NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:08 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 831 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 52, 53, 54, 55, 56
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 1:00 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 1429
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
sec03 wrote:
The reality is time zones. They have to work with it.


I wonder how much relief they would have gotten if they just bit the bullet and had taken OU and oSu. Two games that would have put them into the CTZ where there could have been more leverage for the conference to field earlier games. Putting programs of that notoriety into the conference would have resulted in the conference getting to tear up the old contract and renegotiate a new one.

This is why I can't take the endless Chicken Little fanspeak about the ACC and Big XII issues too seriously...the PAC is having some serious, real issues. What, they didn't see this coming? That they could have addressed this by relenting on Oklahoma State? These guys? The network isn't going to force more money down their way if the product doesn't sell, and the schools need better minds to think this rationally through. Something's going to have to give on the PAC's end...it's not the networks' fault.


The Pac12 not taking the OU-OSU does look like a head scratcher. There was some indication that decision was made because it did not include Texas without the LHN stuff. But the PAC12 is mostly made up of 'combos' in format, and it's hard to see a better combo available other than OU/OSU. That certainly would render the PAC12 CTZ exposure with quality content. But the refusal may be placed on those two or three or so PAC12 schools inherently resistant to expansion due to elitist attitudes and fear of changing the west coast dynamics. They even undermined a potentially lucrative 'coop' agreement with the B1G---and that certainly would have added to a slate of ETZ and CTZ games. One has to think the PAC12 is engaged in 'protectionism' and institutional selfishness a bit too much whereby they miss taking advantage of certain new economic opportunities.

With any new expansion, the PAC12 is going to also fret about divisions. All the members apparently want those games in southern California for exposure, gate receipts, and recruitment. If SEC, B1G, and ACC divisional set-ups have generated varying levels of complications and fuss, one can imagine the higher level of compromise it would take for the PAC12 to deal with 14 or 16 members.

Texas will be Texas and who knows what they would have done had OU/OSU left. Following those two could have been among the options with certain compromising. What is also known is the SEC talked with OU about being #14 prior to the Mizzou addition. The SEC was not going to take two from the same state, and the resolve of OU to go there alone was not evident or simply OU did not want to be in the SEC. And, it is known that the B1G has 'studied' OU in formulating a potential future expansion plan.

In the PAC12's case, an in-state pair could be positive. Depth with an extension that far would be important. Something is lost when a prime rival is not included.
Also, had the PAC12 taken OU/OSU, and prime Texas schools were not available for further inclusion, the PAC12 could have found a couple more (to 16) in the western region to fill in the geographic gaps to make an even more vast, but congruent, conference.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 2:29 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 923
sec03 wrote:
But the refusal may be placed on those two or three or so PAC12 schools inherently resistant to expansion due to elitist attitudes and fear of changing the west coast dynamics. They even undermined a potentially lucrative 'coop' agreement with the B1G---and that certainly would have added to a slate of ETZ and CTZ games. One has to think the PAC12 is engaged in 'protectionism' and institutional selfishness a bit too much whereby they miss taking advantage of certain new economic opportunities.


Larry Scott should have resigned from his post after the multi-sport B1G-PAC arrangement crumbled because of USC and Stanford football commitments to Notre Dame. Seriously, the great, ambitious ideas and whatnot have been batted down for the dumbest reasons. Maybe at that kind of level of income, I could have a thicker skin, but I don't want to be remembered more for what I couldn't do rather than what I did.

And what he's done is get a decent media contract...as everyone is getting these days. The network's been plagued with issues. PAC-16 only netted Colorado and Utah. B1G-PAC. Texas-LHN. Walking away from Oklahoma. Bad TV spots. Even worse attendance issues. Sagging basketball. NCAA investigations into top football programs. That's all under Larry, though not technically his fault. Although, I'm sure someone out that way will say it's his crazy to manage. Sounds close to the PAC-way.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:00 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1324
The Bishin Cutter wrote:
sec03 wrote:
But the refusal may be placed on those two or three or so PAC12 schools inherently resistant to expansion due to elitist attitudes and fear of changing the west coast dynamics. They even undermined a potentially lucrative 'coop' agreement with the B1G---and that certainly would have added to a slate of ETZ and CTZ games. One has to think the PAC12 is engaged in 'protectionism' and institutional selfishness a bit too much whereby they miss taking advantage of certain new economic opportunities.


Larry Scott should have resigned from his post after the multi-sport B1G-PAC arrangement crumbled because of USC and Stanford football commitments to Notre Dame. Seriously, the great, ambitious ideas and whatnot have been batted down for the dumbest reasons. Maybe at that kind of level of income, I could have a thicker skin, but I don't want to be remembered more for what I couldn't do rather than what I did.

And what he's done is get a decent media contract...as everyone is getting these days. The network's been plagued with issues. PAC-16 only netted Colorado and Utah. B1G-PAC. Texas-LHN. Walking away from Oklahoma. Bad TV spots. Even worse attendance issues. Sagging basketball. NCAA investigations into top football programs. That's all under Larry, though not technically his fault. Although, I'm sure someone out that way will say it's his crazy to manage. Sounds close to the PAC-way.

