years. There’s a couple stories to tell if you don’t mind taking the time.
@@PCSPounder spill Paul. I want the stories.
@@mikebronicki8264 Having had a friend invite over a Stanford basketball player after a game in Eugene, I can certainly tell you how many athletes end up with an inferiority complex about going to Stanford. I only mention that to establish the focus on The Farm.
A handful of years later, Cal gets a stud running back named Russell White. There was never a lack of mention in Bay Area media about how frustrated other students were with his presence there. That’s certainly not something that would EVER make news in Eugene or Portland about a UO athlete.
Around that same time, Bay Area columnists had something of an obsessive preoccupation with NCAA investigations going on at Washington. The investigations led to sanctions that prompted Don James to resign. But the media by the Bay were screaming for Washington to be punished for what they saw as insufficient GPA among football players. And I know this attitude stems from the media coverage of Stanford and Cal. Nothing since has persuaded me of anything other than a quite large desire there to emphasize the academics at both schools and ask why other schools are such sellouts.
@@PCSPounder I think there's a market to be had for true Amateur Athletics at schools like: Notre Dame, Stanford, Rice, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Duke, Wake Forest, BC, SMU, Tulane, MIA, USC, SYR, TCU, Baylor, Tulsa, and over time, it opens up for others like: Villanova, Holy Cross, Fordham, Georgetown, Lehigh, Lafayette, Bucknell, Colgate, Bentley, Stonehill, Davidson, Richmond, Furman, U. of San Diego ... the Ivies, and maybe other "Little Ivies" and "Hidden Ivies." And there's just as many "Public Ivies" like Cal & W&M, etc.
Pac12 should add Fresno State and Boise State.
PAC is going to go to Amazon to die on the digital vine. Nobody is going to seek that out other than their hardcore fanbases.
Or will CFB kill themselves by remaining linear when the kids and recent graduates never had a cord to start with?
I do believe your argument needs to be flipped on its head. I’m guessing you’re as close to being as old as I am, if not older. I’m used to cable, I grew up with 5-channel television. My daughter, in grad school… streams. Her classmates… stream. Their goal… not to feed sports contracts or otherwise pay less to watch. ALL sports will require word-of-mouth and social media to thrive… if you want to know how American soccer went from “not on the radar” to “most big cities now have a soccer stadium,” it certainly wasn’t done with mass ESPN exposure. They showed games, but not the in-depth coverage the other major sports here get. So it can be done, but the marketing, the approach, has to change.
Traditional tv is dying and streaming is the future, don’t kid yourself
The truth is that UCLA is a prize and Cal is not, for one thing. For another, the B1G is done expanding. There comes a point beyond which the slices of the pie are too thin and members start to balk, and I'm pretty sure 16 schools is that point. It may even turn out to be too aggressive, we shall see. I'm not sure contractually how it would work, but the obvious thing to do is figure out some way to stitch together the best properties from the Big 12 and Pac 12, or Pac 10 or whatever they will call it now. I'm a little surprised at the Colorado talk coming out, because I'm not sure they are that big a prize either, but things are obviously afoot. Something pretty dramatic has to happen if a bunch of schools are to avoid football marginalization, and adding Boise and Fresno is not that thing.
I am disappointed to say I agree. Unless some major unforeseen shake up occurs, I think expansion is completely done for perhaps years. As a Boise State fan I think we're stuck in the Mountain West for a long time.
pac 12 should ask Deion sanders to help them invite teams to the conference
Deion has influence over kids not college institutions.
@@lorenzohaynes3886 😂😂😂😂😂 why is Jackson State mad then?
lol your got to be joking
@@fadercreek Jackson State isn't mad. Hasn't said one bad thing about the man. Get your facts straight.
