Future of Pac-12 Network in doubt?

[southie]

The Big 10 is the money king. They have played the whole thing extremely well.

The SEC keeps going to market first and setting the standard and then watching everyone catch up.

The Big 12 has some decisions to make. Seems like they are content to move on like they are. The Pac 12 almost managed to stag Texas and Oklahoma once before. I'd be surprised if there were Pac 12 schools wanting to jump into the somewhat dysfunctional Big 12.

As a Texas fan, I would love it if Texas was invited (again) to join the B1G, or even the SEC. I don't think the SEC covets Texas as much as the B1G does because SEC now has its presence in the state with Texas A&M. If the B1G manages to add Texas one day, then I think they will secure being the revenue leaders forever. I certainly don't deny that Texas is "all about the money"; when you add in the B1G's research revenue from their Big Ten Academic Alliance (BTAA), formerly the Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC), Texas joining the B1G seems to be the most realistic next step to me; the only remaining issue is whether it's Kansas or Oklahoma that goes with Texas to increase the B1G membership to 16 schools.

As for the PAC 12, nobody from the Big 12 is going to want to join that conference after what Larry Scott has done to it. To me, the Big 12 and PAC 12 have switched places as far as which is the more lucrative and financially-stable conference. So, the PAC 12 has zero options for expansion (unless it wants BYU, Boise, UNLV, etc.) as far as adding any schools from another P5 conference; they are somewhat boxed in geographically.

Now, if any Big 12 schools leave for the B1G or SEC, then the remaining members may have no choice but to request membership into the PAC 12.

 

[triaddukefan]

And, fall light years behind the other P5 conference schools. While schools in other conferences are upgrading and building new athletic facilities to attract elite recruits, USC and other PAC 12 schools are pinching pennies tighter and tighter. If you're USC, how do you accept that schools like Rutgers, Illinois, Wake Forest, Louisville, Kansas State, Iowa State, Miss. State, and Ole Miss (to name just a handful) are generating millions more in revenue than you are simply based on their conference affiliation? They aren't generating that revenue because they are better athletic or academic institutions than USC, that's for sure.

Hey.... leave Illinois and Wake Forest outta this.... thanks.

 

[nwhoopfan]

they are somewhat boxed in geographically.

That's ironic considering the Big 12 is part of this discussion. Geography has long since stopped having primary importance when it comes to conference expansion. Both the Big 12 and the WAC have footprints that cover about half of the Lower 48.

 

[visitingcock]

Living in Florida now I have had the Pac-12 network for several years and I rely on it for FB, WBB, T&F, VB, etc. It is amusing to see some on here denigrate the PAC-12 in general (FB, MBB) considering its history...it is after all the Conference of Champions and no other is even close.

perhaps it is amusing to the school with Nike sponsorship, but not to the rest of the athletic departments. Schools like Stanford and SoCal are very rich but those endowments aren’t used for athletics.

BUT, I think the PAC can carve out some recruiting advantages in athletic endorsements in the future - particularly the LA area. ( But every car dealer in Alabama is gonna have football players shilling for them.)

the endorsements are a huge, unplaced card

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

If you’re earning $5 M and the Great Plains schools are offering $40M, allegiances die pretty fast.

Look at Maryland leaving the ACC.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

Hey.... leave Illinois and Wake Forest outta this.... thanks.

And Rutgers.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

And Rutgers.

Rutgers is academically respectable. As required to get in the B1G.

It is interesting that Rutgers has built a new academic center and new indoor sport practice facility in the last couple of years. But, interestingly, so did Arizona (football instead of the indoor sports, as they already have the Richard Jefferson basketball facility). The football facility was quite nice, they hold a pre-game tailgate there and we went to one in the 2019 season. Rutgers probably could upgrade, they have a bubble but it is quite old.

What is (or was) lacking at Rutgers was the facilities for other, so called non-revenue, sports. Of those I am familiar with, none at Rutgers compare with the equivalent at Arizona. But soon Rutgers will have a much better revenue stream from the Big Ten (it isn't going to make sports profitable, though) than Arizona does from the PAC.

