Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
All Hail

PAC 12 Continues to Fall Behind Other Big 5 Conferences in $$ Chase

17 posts in this topic

http://www.scout.com/college/usc/story/1782379-pac-12-falling-behind-fast-in-chase?s=166

Solid article by uscfootball.com of all places.  The average PAC 12 school is going to lose out on 15 million per year compared to it's peers and that number only looks like it's growing.  I wonder where all of the best coaches are going to go and who is going to pay them the most money in the coming years... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad you posted this -- I don't have access to it, but ...

Listening to the same peoples' podcast this morning makes me wonder if the much bigger problem facing the conference isn't the threat of the LA schools asking why Wazzu and Oregon State make the same share of the conference pie as they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Scscsc89 said:

I'm glad you posted this -- I don't have access to it, but ...

Listening to the same peoples' podcast this morning makes me wonder if the much bigger problem facing the conference isn't the threat of the LA schools asking why Wazzu and Oregon State make the same share of the conference pie as they do.

It's true that the leverage is already built into the relationship.  All that needs to occur is for the LA schools to exercise said leverage but thus far they have yet to do so.  Unlike in other parts of the country, there is no viable alternative power 5 conference that either of those schools could logistically threaten to go to while countering the natural media-based leverage that the LA schools maintain.  

I think what holds UCLA back from making such demands is their affiliation with Cal (and other UC's) as a UC, they don't really have the wherewithal to make such a power play.  So basically it would be USC making the move and they very well could make such a move.  However, I'm not sure it would be worth the ire they would receive from the rest of the conference if they went full-blown Texas on the conference.  After all, Texas' domination over the Big 12 is the very catalyst that has caused so much instability and has seen 4 valuable institutions flee with others looking to do the same.  I'm not sure that is ultimately in the best interest of USC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes ... I find it hard to take the USC-to-go-the-NotreDame-route talk seriously.

However, it is much more plausible that USC could leverage things by reaching out to Oklahoma & Texas to create a 16-team super conference & everyone scrambles not to be left out.  UCLA & Cal could be a package deal then.

(not to make this an expansion thread, its more about the revenue sharing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Scscsc89 said:

Yes ... I find it hard to take the USC-to-go-the-NotreDame-route talk seriously.

However, it is much more plausible that USC could leverage things by reaching out to Oklahoma & Texas to create a 16-team super conference & everyone scrambles not to be left out.  UCLA & Cal could be a package deal then.

(not to make this an expansion thread, its more about the revenue sharing)

Agreed.  I was thinking the very same thing as I wrote my previous post.  The easiest way for USC to rewrite the conference rules to their liking is to recreate the conference by adding two heavyweights.  However, what USC would be giving up is their future leverage and so they would have to be absolutely certain that this is the best way for them to use their current leverage.  With Texas in the conference, USC would never again have dominion over the rest of the conference and I'm just not sure they want to give that up.  I think USC likes being the top dog even if it doesn't come with as much monetary benefits as they would like.  I could be wrong but that's the way I see it. 

From a conference revenue standpoint, adding Texas (and Oklahoma to a lesser extent) would be a huge boost but I'm not sure how feasible it would be given that Texas is currently making 15 million a year (and growing fast) from their own network.  If anyone is positioned to be the next Notre Dame, it's Texas and their now lucrative Longhorn Network.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Scscsc89 said:

Yes ... I find it hard to take the USC-to-go-the-NotreDame-route talk seriously.

However, it is much more plausible that USC could leverage things by reaching out to Oklahoma & Texas to create a 16-team super conference & everyone scrambles not to be left out.  UCLA & Cal could be a package deal then.

(not to make this an expansion thread, its more about the revenue sharing)

Double post. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, All Hail said:

Agreed.  I was thinking the very same thing as I wrote my previous post.  The easiest way for USC to rewrite the conference rules to their liking is to recreate the conference by adding two heavyweights.  However, what USC would be giving up is their future leverage and so they would have to be absolutely certain that this is the best way for them to use their current leverage.  With Texas in the conference, USC would never again have dominion over the rest of the conference and I'm just not sure they want to give that up.  I think USC likes being the top dog even if it doesn't come with as much monetary benefits as they would like.  I could be wrong but that's the way I see it.

Thats all true -- I guess that's where it winds back to the initial story of how the P12 can compete with the other conferences.  Especially if you believe as I do that there's no obvious answer to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oklahoma is already laying the groundwork for its eventual exit from the Big 12.  I would not bet on OU or even Texas coming to the Pac-12 at this point.  The OU fanbase is strongly in favor of a SEC move and OU knows all too well about CU's struggles when the Buffs were in the Big 12 due to a large number of CU alums being on the west coast.  

Texas clearly can go independent at this point and they can even rake in the $ doing so and trust me, the appeal of doing that is there for the Longhorns.  All they have to do is find a conference home for their other sports and they are set.  The AAC & ACC is certainly an option in that case.  Norte Dame and Texas as travel partners in the ACC?  Think about that.