@@lorenzohaynes3886 the hbcu president is wishing for him to fail
My take on PAC 12 expansion is outside of the box. If the Big 10 can take west coast schools, the PAC 12 should also consider some excellent programs outside of just the west. I think they should consider adding Navy, Air Force, Army, SMU, Memphis, USF, Boise State, San Diego State and Fresno State. If I were to narrow it down to 4 schools: Air Force, Fresno State, San Diego State, and SMU (reluctantly, they’re not all that good so I’m not sure why they’re such a hot topic lately).
Talk of adding UNLV should die. They are just not a good program and not even very popular in Las Vegas so there’s really no interest in UNLV in their own market.
Poach a couple Big12 teams.
You have the right idea and the right teams--Great job
Fresno state much better football program along with Boise.
Getting a media deal before any expansion, hence negotiating a deal while your conference has less value. SMH Where can I apply to be the commissioner? I can't do any worse than these clowns.
San Diego State lost the best DB in college ball to Texas Tech! He transfered a day or two ago. He got homesick. Wreck 'Em! Guns up! San Diego State's stock just dropped!
Nahhhh!
PAC 12 need to poach big 12 teams: Baylor, Ok State, Kansas, Kansas st, or Texas Tech.
Coastal division vs Mtn division.
Not happening.
Lol
When Texas and OU announced they were leaving to the SEC, TCU, Baylor, TTU, OK St. Wanted to go to the Pac12, They said no
Could have happened last year but the PAC 12 was too arrogant. Now there is absolutely no reason for any Big 12 school to go to the PAC.
why would they go to pac 12 their tv deal will be 10 to 15 million less
They let UCLA leave, but they are going to be taxed! That's the 2 to 10 mill per year.
no they are not that illegal
Not per year.
Vegas adds value! That's why they hold the Pac 12 championship game for Football and Basketball there.
@@shawn8690 UCLA is part of the University of California system, with 11 schools. It was actually “illegal” (or at least immoral) for UCLA not to tell the Board of Regents that they considered the offer. The Board could have fired everyone at UCLA who was involved. In the end, they decided that Cal would only lose so much (the amount of the “tax” is conditional, based on the next Pac contract) and the B1G money will be nice enough to go ahead. The upper bound of that “tax” covers the annual debt on Memorial Stadium, and the Regents are apparently happy with that.
@@brandonwhitney1189 That’s not how Vegas adds value. Cheapest place to fly. Not necessarily more hotel rooms than they’d ever hope to fill, but it seems like it does. I believe the only western conference NOT to play their basketball championship in Vegas is the Big Sky.
Personally I believe that the Pac-12(10) should expand into the Pac-16.
PAC North:
Washington
Washington State
Oregon
Oregon St
Boise St.
Wyoming
Stanford
California
PAC South
Arizona
Arizona St
Utah
Colorado
Fresno St
San Diego St
UNLV
Nevada
You don’t understand the money aspect. Not one team you added will add value. The current members would lose money by adding teams. Say you have 10 teams and a $100,000,000 TV deal and then add 4 schools who add $20,000,000 combined. You are now dividing 120,000,000 14 ways. That’s about 8.5 million instead of 10 million. Why would you do that? You’re better off staying at 10 schools at that point. No school will give up revenue.
@Big Roy 100% correct but I would love to see this set up as a fan.
@@STC987 Just because the introduction of the mountain West is a short-term negative does not mean that it will not progress to be a long-term benefit. That's like saying that none of those programs would ever increase in its marketing value while being in the PAC. Fresno States, for example, across all its programs for sporting entertainment is a relatively good program. They have shown throughout the years that they can play ball. They have winning records, bowl, game wins, and they already have shown on multiple occasions that they can beat members of the Pac-12. If you think the Pac-12 can ever pull a team like Texas A&M, Nebraska, Texas Tech, Ohio State, then you sir are crazy. No huge name. Caliber program is going to want to leave the Big Ten or the SEC to come to the pack. So in order to boost the PAX profitability, you have to expand it.