Ah well, we will see what direction the PAC12 moves in.

 

[Reypl21]

I guess I never knew the landscapes of what each conference could offer schools. I read all of this and learned a lot. Probably too much info at once. I knew the power 5 conferences offered more money, but didnt realize the difference between all of them. What makes the B1G be able to offer so much more money to their schools? I'm ignorant to all of this. This seems so crazy.

 

[GoCardinal]

I’m willing to bet nearly half the Big 12 schools would immediately jump at the choice to join a different conference if asked. Whether they are making revenue or not, it’s still as dysfunctional as it was when Texas A&M, Missouri and Colorado left.

I’m sure West Virginia would much rather the ACC. I’m sure deep down Iowa State and the Kansas schools would rather the Big 10, especially Iowa State considering they were going to be one of the “odd schools out” when everyone else in the Big 12 were having conversations with other leagues.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

Rutgers is academically respectable. As required to get in the B1G.

It is interesting that Rutgers has built a new academic center and new indoor sport practice facility in the last couple of years. But, interestingly, so did Arizona (football instead of the indoor sports, as they already have the Richard Jefferson basketball facility). The football facility was quite nice, they hold a pre-game tailgate there and we went to one in the 2019 season. Rutgers probably could upgrade, they have a bubble but it is quite old.

What is (or was) lacking at Rutgers was the facilities for other, so called non-revenue, sports. Of those I am familiar with, none at Rutgers compare with the equivalent at Arizona. But soon Rutgers will have a much better revenue stream from the Big Ten (it isn't going to make sports profitable, though) than Arizona does from the PAC.

Ah well, we will see what direction the PAC12 moves in.

I'm pretty familiar with the U of A; my brother is a professor there and has WBB season tickets for a number of years. I was hoping they'd be in the Gamecocks' Region for the NCAAT. Rutgers' facilities have improved, but they still have some distance to go. They've always been hurt by their location between 2 huge pro markets. Long term, the Big Ten will be great for them. I consider Rutgers to be my 2nd favorite team since I grew up near their campus.

 

[PJCLaw]

I wonder if the Big 12 will have trouble attracting top tier schools? They have everybody from the AAC begging them to be let in, but that's not the same thing. Nebraska, Texas A&M and Missouri all got sick of dealing w/ Texas so chose to go elsewhere. That could be a cautionary tale for other schools considering making that move.

Yeah, and aside from making more money, none of those schools are relevant in their new conferences. Nebraska has been horrible in the Big 10 and Missouri and A &M have only really had a couple good seasons in the SEC where they were highly ranked (Chase Daniels and Johnny Manzel days mostly, until this past season for A &M). At least in the Big 12 they each had more of an opportunity to play for major bowls and get 9-10 wins a years.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Yeah, and aside from making more money, none of those schools are relevant in their new conferences. Nebraska has been horrible in the Big 10 and Missouri and A &M have only really had a couple good seasons in the SEC where they were highly ranked (Chase Daniels and Johnny Manzel days mostly, until this past season for A &M). At least in the Big 12 they each had more of an opportunity to play for major bowls and get 9-10 wins a years.

Moving to the Big 10 was a brilliant move for Nebraska volleyball.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I'm pretty familiar with the U of A; my brother is a professor there and has WBB season tickets for a number of years. I was hoping they'd be in the Gamecocks' Region for the NCAAT. Rutgers' facilities have improved, but they still have some distance to go. They've always been hurt by their location between 2 huge pro markets. Long term, the Big Ten will be great for them. I consider Rutgers to be my 2nd favorite team since I grew up near their campus.

Rutgers location is an issue, particularly as it relates to fan attendance. NJ is a pro-sports state. My wife and I are native to NJ, she from East Brunswick, me from about 30 miles further north; after getting married we lived in South Bound Brook for 23 years or so, although we didn't start following RU sports (my alma mater) until we became WBB fans in 1994 / 1995. We were as close to the RU campuses as we are to Arizona now.

