New PAC-12 Forming | Page 50 | The Boneyard

New PAC-12 Forming

Fishy said:
You’re naive. And gullible.

You can cherry pick and pretend that this about Temple and ODU, but that’s you being disingenuous because none of your “facts” will survive contact with reality.

And you’re simply making up numbers. The Pac12 could not convince a major network to bid on their content. They have a mishmash of USA, CW and CBSsports. They’re a remnant deal and if you think that’s $10M a year….lol. They’re lucky if it’s half that….at $10M, they’re screaming those numbers from the rooftops. They’re not because it’s not.

Pure comedy that you think they have the cash to buy us out of our future contracts and even funnier that you think it’s a good idea.

The conference is a dog and that’s why they had to add Texas State just to get to the minimum number of schools.
Expand ...
The Pac 12 is responsible for most of the production costs so the best estimates are that the Pac 12 schools will net $6 to $7 million per year from their media contracts. And, clearly, the media partners they had to sign up with are a disappointment. End of the day, the 2 Pac 12 school should have merged with the MWC, added Gonzaga, and offered significant Mountain and West Coast sports content to media companies.
 
Rdkid said:
I’m not sure why football only is a problem. 4 road games, schedule BC, Cuse & a couple of cupcakes to keep regional travel & interest. I wouldn’t have Bball give them anything - except an MSG or TD trip for Gonzaga. Who is talking all sports including exit fee? That is nuts.
Expand ...
It's not 4 games -- it's 4 trips clear across the country. From a cost standpoint, a football success standpoint, and a fan investment standpoint it makes no sense.

The only way it makes any vague sense is to park the football team on the west coast for 3 weeks each fall and to play 3 consecutive west coast games. But even that is a robustly stupid idea.
 
.-.
huskymedic said:
KC Smurthwaite article/tweet
Expand ...
No clue who KC Smuthwaite is, but he actually appears to understand UConn's football and overall athletic dept situation better than many people in general AND on the 'yard. One possible exception, if factual, the Huskies' potential net football income (loss) and resulting football budget might improve in a New Pac scenario. Emphasis on might. Or, not?

Bottom line: Aside from fewer games with possible recruiting advantages, e.g., DMV, Jersey, Keystone state, FL, GA, Carolinas, etc and possible enhanced playoff access, what's the New PAC financial impact? Potentially higher media revenue (low bar vs CBS SN revs), clearly higher travel costs, possible decreased home fan interest and resulting lower ticket revenue than current status (ex-BE opponents, few other ACC schools, a B1G opponent, closer P6 opponents, etc). IF, emphasis, a net revenue positive, perhaps UConn's possible net gridiron budgetary allocation increases versus current budget AND relative to average New PAC football budgets. Or, not?
 
Purple Stein said:
It's not 4 games -- it's 4 trips clear across the country. From a cost standpoint, a football success standpoint, and a fan investment standpoint it makes no sense.

The only way it makes any vague sense is to park the football team on the west coast for 3 weeks each fall and to play 3 consecutive west coast games. But even that is a robustly stupid idea.
Expand ...
I’m guessing Stanford & Cal don’t park all their sports teams clear across country on the east coast for 3 weeks at a time. And for them, it’s not just 4 football games - it’s almost every road games for every men’s & women’s sports team that they have.

I also wonder what would happen if Uconn ever got into the B12 and most men’s & women’s teams had to travel about 1500 to 2000 miles for road games. That said, I sure hope UConn gets a B12 invite soon.
 
UConnJim said:
The Pac 12 is responsible for most of the production costs so the best estimates are that the Pac 12 schools will net $6 to $7 million per year from their media contracts. And, clearly, the media partners they had to sign up with are a disappointment. End of the day, the 2 Pac 12 school should have merged with the MWC, added Gonzaga, and offered significant Mountain and West Coast sports content to media companies.
Expand ...

Retired television exec on X told me that he thinks the deal is under $5M per school and the conference is picking up all production costs for at least one partner.
 
Da_Aisijimo_Gou said:
No clue who KC Smuthwaite is, but he actually appears to understand UConn's football and overall athletic dept situation better than many people in general AND on the 'yard. One possible exception, if factual, the Huskies' potential net football income (loss) and resulting football budget might improve in a New Pac scenario. Emphasis on might. Or, not?

Bottom line: Aside from fewer games with possible recruiting advantages, e.g., DMV, Jersey, Keystone state, FL, GA, Carolinas, etc and possible enhanced playoff access, what's the New PAC financial impact? Potentially higher media revenue (low bar vs CBS SN revs), clearly higher travel costs, possible decreased home fan interest and resulting lower ticket revenue than current status (ex-BE opponents, few other ACC schools, a B1G opponent, closer P6 opponents, etc). IF, emphasis, a net revenue positive, perhaps UConn's possible net gridiron budgetary allocation increases versus current budget AND relative to average New PAC football budgets. Or, not?
Expand ...

He struck me as a simpleton who outside of a few google searches really had no useful insight into UConn’s situation.
 