And there's the timezone factor that I have brought up many times on this forum.  I don't think OU or Texas wants to frequently travel to places more than one timezone away.  Texas A&M's then AD made a huge point about the student athletes getting back home to College Station just before the rooster crowed from tourney games in the Pacific Northwest.  Austin and Norman's location in the Central Time Zone isn't much different from College Station.  UT and OU do have the money to support travel but they aren't stupid either.

And AH is concerned about losing coaches...I honestly am not worried because there is more than enough coaches willing to coach at a lower pay since they don't face the same kind of scrutiny head coaches face in the B1G, Big 12, and SEC.  Take WSU's Leach for example.  He had offers all over the country and could have gone anywhere.  OSU's Andersen will never get the kind of support at OSU like he did at Wisconsin but he went back for a reason and it's because the west fits him better than the midwest.  Any Pac-12 fan that have dissed Pullman needs to just shut up and go visit Stillwater, Lubbock, Ames, Waco, and Manhattan.  Pullman beats those locales easily.  There is a reason why those coaches might be getting more money because they are having to work harder to convince kids to go to those locales versus locales in the Pac-12.  There is another reason why the MWC was one of the better mid-major conference for years as well.

As for the OSU/WSU dilemma, you Pac-10 fans are so spoiled.  In the Big 12, there was Iowa State, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State pre-Boone Pickens.  That is five programs very similar to OSU/WSU.  And you are willing to add to that group with TT & Okie State in order to bring in OU and Texas?  If you are already bickering about OSU/WSU, why bother?

It's also a whole different America east of the Rockies than you west coasters are used to (and especially how coaches have to deal with the local fans).  Be careful what you wish for and I'm being pretty sincere about this.  That is why I said earlier that those OU fans want no part of the Pac-12 because they already have dealt with a PAC-esque fanbase in CU.  They know they will be dealing with 11 more PAC fanbases and if CU was more than enough for them, joining the Pac-12 would be pure lunacy.

This is a long term process and also a byproduct of the cultural difference between the Pac-12 and the likes of the B1G, Big 12, and SEC.  If the Pac-12 was more culturally similar to those conferences, there's a good chance the Pac-12 would be winning the money race.  The west is growing fast from all those people moving there and it doesn't mean they transfer their loyalties from B1G, Big 12, and SEC teams to the PAC.  The second or third generation of such fans are the key.  I know what I'm talking about because I am one of those people who decided to not follow my family's tradition of rooting for Oklahoma.  The Pac-12 will have its day on the top...just not today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a couple clear steps the PAC 12 can take that are not through expansion.  Texas was really the only school that could make a three time zone conference viable.

Texas is with ESPN and we created a 100% independent conference cable network.  Our Paths  have diverged and won't cross.

first, the conference  can mandate FBS only scheduling equal to the BIg Ten.  It means more regular season matchups that have viewer interest.  UCLA and USC never schedule FBS.

second, Power 5 matchups can be mandated as well.

third, contraction.  There are ten schools who could move forward with a great round robin schedule and the exact same advertiser/network interest as the PAC 12.

luckily, money isn't that important.  If it was there would be incremental steps like no more FCS matchups before drastic steps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, potrerosf said:

first, the conference  can mandate FBS only scheduling equal to the BIg Ten.  It means more regular season matchups that have viewer interest.  UCLA and USC never schedule FBS.

second, Power 5 matchups can be mandated as well.

 

So ... all of a sudden we have 2-3 fewer bowl-eligible teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Revenue skews to the top bowls and ratings for earlier bowls are declining.  

Guaranteed  revenue from another good regular season matchup is probably close to what a lower tier bowl offers now, and the amount for a lower tier bowl is probably going to decline along with the ratings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try selling that to the players, fans & donors from rebuilding programs.  Not to mention the coaches with bowl bonuses.

 

i personally agree we should do that, I just don't see it happening.  Perhaps when we move to a 64-team division 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are any of those people a university president?

i don't think Fans would care if the New Mexico Bowl or Las Vegas Bowl are played December 16 this year.

if the bowl isn't played near New Years we don't need it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How have you positioned Pac-12 Networks for distribution on emerging platforms?

It’s been very important for Pac-12 Networks to be nimble and to position the content for distribution on every existing platform. The beautiful thing is that a provider can choose to carry one network – the Pac-12 Network, which is the national network that offers more than 450 live events – or the national network plus the six regional channels. There’s a plethora of content available in multiple ways for a provider to choose and ultimately the consumer to choose. We aggressively pursued new distribution deals with DISH and Sling TV, for one. We have another one that’s already in place that hasn’t yet been announced, and we’re in conversations with others.

- See more at: http://www.cablefax.com/programming/pac-12-networks#.WURR90Grymg.twitter

Youtube, Playstation Vue, Hulu, DirecTV Now, etc.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0