In Women's Basketball we generally root for South Carolina to do well, there are many teams and coaches that we like and, yes, quite a few that we are not so fond of. Right now, in the SEC, we probably think positively of Texas A&M, Arkansas and Georgia in WBB; Alabama, Ole Miss, LSU, Auburn off the top of my head, not so much. Tennessee we liked when Pat was there, now, not so interested.

 

[southie]

I guess I never knew the landscapes of what each conference could offer schools. I read all of this and learned a lot. Probably too much info at once. I knew the power 5 conferences offered more money, but didnt realize the difference between all of them. What makes the B1G be able to offer so much more money to their schools? I'm ignorant to all of this. This seems so crazy.

The B1G is getting the largest TV contracts for its football and basketball games. FOX, ESPN, ABC, etc. are paying huge money. SEC is on par; might be slightly higher/lower. The B1G's conference TV network (BTN) has been hugely successful, and was the first of its kind; so, that's even more TV revenue to distribute among conference schools.

The B1G is large on research institutions. They have their own consortium (BTAA) which provides even more millions of research money to its member institutions; no other conference offers that.

Big Ten Academic Alliance | ICOLC Website

icolc.net

 

[southie]

Yeah, and aside from making more money, none of those schools are relevant in their new conferences. Nebraska has been horrible in the Big 10 and Missouri and A &M have only really had a couple good seasons in the SEC where they were highly ranked (Chase Daniels and Johnny Manzel days mostly, until this past season for A &M). At least in the Big 12 they each had more of an opportunity to play for major bowls and get 9-10 wins a years.

Folks forget that schools like Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas A&M and Texas were all in favor of each member Big 12 school managing their own third-tier TV rights; none of the big players wanted equal-revenue sharing during the conference's inception. 15 or so years later, when Texas was offered the Longhorn Network (and $15 million a year) by ESPN for its third-tier rights, the other schools cried about it. Nebraska never would have left the Big 12 had they still been competing for football championships; their program started falling behind Oklahoma and Texas, and they were without a championship since 1999. I guess they figured they'd have more football success in the B1G; hasn't happened one iota. They also just finished in last place in men's hoops. So, in the most visible of men's sports, Nebraska not doing well at all.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

Rutgers location is an issue, particularly as it relates to fan attendance. NJ is a pro-sports state. My wife and I are native to NJ, she from East Brunswick, me from about 30 miles further north; after getting married we lived in South Bound Brook for 23 years or so, although we didn't start following RU sports (my alma mater) until we became WBB fans in 1994 / 1995. We were as close to the RU campuses as we are to Arizona now.

In Women's Basketball we generally root for South Carolina to do well, there are many teams and coaches that we like and, yes, quite a few that we are not so fond of. Right now, in the SEC, we probably think positively of Texas A&M, Arkansas and Georgia in WBB; Alabama, Ole Miss, LSU, Auburn off the top of my head, not so much. Tennessee we liked when Pat was there, now, not so interested.

I grew up in South River, so just across OBT from your wife. Small world.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I grew up in South River, so just across OBT from your wife. Small world.

Very familiar with South River. I spent a lot of time in East Brunswick, as well - I had 2 stints as Manager of the "Loews Route 18 Twin" movie theatre (where I met my wife); I lived in East Brunswick during both stints and briefly after our marriage until we could buy the house. A lot of my staff were from South River, and my wife had family in East Brunswick / Spotswood.

Years later, one of my Sisters-In-Law lived several placed in South River until Hurricane Sandy ruined the house she was renting, that was after we moved to Tucson and she ended up moving to Tucson as well.

After we moved to SBB we started to do more activities in Somerset County, but we were in the East Brunswick / South River area quite a bit.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

That Loews on Rt 18 was definitely a place I remember and I think they had a drive-in theater on Rt 18, too.