If OU and OSU had joined the PAC12, then Texas Tech could have been offered as well which then the PAC could have pretended to be in talks with KU which would have forced Texas to move.

No way does Texas stay in a conference with TCU, Baylor, KSU, ISU, and WVU. Pressure from Tech fans, OU/OSU fans (yes there are many of them in the State of Texas), and even Texas fans would have forced the issue; however I'm sure Stanford/USC didn't think that in the worst case scenario (Texas stays in the B12 or goes SEC/B1G/ACC/Indy) that OU/KU are worth expanding with Texas Tech or OSU. Without Texas it would have been hard to get everyone on board and even harder to convince Utah/Colorado to give up LA/PHX for Lubbock/Stillwater/Norman/Lawrence.

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:34 pm 
Offline
Sophomore
Sophomore

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:07 pm
Posts: 55
sec03 wrote:
The reality is time zones. They have to work with it. West coast schools exposure in national telecasts, by circumstances, are going to have limitations in the east. Regional telecasts have served a good purpose for a long time. What the big networks seem to want to do more frequently is have 'national telecasts' of 'featured' games they focus on marketing beforehand. For them, they weigh that cost against resources that have to be devoted to regional programming.

Outside the really big names on the west coast, there may be a bit of under-valuing due to limited eastern exposure. On the other hand, there is certainly the 'hype' given to a few west coast schools that often get over-stated. After all, California is the most populous state, along with some very significant metro areas elsewhere in the far west. How many times in the recent era has the sports media in the pre-season labeled the University of Southern California as having the team of decade, or even the century, and then to see such hype prove to come up way short of the portrayal?

The comparative population factor, alone, is a greater challenge to most of the Mountain West types.

I think what it means is that when the next major round of P5 realignment occurs in 2025-2027, we should expect the PAC to go large, to about 18 schools, with all the new schools in CTZ and ETZ. For example, consider adding Texas, Kansas, Iowa State, Notre Dame, Pitt, and one other. (Of course Notre Dame would insist on having football games against USC, Stanford, and Texas every year, plus other demands, but it would give them the desired national footprint.) The PAC could schedule to ensure at least one school in each time zone has a home game every week, in all sports.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 1:04 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 4:20 pm
Posts: 21
The fact is that any expansion without Texas was going to be dead in the water. The PAC-12 has these following things going for it.

1. The California Schools will not give up playing eachother. This was quite evident when the schedule for the PAC-12 came out with scheduling protections for the 4 California Schools.

2. The Northwest Schools will not give up even more games playing in Southern California. They gave up a lot last time to make the PAC-12 work. There is no way that they'd give up even more time in one of the biggest recruiting grounds that they have to make the PAC-16 work.

3. In an expansion to 16, the old PAC-8 would insist on staying together, which would mean that the population base, would be moved to one division. This would have to be countered by adding an population counterweight to California. About the only population base that makes that possible is if you add the entire state of Texas, by adding the Texas Longhorns.

4. The Longhorn Network will never be converted into a PAC-12 network (which at that point would be PAC-16). The PAC-12 networks are owned lock-stock-and-barrel by the conference. The Longhorn Network is owned partially by non-conference. Now, that being said, if the Longhorns were to get out of the LHN, and join the PAC-12, the PAC-16 would probably launch the PAC-16 Network - Texas. Also, Texas's counter-proposal on that was laughable. It was "We'll keep all the revenues from the LHN. And if the PAC-12 Networks would have made us more money than the LHN, then we want a share of that as well. However, we will not give up any of the revenues on the LHN if the PAC-12 networks don't make as much money."

So, let's give two hypothetical solutions...

LHN makes 50 million, PAC-12 Networks make 40 million per school... - Texas gets 50 million, every other school gets 40 million.
LHN makes 50 million, PAC-12 Networks make 60 million per school... - Texas and every other school gets 59.375 million.

Texas wanted to eat it's cake, and have it too.

There was probably a proposal from the PAC-12 that Texas gets rid of the LHN network (probably even some money offered to get them out of that contract with ESPN), at which point the PAC-12 would add to their networks two additional networks launched - PAC-16 Texas, and PAC-16 Oklahoma (to go along with PAC-16 Oregon, PAC-16 Washington, PAC-16 Bay Area, PAC-16 Los Angeles, PAC-16 Arizona, and PAC-16 Mountain).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2014 1:56 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:41 am
Posts: 923
Considering there wasn't a firm agreement between the Big XII schools until before last season, had OU bolted west (had the PAC wanted the OK pair), I think Texas would have been forced to be a bit more flexible or liberal with its LHN holdings. That the PAC would have had a reach into the CTZ, Texas' leverage was severely diminished, and the kind of terms the Big XII would have gotten from any network was not going to be enough to keep the group together for very long.

That kind of hypothetical...it makes the PAC look very weak. Just because they couldn't have Texas when they wanted them, what, they didn't think of the long-term prospects?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 831 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 52, 53, 54, 55, 56

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 

cron




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group