@@danielpaoli1093 you also have no concept of how things work. Wins and losses have little to do with it. All that matters is what a program can bring financially. Texas has been horrible the last 15 years but yet bring a ton of value. Wyoming has had decent records of late, but adding them loses money for the conference. You do not get it. No PAC schools are going to subsidize Wyoming, Boise, etc… Unless you think the schools that bring little to no value will take a cut rate, you are simply dreaming. Some schools, will never become relevant. The schools listed will never bring value to require a massive TV deal. As a matter of fact, Oregon State and Washington State aren’t very attractive financially, so the solution is to add schools far less profitable than that. Again, a lot of people like you are ignorant. That isn’t a derogatory term btw. You, and others, are extremely ignorant as to what goes into profitable business models. You have no concept of math. If the PAC is losing money by the departures of UCLA and USC, your solution is to add more teams for the sake of it and in turn bring in less money for each school. You clearly did not read, or cannot comprehend my previous post. Your approach would 100% lead to the end of the PAC. You think Oregon, Washington, Colorado, ASU, Arizona and Utah are going to stick around to subside mountain west schools? They would rather not add schools. That is ignorance at the highest level. It’s always quality, not so much quantity.
I like SDSU plus a combo of Gonzaga and Boise St. as a football only member.
ucla at Rutgers
I know to many this is still laughable, but I think the PAC-12 has no other choice but to bring in programs like Boise State, UNLV, and New Mexico State. It's either they bring in such programs or the conference is gone within a few years. I assume San Diego State is going to the PAC-12 eventually, so if they add 3 more programs like the aforementioned they'll stay afloat.
Boise is worthless.
The big 12, in need to schools before they died, went and annexed cincy and UCF instead of Boise in their back yard. (I get the Houston and byu additions). They passed on Boise, that tells you all you need to know
I wouldn’t consider Boise in B12 backyard. Somewhat close to BYU but long ways away from everywhere else
@@Bobcats-nb7he
Boise is right in the big 12s area.
The fact they passed on Boise tells you everything you need to know
New Mexico State?? Two bowl games in about 50 years isn’t good enough.
why? those teams dont bring value to the tv deal and with the big 12 looking they will wait for the big 12.
Could go get Eastern Washington University pac-12 then try and get an independent school
After the end of next season.....What PAC 12????
Get an updated phone. Sounds like 365 is talking to Charlie Browns teacher. Can hardly understand what your saying.
UCLA throws Berkeley a bone. Cal is a failed athletic program. They'll never get into the B1G.
I can confidently say Pac will not get anything *substantial* from Amazon.
The PAC-12 does not need to expand just for the sake of expansion. None of the expansion teams move the needle what so ever. They just water down what would be a competitive conference. Just let the 10 remaining teams share all the revenue rather than burden them with lesser teams.
If they do not vastly expand contemporaneously with the switch to streaming, the streaming experiment is doomed to fail. They must bring on board enough quantum of programs to make the switch a movement instead of just another experiment.
They are almost better off bringing 32 teams with them over to streaming.
They must accumulate a critical mass to make the switch a success.
This is why the pac 12 should’ve added Boise state and Fresno state while they were hot. They could’ve made so much money off them in the kellen Moore era. And when Davonte Adams and Derek car at Fresno state would’ve brought their tv revenue up
They would not have made money. These mid teams would slowly drain the conference dry and further their demise.
@@brucebane5602 no they wouldn’t they’d be able to recruit better because of more money
Fresno State is just as good now as it was when Derek Carr & Adams were there..
Pac-12 adds SDSU and SMU. There is NOBODY else that helps the conference in any way. And, for those that keep saying Boise State, Fresno State, UNLV .... You have no idea what you're talking about. For academic reasons those schools will NEVER be in the conference. Period.
SEC, ACC and Big 12 do not care about academics, and they are a much better conference than PAC 12. San Diego State is stuck at a high R2. Boise State can get there to an R1 and they already are in a working relationship with University of Washington and they could reach an R1 status that SDSU can't. UNLV is already an R1, but UNR is the better R1 academics, and it is the flagship school.
