Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
That doesn't really apply to Colorado or Utah, although Utah's hatred of BYU might keep them away.
Arizona would have the history and rivalries, but are those worth a loss of 25-50 Million over 5 years? If Arizona State came too, Arizona wouldn't have to worry about losing its rivalries.
The short deal expected is what will keep the Pac together. They are reasoning that the market forces won't be as bad when they do this again in 3-4 years.
By signing a GOR agreement for 5/6 years it would give the schools a "pause" while trying to get a better picture of their future. Doing a 5/6 year deal gets them roughly to 2030, the ACC GOR ends within 4 or 5 years of that date, close enough that it would allow those schools to start looking into moving to the B10 and SEC.
The universities are just going to have to be willing to pay more to keep their athletic programs going until then, but they also get less travel, play longtime rivals and have a better understanding of which path to follow. At 12 teams by then, the B12 will be adding at least four, and maybe six teams, Arizona and Colorado will be two of those teams if they want it.
Pretty good listen...
Paul Finebaum is pretty high on the Big 12 over the ACC / PAC-12.
podcasts.apple.com
Paul Finebaum is pretty high on the Big 12 over the ACC / PAC-12.
Episode 94: Guest host Paul Finebaum on ESPN and college sports media
Podcast Episode · The Sports Media Podcast · 07/05/2023 · 47m
What a trainwreck.
The streaming percentage will be interesting. I'd say Oregon might say if linear is above 25% they're good with it because they'll always be on linear. Oregon St. and WSU might be fine if it meant more money, because they probably aren't going to be on linear if it's anything less than 50%, outside of their in-state rivalry games.
I think the teams most concerned about that mix are going to be the likes of UW, Utah, and probably CU. CU probably thinks they could rack up some linear slots with the Sanders interest. Utah has been a good brand, but knows they are going usually lose out to OU in the TV pecking order, and if CU is even decent they'll get some of those slots, especially early in the year. I'd say that difference between 25 and 50% linear is going to cost Utah, UW and maybe CU along with any of the others that might have a better than expected season.
Pretty good listen...
Paul Finebaum is pretty high on the Big 12 over the ACC / PAC-12.
Episode 94: Guest host Paul Finebaum on ESPN and college sports media
Podcast Episode · The Sports Media Podcast · 07/05/2023 · 47m
Thanks for sharing. Pac-12/Big 12 chatter starts at 18:40 for those who are curious.
I’m guessing Kliavkoff et al will just say they’re not taking any media rights negotiation questions at the PAC media days on 7/21 then.
I wonder if this new deadline is a result of the Arizona president or AD saying that they want a minimum of 50% of games on linear TV when we've been hearing that 80% would be streaming. Thus going back to the negotiation table.
It almost feels like the AZ AD is trying to layout multiple rationales for bailing. As if he has made up his mind but needs to have the "well, we said this was a must and they didn't deliver". No need to say it out loud in public if you just want GK to know what your MIRs are.
As far as Labor Day, how ridiculous. We know Big12 has plenty of time to wait, but how soon does the Big12 need to know for scheduling in 2024? October? January? At some point, its' not that you won't get an invite, but that you have missed the window for 2024. And now you're screwed, either stuck in the Pac or else playing a home-and-home-and-home-and-home-and-home-and-home-and-home-and-home with San Diego State.
We've joked maybe GK's strategy is to string everyone out until they have no other choices left, but if they are still effing around in ~November, wouldn't you have to just say "enough" and head to the Big12?
"Those negotiations are going very very well, but I can't really comment on them in detail due to confidentiality."
I’m guessing the next stipulation the Arizona president comes out with is a drop dead date. He’s running out of other things to stipulate.
There’s no deal. They aren’t close to a deal. We’ve entered in to “take whatever the PAC leadership and the PAC spoon fed media says and believe the opposite” territory.
They aren’t close to a deal. Time to start thinking about a world where they aren’t offered a new deal that is even equal to what they get now and they just dissolve.
They aren’t close to a deal. Time to start thinking about a world where they aren’t offered a new deal that is even equal to what they get now and they just dissolve.
Usually when things like this are possible they will have multiple schedules made up. One for if things stay the same, one for adding two schools, and one for adding the corner schools, etc. If the pac schools jump scheduling would be the least of my concerns.
