(07-30-2023 02:58 AM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 02:19 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 02:16 AM)TeamRamRod1 Wrote:  I'm not shocked to see he can't figure out that Oregon and Washington would be #15 and #16 instead of Utah and Arizona State.

Except there’s no evidence to this point Oregon and Washington want in the Big XII.

They don't want to be making $10 million less than Colorado. Where are they going to get the $ to keep up? Not the PAC. If the BIG is not welcoming them now, they must seriously consider the Big 12.

$10m is just the media rights deal. After bowls/NCAAT units/etc, it's more like $15m. $15m over 7 years is over $100m.

(07-30-2023 11:13 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(07-29-2023 08:28 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-29-2023 07:49 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  Pac-12 Hotline mailbag with Jon Wilner of the San Jose Mercury News:

https://tucson.com/sports/arizonawildcat...1f586.html

California and Stanford have no choice now but to add academic lightweights like Boise State.

I want to agree with you, and in a rational world that is exactly what they would do. However...this is Cal/Stanford. They're probably adding SDSMU, Rice, Tulane, maybe CSU or AFA.

If so, they deserve shrinking from P5 status. The PAC9 is an athletic conference and not an academic entity. Classroom snobbery should have no place on the field or on the court where meritocracy reigns.

Quote:Either way, Kliavkoff’s strategy was to draft off the Big Ten’s negotiated figure of more than $60 million per school per year. Our sources in the media industry were skeptical of the approach and suggested ESPN would be, as well. However, it’s difficult to know what price point would have been acceptable to Oregon and Washington, for instance.

He's talked about the B1G being used as the basis for the PAC's targets, but I don't recall him ever saying his sources were skeptical of that approach. So unless I missed it before that feels like some important info that had been conveniently left out until after Colorado left.

(07-30-2023 02:19 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 02:16 AM)TeamRamRod1 Wrote:  I'm not shocked to see he can't figure out that Oregon and Washington would be #15 and #16 instead of Utah and Arizona State.

Except there’s no evidence to this point Oregon and Washington want in the Big XII.

In the article he said if Washington and Oregon were to join the Big 12 they would be #17 and #18. Washington and Oregon would obviously get the last two spots and Utah and ASU would be stuck in the PAC.

(07-30-2023 09:35 AM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 08:00 AM)otown Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 04:15 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 02:58 AM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 02:19 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Except there’s no evidence to this point Oregon and Washington want in the Big XII.

They don't want to be making $10 million less than Colorado. Where are they going to get the $ to keep up? Not the PAC. If the BIG is not welcoming them now, they must seriously consider the Big 12.

Where's the evidence that they'll make $10 million less than Colorado? Link?

Bottom line, it's a big undertaking to switch conferences. Colorado did not simply switch cause they woke up one morning and wanted to switch. If the money was there, they would have stayed. It's that simple.

Yep, people ignore some of the statements leaked out of CU. The money was a big deal, as was the comment made that the PAC is unstable. There is more movement coming, CU knew it and jumped first.

The problem is that what if GK announced that they have a media deal where the schools are making more than the Big 12? Colorado jumped not being patient because of the mind games coming from BY and the national media.

(07-30-2023 04:10 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 09:35 AM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 08:00 AM)otown Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 04:15 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 02:58 AM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  They don't want to be making $10 million less than Colorado. Where are they going to get the $ to keep up? Not the PAC. If the BIG is not welcoming them now, they must seriously consider the Big 12.

Where's the evidence that they'll make $10 million less than Colorado? Link?

Bottom line, it's a big undertaking to switch conferences. Colorado did not simply switch cause they woke up one morning and wanted to switch. If the money was there, they would have stayed. It's that simple.

Yep, people ignore some of the statements leaked out of CU. The money was a big deal, as was the comment made that the PAC is unstable. There is more movement coming, CU knew it and jumped first.

The problem is that what if GK announced that they have a media deal where the schools are making more than the Big 12? Colorado jumped not being patient because of the mind games coming from BY and the national media.

You don't get a better deal w/ 9 schools and less inventory than you did w/ 10. If they were anywhere close to 25M Klowncar would have went public or at least told CU. He didn't because It's probably 19-20M a yr at best. When the Pac9 meeting outcome was "it couldn't have gone worse" means that that 19-20M probably is off the table now. Why pay more while I know I have you by the balls? They may say only 15M take it or find spots in the B12.

(07-30-2023 03:47 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

Quote:Either way, Kliavkoff’s strategy was to draft off the Big Ten’s negotiated figure of more than $60 million per school per year. Our sources in the media industry were skeptical of the approach and suggested ESPN would be, as well. However, it’s difficult to know what price point would have been acceptable to Oregon and Washington, for instance.

He's talked about the B1G being used as the basis for the PAC's targets, but I don't recall him ever saying his sources were skeptical of that approach. So unless I missed it before that feels like some important info that had been conveniently left out until after Colorado left.

Revisionist history in the making.

Otherwise, he'd have to come out, admit he had it wrong. Honestly, I don't think he is all that smart, so feels a bit insecure. And not being smart he is not really aware that he was being used as a Pac-12 talking points machine.

(07-30-2023 04:27 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 03:47 PM)Alanda Wrote:  

Quote:Either way, Kliavkoff’s strategy was to draft off the Big Ten’s negotiated figure of more than $60 million per school per year. Our sources in the media industry were skeptical of the approach and suggested ESPN would be, as well. However, it’s difficult to know what price point would have been acceptable to Oregon and Washington, for instance.

He's talked about the B1G being used as the basis for the PAC's targets, but I don't recall him ever saying his sources were skeptical of that approach. So unless I missed it before that feels like some important info that had been conveniently left out until after Colorado left.

Revisionist history in the making.

Otherwise, he'd have to come out, admit he had it wrong. Honestly, I don't think he is all that smart, so feels a bit insecure. And not being smart he is not really aware that he was being used as a Pac-12 talking points machine.

I agree with seeing revisionist history in the making. I try to give some benefit of the doubt in cases like this due to my memory and vocabulary issues. But in this case considering his PAC slant, a comment like that would have stood enough to me to remember if he said it before. He should have been talking about it back around when he heard it. Not when the PAC has a possibility of falling apart.

(07-30-2023 04:10 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 09:35 AM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 08:00 AM)otown Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 04:15 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(07-30-2023 02:58 AM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  They don't want to be making $10 million less than Colorado. Where are they going to get the $ to keep up? Not the PAC. If the BIG is not welcoming them now, they must seriously consider the Big 12.

Where's the evidence that they'll make $10 million less than Colorado? Link?

Bottom line, it's a big undertaking to switch conferences. Colorado did not simply switch cause they woke up one morning and wanted to switch. If the money was there, they would have stayed. It's that simple.

Yep, people ignore some of the statements leaked out of CU. The money was a big deal, as was the comment made that the PAC is unstable. There is more movement coming, CU knew it and jumped first.

The problem is that what if GK announced that they have a media deal where the schools are making more than the Big 12? Colorado jumped not being patient because of the mind games coming from BY and the national media.

I'm looking forward with the announcement. When that happens, we shall see the floodgates open out of the PAC.