SDSU is not an academic institution? Lmao It’s a party school. You must be smokin something my man.
Pac 12 falling apart and Cal still holding on to UCLA like a leech
SDSU will go to the Pac for sure. Then, either Fresno or UNLV will follow.
The big "FTX" on Cal's football field says all you need to know about Cal
The PAC 12 needs to add Colorado State and Air Force, San Diego State, SMU, TCU and Hawaii !
Adding 6 teams will cut the money per school down significantly. Current member schools would never approve this.
With a stronger PAC 12 they should be able to negotiate a better contract with the Netwirks
@Dirk Hartman yes, a stronger P12. The only team that adds any strength is TCU and they have no reason to join. You really think Hawaii and Colo St add value to where the per school split would be higher than it is without them?
You do not understand the money situation. Adding schools does not add value in most circumstances. How would adding the schools listed improve the PACs negotiations with networks? You think Fox and ESPN are demanding more Hawaii and Colorado State? Unless the teams increase value, it lowers the payout per team.
Nah. All they need is The Academy of Art!
BIGPAC Conference merge PAC 12 and BIG 12.
No......those schools supported trying to force UCLA to stay for their personal gains. Knowing UCLA had 100 million dollar debt. Those aren't good people. You do not merge with snakes. They'll destroy you eventually.
why we dont want anything to do with pac 12 maybe 3 teams
Conference members would lose money merging with the PAC 12. Oregon and Washington would make sense but they will be in the Big 10 at some point. Colorado, ASU, Arizona and Utah are the only real possibilities.
Pac12: a slow motion train wreck.
I see no way this conference survives. Not enough money to make it worth maintaining.
Same could be said about the BIG12. In the end we are moving toward two main conferences and then a few on the secondary level. BIG10 and SEC on top and then the remnants of the PAC12, BIG12 and ACC
The Big 12 has positioned itself as third in revenue and has landed with both feet planted. The ACC is on the edge of the bay door of a plane and almost ready to jump. The Pac is already at free fall mode and can't get the parachute to eject.
@@purplehaze9793 that’s your opinion. It’s not fact. And I disagree 100%. The value of UCF, Cincy and especially Houston are NOWHERE near what OU and Texas would have brought long term
Deion sanders
What you fail to realize is USC and UCLA are bigger hits to their conference in comparison to OU and TX. The LA market the PAC lost was massive. Yes OU and TX are Big names but their market don't come close to USC and UCLA. The 4 schools coming in are not high brand names but.. they open the Big 12 more market wise across the U.S. Before the Big 12 squeezed themselves by being to central with one another. Hence the problem with the PAC. Geography does not bode well for the PAC. BIG 12 has survived so many times because how well positioned it is (central) the PAC has built itself in a corner where fan bases aren't as passionate about football. Hence low turnouts.
I see a lot of B12 fans say grab the 4 corners like they bring so much value to B12 when in fact they dont. Why arent fans wanting Oregon and U Dub? Is it bc of the perceived forgone conclusion they are big10 bound? Or are they really just scared of the major NIL player that is Oregon? Lots of major talent snubbing SWC/New B12 schools and are already flocking to the Ducks, no pun intended. New B12 should also be leery of SMU to PAC. And 5 stars have been avoidng B12 for many many years anyways. Jimmy's and Joe's over X's and O's. New B12 might be in trouble. Big 12 Natty drought continues....
The big 12 would love both uw and Oregon. Both programs want the B1G, and they will not sign a GOR. 5 star talent is concentrated among 10 programs. There are very few schools who have won a championship in the last decade so there is no need to fear anyone. The B12 tv deal will net members the most money they have ever made, they have a team in the playoff, they have strong competent leadership, and they have strong tv ratings. The Big12 is competitive.