.-.
.-.
KryHavok said:
One of these doesn't belong...one of these is less an outlier and more of "you must be out of your GD mind to think this makes sense"View attachment 120069
Expand ...
Remember, the ACC has TWO west coast teams...why not join them for Football only? I mean, watching Washington State, Boise State, San Diego State and Fresno at the Rent. It would be better than see some teams, like Ball State or UTSA (as examples).
 
ArtTheFan said:
Remember, the ACC has TWO west coast teams...why not join them for Football only? I mean, watching Washington State, Boise State, San Diego State and Fresno at the Rent. It would be better than see some teams, like Ball State or UTSA (as examples).
Expand ...
Well because Calford get 30 million+ for it. We would get, what, 5?
 
There’s a weird dynamic to be considered. Even Randy Edsall admitted that for some reason, and to his surprise, recruiting got better and easier as an Independent. Players preferred it to the AAC. How will playing football only in a West Coast league affect recruiting? I’m guessing it will be a similar situation.

I don’t like the idea that much. I have thee reasons. First, it isn’t much of a step up from Indy and will cost us opportunities to play P4 teams that our fanbase wants to play (BC, Cuse, Duke etc.) Second, we will be an outlier and that’s rarely good for teams looking for big success. If we go to the PAC and get our teeth kicked in because we are fish out of water that can’t recruit well, we will inflict serious damage on our P4 chances. I can see why our typical east coast player would rather see east coast teams on the schedule. He wants his mom to come to some games, she isn’t flying to Utah and California for the weekend unless she’s got a lot of extra cash. Lastly, I still feel we get some decent press being grouped with ND on all kinds of lists and graphics. It was embarrassing when we were the worst team in football but now that we are respectable, it results in more discussion about our solid seasons and potential. Maybe, I’m just chicken, but I think it might be too risky. I’d rather see what Candle can do with what Mora started.
 
Last edited:
ArtTheFan said:
Remember, the ACC has TWO west coast teams...why not join them for Football only? I mean, watching Washington State, Boise State, San Diego State and Fresno at the Rent. It would be better than see some teams, like Ball State or UTSA (as examples).
Expand ...
Our fans have no affiliation with those west coast teams and their fans won't come to the Rent, so definitely an attendance hit. As compared to the P4 and regional teams we have on the schedule, a Pac12 schedule will be dismal compared to our future schedules (home and away). All in all, I can't think of a conference that would make UConn any more irrelevant than the Pac. It'd make the days of us being in the AAC look not so bad.
 
CTFAN4LIFE said:
Our fans have no affiliation with those west coast teams and their fans won't come to the Rent, so definitely an attendance hit. As compared to the P4 and regional teams we have on the schedule, a Pac12 schedule will be dismal compared to our future schedules (home and away). All in all, I can't think of a conference that would make UConn any more irrelevant than the Pac. It'd make the days of us being in the AAC look not so bad.
Expand ...

I agree, except that the PAC brands are bigger than the AAC brands. At least they are large, state universities, including some with P5 history. Those games might appeal more to real football fans. For instance, Boise, SDSU, Washington St and Oregon St are good names compared to Buffalo and Temple for a real football fan. I’m not sure they help much with the fan we are seeking, which is the casual fan that hasn’t been hooked yet. He/she will want to see Cuse, Duke or NC State and will think seeing SDSU is like seeing CCSU. They just don’t know anything about football. In order to attract new fans we need the biggest events possible. That means playing east coast or national brands at the Rent and then absolutely crushing our non-major opponents.
 
Hoophound said:
I agree, except that the PAC brands are bigger than the AAC brands. At least they are large, state universities, including some with P5 history. Those games might appeal more to real football fans. For instance, Boise, SDSU, Washington St and Oregon St are good names compared to Buffalo and Temple for a real football fan. I’m not sure they help much with the fan we are seeking, which is the casual fan that hasn’t been hooked yet. He/she will want to see Cuse, Duke or NC State and will think seeing SDSU is like seeing CCSU. They just don’t know anything about football. In order to attract new fans we need the biggest events possible. That means playing east coast or national brands at the Rent and then absolutely crushing our non-major opponents.
Expand ...
Yes, we need more of the ACC teams as opposed to any Pac team. Even Boise State, which would be the biggest Pac brand, wouldn't be more attractive than Duke, or NC, or BC, or Pitt, or Syracuse to our fan base (whether fanatics or casuals). If we go to the Pac, we'd go from being able to face those ACC teams (and Army, or JMU, or Rutgers, or UMass, MD, etc.) ~ 5 times per season to maybe 1 or 2 just because of the lack of scheduling flexibility we'd have with a Pac schedule. While WA State and OR State were in a P5, they don't move the needle here in CT and are fading away even more so. I think some people get excited by the Pac name but it's really a G6 frankenstein league. We'd also take a hit a record-wise traveling out west for 4 or 5 road games up to 3,000 miles away.

We're better off being Indy for a few more years and being a backfill into the ACC if they lose a few or more teams. Sometimes the best move is to hold for a bit.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,641
Messages
4,587,475
Members
10,497
Latest member
Orlando Fos


Top Bottom