It’s not like that’s some big hurdle. Either accommodate them or force them to go against their beliefs. Not exactly rocket surgery.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Of course, Canzano has the answer why SDSU was not added yet.
sports.yahoo.com
Short version is the Pac didn't want to dilute the revenue for one year in order to pay off the Comcast fiasco.
Thought Canzano said before SDSU and SMU were additive to the tv deal and were necessary for tv inventory to get close to the Big 12 tv revenue number.
Finally, a logical answer to why the Pac-12 didn’t finalize a media deal by June 30
We were puzzled by the Pac-12's apparent lack of urgency relative to the #Aztecs. @JohnCanzanoBFT gave us the answer we needed.
Short version is the Pac didn't want to dilute the revenue for one year in order to pay off the Comcast fiasco.
Thought Canzano said before SDSU and SMU were additive to the tv deal and were necessary for tv inventory to get close to the Big 12 tv revenue number.
Last edited:
Think at the very least it is SDSU forcing the PAC to negotiate in good faith. If SDSU had committed to leaving the Mountain West before they had consummated the deal, the PAC would have had all of the negotiating leverage, then could offer just the bare minimum to them to join. This way the PAC is forced to offer enough to entice them to leave the Mountain West. Either that or they will stay put. Necessary move on SDSU ‘s part. Essentially saying to the PAC we need an acceptable offer.
Even though SDSU's current annual payout from the MWC is only $6 million, they know they're the #1 expansion option for the Pac and it's not even close. I hope they're holding out for a full share.
Its also possible SDSU wanted to put out a doc before the deadline that would help them negotiate a lower buyout, but without actually committing to leaving formally. Even the "psych!" retraction still they can argue "we did give notice"...
Or it could have been a ruse to make the PAC make a formal offer, by making them think the B12 already had and they were gonna take it. Which would be pretty self-inflated, but maybe worth a shot, esp if you thought P12 leadership was foolable.
Or it could have been a ruse to make the PAC make a formal offer, by making them think the B12 already had and they were gonna take it. Which would be pretty self-inflated, but maybe worth a shot, esp if you thought P12 leadership was foolable.
Trying to outsmart/outmaneuver each other doesn’t seem like a great way to start out a relationship.
What a great way to start a relationship. PAC 12 tells themselves internally to slow play SDSU to increase revenue for a year and then keeps that secret from SDSU and puts them through the wringer with the whole letter fiasco. Plus if revenue was higher without SDSU, why invite them and SMU in year 2 to begin with?Of course, Canzano has the answer why SDSU was not added yet.
Finally, a logical answer to why the Pac-12 didn’t finalize a media deal by June 30
We were puzzled by the Pac-12's apparent lack of urgency relative to the #Aztecs. @JohnCanzanoBFT gave us the answer we needed.
Short version is the Pac didn't want to dilute the revenue for one year to pay off the Comcast fiasco.
Thought Canzano said before SDSU and SMU were additive to the tv deal and were necessary for tv inventory to get close to the Big 12 tv revenue number.
PAC 12 does not have a very good deal. If they did they would release the details and eagerly spin the news they are the clear #3 after the B1G and SEC. PAC 12 is trying to buy time and hoping a great deal appears out of nowhere. Big 12 is sitting back knowing when the PAC 12 reveals their deal that the money and stability will likely bring Colorado and maybe Arizona to the Big 12. And justifiably then make the move. They had no choice. Who can blame them for leaving. Good PR move.
The logical answer is the PAC is semi-incompetent. In a world where everything has to have some crazy technical answer, the PAC is just kind of dumb.
Oregon and Washington will anchor a PAC 12 along with Utah. For the near term. As long as they keep the automatic bid. They will only take Big 12 if there is absolutely no other option. And they do have the option of a cobbled together PAC 12. For a while. Colorado and Arizona go to Big 12.
If the PAC number comes in less than $20m then I could see them making a move as I don't see that conference viable when CU and UA move. If that TV contract is as bad as many here want it to be, I see the dominos falling quickly with 6 schools added to the Big12 to get to an optimal number of 18 schools.
Washington and Oregon want to be in the B10, both schools can afford to take less money for the short term, if the golden ticket is there down the road. Neither school will look to move to the B12, unless all over options are no longer available.
The only way that works is if OR, WA and anyone else with a B12 invite are taking quite a bit bigger of a cut than the rest. That’s a lot of haves and a lot of have nots in one conference, and I’m still not sure there’s enough to spread around.
They might be enticed if the corner schools all bolt. If the PAC has an offer in the $20m/school range, what is it with the SDSU, SMU and 2 or 4 tbd MWC schools swapped in for the corners? $15m? $10m? How do they cut that pie to bring the other schools in for 2024 knowing at least 3 of them have to pay $16m to get out of their current conference. Yeah, WA and OR can take a little less and be okay, but there are still limits to what they can pass on. Plus, the B12s new deal is up in 2031, which isn’t much (if any) longer than the PAC deal would likely be.
I’m just not convinced the invite is coming. If the Big 10 really does want WAOU, why wait? They may eventually be fall back options, but I don’t see the purpose of not inviting them now if the really wanted WAOR that bad.
WAOR may think they are content to wait, but another 5 or 10 years and the ACC may then be in play.
I think you are spot on here. The PAC said they would bring in SMU and SDSU, then the TV money said, “The deal is the deal, no extra cash for SDSU and or SMU.” They can’t afford to bring them in and keep existing members happy.
Either the B10 doesn’t want them or the B10’s TV partners aren’t ready to cough up even a partial share for them right now.
It’s one, the other, or both.
They are waiting to give a reduced share of payment. Maybe each get half share In B1G. They can take that offer or make even less in PAC 12 with mostly Streaming.