The talent that has snubbed the new B12 members may begin reconsidering those schools once they are in a P5 conference with P5 exposure/resources. Schools that have been elevated from G5 (or whatever it was referred to previously) have done fine, just look at TCU and Utah. And while of course talent matters, the amount of 5 star recruits a school manages to land year in and year out is not the most accurate measure of success. Obviously Oregon and Washington would be huge gets for the B12 but anyone who is having a realistic conversation about B12 expansion knows it’s not likely to happen. They don’t want to commit to the B12 long term and the B12 doesn’t need them as a rental to be okay. As for the B12’s natty drought, the PAC hasn’t won a title since before Texas beat USC in 2005. Even after OU and TX leave, the new Big 12 will still have 2 members that have reached the CFP in TCU and Cincy. So if a title drought is something the B12 should be concerned about, then it’s a concern that the PAC should share and I highly doubt that adding SMU will do much to change that for them. Unlike TCU and Utah before they moved up, SMU has had one noteworthy season in the last 3+ decades at the G5 level. If the PAC is considering them it isn’t about adding a quality team, it’s just to get into the DFW market which is already split with TCU and dominated by the B12 and SEC. SMU to the PAC shouldn’t concern anyone but PAC fans because it is a desperation move.
Big12 needs to go invite Washington, Oregon, Arizona and CAL or Stanford.
I think the big 12 would be well off trying to get the 4 northwest schools,
Washington, Oregon, wsu, OSU
Oregon and Washington wouldn’t be a good fit and would eventually bolt anyways if the Big 10 ever ends up looking their way. Oregon St and Washington St wouldn’t do much in terms of bringing any value to the Big 12 so no. The only Pac-12 schools that make any sense are the 4 corners if the Pac doesn’t survive.
No to cal
@@lordrayden3045 Nope. Oregon wants to recruit in California. That means a conference with California schools. The B12 ain’t that. I tend to think the other northwest schools think similarly.
I’ll put it another way… there were already merger talks. If anyone took that seriously, something should have happened then.
@@Khromiux
Yeah, who want the top public university in the 8th largest media market?
And you can beat them all the time
Who wants that?
Cal needs calimony because they’re like the woman in this divorce and UCLA is the man.
Are you sure, what do they say their pronouns are ? (WTF - where did that bullshit come from ?)
Both the Pac-12 and the Big 12 have completely been destroyed. The Pac-12 destroyed itself and the Big 12 destruction is a mystery because it was the only conference a few years ago that could rival the SEC. The Pac-12 for some reason thinks it's smart to air their games only at 3:00 am. in the morning on the Eastern Seaboard which is where most of the viewers are. The Pac-12 also makes their games incredibly exclusive and expensive to watch. They are just not very smart people running that conference. If Oklahoma and Texas had stayed and not to mention Nebraska in the Big 12 and bringing Colorado back now that Deion Sanders is there we would have been a better conference than the SEC without question.
BYU and UNLV
BYU is in the Big 12. Be for real..
@@lorenzohaynes3886 not yet
@@RAJohns Utah State is Tier One, Carnegie 1, R1 and Nevada and two other Mountain West schools are and all are better total athletics than UNLV. PAC12 made it clear no religious colleges and BYU will be in Big12. True not in yet, but would be a bigger penalty than when schools backed out of being or staying in the AAC in the beginning of the name change from Big East. Again PAC12/10/8 will not take religious schools. That means no Gonzaga or SMU or Tulsa. The PAC12 could add Utah State, Nevada, San Diego State (not R1 yet), Colorado State and then flirt with the idea of adding Hawaii which is Tier1, Carnegie 1, R1 and Fresno State; which is not. I not sure about what Wilner is talk about as far as television partners; maybe two of those will be on board but not FOX based on what has been reported.
@@RAJohns Keep smoking. BYU is 100% Big 12. The fact you'd say BYU says the position the Pac 12 is in. Get over it buddy. That ship has sailed. Better hope SDSU and UNLV sees value in going to the Pac. That's your best shot.
