Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
Ah okay. I took that as “You guys in the B12”. I’m a little touchy.
Do the SDSU students, or alumni even know they have a football team? I work with an SDSU grad, he didn’t know they were in the final four this year.I think SDSU has a law school. Makes me wonder if the students are handling some of this.
If they pull out of the NCAA MBB tournament, would they then just pull out of all NCAA events? I just don’t see them pulling that pin on the grenade. They’d not only be jeopardizing their future legitimacy, but they’d also be risking their non-profit status.
But then again, maybe the Saudis will fund their new league?
If the reports of $30m for a streaming deal are true, I don’t think they move this time around. The money is there to wait this out and see how the steaming deal works. Losing some exposure is easier to deal with than losing money. At least for the short term.
Even at $25m, I don’t think that’s enough of a monetary difference compared to our deal. I think they could stomach that amount. However, the PAC schools would need to consider what kind of exposure they would get; which would be poor.
Disney stock has been downgraded due to softness in its streaming services. How safe is a PAC 12 network based on streaming?
Yeah I feel it is borderline, at least for a couple schools. Basically, like it has been, it could go either way, and if it is just down to the money number, not sure anyone moves. But....
First it is the Net Figure, after taking out costs. Like you said if it is $25M then that is possibly just enough, to possibly stay.
The issue is, the entire package. Is $25M enough combined with 80% or more on streaming? When you look at it that way, then it pushes it more towards moving. I believe it was AZ that said the deal must be at least 50/50 streaming, more than that was not acceptable. This very well mean nothing but it is a significant issue.
Next, they have talked about unequal revenue for a while, and that could really change things too. So if the average deal is $25M but the top teams get 30+ and the bottom teams get more like 20. That could push some out too. Unless they are a team that thinks they will be in the top of the conference (if it is based on performance, as indicated), they may decide it is not a good deal. A team like AZ, I doubt thinks they will be in the top of the Pac just out of the blue, CO may also believe it will take a few years, etc. So they can look at it as possibly for the life of the new contract they will be getting less.
The overall package is what could push someone out, vs just looking at the raw number. By the time you look at everything, it may not look like such a good deal.
Losing exposure means losing recruits. Schools like Stanford and Cal might be OK with limited exposure, but I can't believe the other 8 schools would be. Maybe WSU & OSU because they could be destined for the MWC. But I can't believe 4 & 5 star kids will go to schools with maybe 500k-1M people watching their games. I can't believe it would help OR WA getting into the Big10 or 4 Corner schools to Big12 around 2030. Especially if ACC schools are in play this decade.
Having Pac12 go with a heavy streaming deal would help the Big10, Big12 and SEC having the Pac12 be an incubator for streaming revenue over the next 6 years. The key on the streaming deal will be if production costs are offloaded to the schools. So $30M might not be a net equivalent to the Big12's $31.7M.
As long as the Pac 12 can get between 5 to 10 million after expensive of what the B12 schools will receive, I think they will stay at least for the time being in the Pac 12.
How long that lasts is anyone's guess, because Oregon and Washington want out and will jump the moment that the B10 offers.
If the money is within the range I mentioned, that is going to put a lot of pressure on the AD's and Presidents of Colorado and Arizona to either move or stay put at least for the time being. Both schools have to know that they have a pathway to the B12, so that door will be open. The only problem for both is when the ACC contract is up, then we are going to get a rush to gain those teams, but that is like 13 years away.
How long that lasts is anyone's guess, because Oregon and Washington want out and will jump the moment that the B10 offers.
If the money is within the range I mentioned, that is going to put a lot of pressure on the AD's and Presidents of Colorado and Arizona to either move or stay put at least for the time being. Both schools have to know that they have a pathway to the B12, so that door will be open. The only problem for both is when the ACC contract is up, then we are going to get a rush to gain those teams, but that is like 13 years away.
KidSilverhair
Well-Known Member
Remember that time when it looked like Iowa State’s best hope for survival might have been joining a few other Big XII refugees and hoping for a PAC invite? It wasn’t all that long ago … my, things sure do change
Why would the 4 corner schools sign a multi year GOR agreement to a conference that provides significantly less money, significantly less exposure, and significantly less stability?
If they do sign, then they deserve whatever fate awaits them.
Tradition and rivalries, what we all say the new realignments have killed. We can't chastise them for holding onto what we wish the rest of us could have.
Because they care more about academic association and cultural association than they care about solvent athletic departments.