@@michaelwall3393 SMU is not a religious school.
They should have already offered
San Diego state
Hawaii
UNLV
Tulane
Then start thinking about San Jose state, Fresno state, SMU, Rice
Tulane and Rice not going to that train wreck. SMU the only goofy school ready to go to that conference knowing Oregon and Washington on a jet out to the first thing that makes sense.
@@lorenzohaynes3886
Where’s Oregon going? To the big 12? Independent? Where?
They don’t have other options.
@@lordrayden3045 the tv deal for pac 12 is going to be much lower than big 12 so maybe
Utsa
Hawaii?? They don’t even have adequate facilities. Aren’t they playing home games at their practice facility because their home stadium is condemned????
The PAC 12 is DONE!! How can ppl not see this? Oregon, Washington, Colorado and Utah are not going to stick around in this conference for San Diego State or Boise or Fresno State. The Big 12 will gobble them up if the Big 10 doesn't take them. The last year for the PAC 12
B12 fans are so happy to not have their conference broken up that they’re having delusions of grandeur.
There’s no value in having a 1 in 16 chance at the football playoffs in a conference losing their two big money draws when you can have a 1 in 10 (or 12) chance in a conference that has a couple big markets and an emerging power. It might make $4 million less per year per school (though I doubt it’ll pay that way), but out west, that’s eaten up with travel costs and another trade off or two.
Also, if the ACC contract were up at this time, they’d get paid more, even if they lost Florida State and Clemson. Not a whole lot more (I will assume a couple schools get poached), but more. ESPN was very fortunate to lock the ACC into a long-term contract, and if the GOR is voted out, the real first move is a renegotiation of media rights.
The real reasons the B12 got an increase are (1) a make nice after ESPN almost killed the conference, and (2) a last stand towards justifying any sort of linear broadcasting aimed at a mostly male audience. The goal here isn’t for conferences to match B12 money, it’s for schools to match B1G money.
@@PCSPounder Are you kidding? The Big 12 would gobble up Oregon and Washington in a second if they made a call.
@@danielbitzer652 Duh, that’s a bigger market and a major program.
Nobody with any sense about the subject believes that’s going to happen.
Just as important, for all of UO and UW’s attributes, they’re not going to get B1G money from the B12… nor the Pac. So many B12 fans I’m seeing think they’re going to be on their way to B1G money by adding those two, but besides these schools not going anyway, even if they did, it wouldn’t actually increase a per school B12 take.
@@PCSPounder lol.... They already begged the Big 10 to take them and the Big 10 said NO!!! So there you sit with this great recruiting class in the unknown. Will the PAC 12 once USC and UCLA leave? Will Oregon be stuck in the PAC 12 with San Diego State and Boise State or maybe Fresno State? Will Oregon jump to the Big 12 or the Mountain West Conference? Will the Big 10 throw them a bone? I heard that the Big 10 might take Oregon and Washington on a pay cut basis because Oregon doesn't create enough revenue? Experts are saying Oregon would take the deal because they still would get more then the PAC 12 could give them... The question is will the Big 10 in fact allow Oregon in?
The Pac is going to leverage Deion and the new Colorado to get an enhanced TV deal. The Pac will stay at 10 teams. That will limit the split. SDSU, UNLV, SMU add no value. In SDSU case, absolutely no one in LA/Orange Cty/Inland Empire watches or cares about SDSU.
I’m sure the Pac will try and stick with 10 teams but Deion isn’t going to make up for losing USC/UCLA unless Colorado wins 3 out of the next 5 national championships, which they won’t because Deion either flops in Boulder or, more likely, gets hired at a bigger program like Florida St or somewhere in the SEC. In fact, I think it’s more likely that Colorado went out and hired someone like Deion not to help prop up the PAC but rather to try and make themselves more attractive to another conference should the PAC fail to stay together.
No head coach will raise value of a conference. He ll get poached again to an sec or b10 school lol