Eventually we'd have to give them a full share though. Thats the part that makes this suck.
And also, we need 0 more west coast teams. The midwestern and eastern teams would be stupid to agree to even more 9pm start times
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
And also, we need 0 more west coast teams. The midwestern and eastern teams would be stupid to agree to even more 9pm start times
Lets be honest though, ultimately the big 12 will do what the networks tell them to do.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Even more delicious if the former PAC schools get Apple cash to make them whole.
No, can’t have anymore close games on the schedule.
Looking at it from Whittingham's perspective, he's about to be coaching in his third conference without changing jobs. So "permanent" isn't really a thing in his world when it comes to realignment.
I have no issue adding any of the Pac4 if the money makes sense, which I am skeptical.
This media reports seems to be part of the Pac12 realignment playbook- project there are options to improve the deal.
IMO these reports are disinformation to solidify ACC interest and maybe improve the deal for adding Stanford & Cal.
In the short term its fine. In the long term you have a 20 team conference with a ton of duds on the west coast. Unless you can remove them then I don't think it helps once you hit the next contract
Once the ACC stuff comes to a head I think it makes it more likely you lose the chance to add anyone from there and instead lose Cincy, UCF, and WVU to the ACC instead. There's no scenario where Cal, Stanford, Oregon State, and Washington State are worth more than those 3, even if I know some don't like having them in.
I want nothing to do with those 4. Cal and Stanford make no sense. while I think Oregon State and Washington State make sense from a culture fit standpoint, they are way out of the way for travel and at this point it's like promoting 2 G5 schools. Selfishly I want less competition for ISU staying in a power conference
Last edited:
I think the Big 12 needs to be skeptical of who is asking things of them too. Sure, ESPN probably wants a more full late night window. That doesn't mean anything if they decide to not go back to the table with us in 2031 or low ball us so they can splash some cash on the Big 10.
ESPN has telegraphed they don't like or want the Big 12. It won't be that hard for them to screw us over even if we do make all the adds they ask for when the time comes. I'd rather see the Big 12 appeal to Fox and then CBS and Turner with basketball stuff. Can't have an elite basketball product to sell if you absorb most of the by far worst P5 conference in CBB.
ESPN has telegraphed they don't like or want the Big 12. It won't be that hard for them to screw us over even if we do make all the adds they ask for when the time comes. I'd rather see the Big 12 appeal to Fox and then CBS and Turner with basketball stuff. Can't have an elite basketball product to sell if you absorb most of the by far worst P5 conference in CBB.
Hmm… I wonder if the threats of litigation by WSU/OSU has the media partners revisiting including them in the P4?
Eh, when teams are flying everywhere anyways oregon state isn't that bad as far as travel, being right along I-5. Can fly into PDX or Eugene. No worse than WVU from that aspect
This would require ESPN to be paying the full load for the additional schools in the big 12 though. Keep in mind they're not paying that full amount now, Fox is paying part. What's their incentive?
Why exactly, at this point, do you 'lose the chance to invite someone'?
We've passed the point where these conference sizes make logical sense for scheduling anyway. So the idea that a conference is ever 'full' is past us. Conferences are just media-aggregation agreements at this point. If those ACC members make sense as adds in the future, they'll be added whether or not we have 16 teams or 20 teams then.
On one hand I think its a terrible Idea to add more Pac schools, on another I think its a good add, and on a third hand I dont really care either way.
I dont think there is a high likelihood that the B12 adds more Pac schools, but if the rumors are true there is at least some chance.
I feel for it to happen the media partners need to be on board or a new one allowed to make the money make sense. From what is rumored at least ESPN is on board.
If ESPN, Fox or another partner jump in and are willing to pay, and those 4 are willing to possibly take a smaller share than I dont see a huge problem. What I dont want is for those 2-4 to come and reduce our share.
What if Espn says they will pay their $20M share for those 4 and they agree to come for that, and No Fox money? Everyone else stays at their current level and those 2-4 get 20M per year for the remainder of the contract.
What if another partner comes in and it actually increases our pay.
What if ESPN agrees to pay 75M for Stan and Cal, (what is rumored was close to the offer for the ACC )and the B12 gives them 20 each and splits the remaining 35 among the other 16. That could make up a bit for the loss that we took for not taking a full prorata adding the last 2.
I think there are scenarios that make it make sense, and some that dont. I feel BY and the presidents are not going to take less to add more so for it to happen some media partner is going to have to make everyone whole or sweeten the pot.
But I also agree with @alarson that at this point adding 2-4 more doesnt change our option to add up to 4 from the ACC. I believe if the ACC does fall in the future the B1G, SEC and B12 will all be in the 20-24 team range. So if we take as many as all 4 of the remaining PAC we still could add 4 ACC schools. At that point I have a hard time seeing going beyond 24. And after the B1G and SEC take their picks from the ACC I am not sure there will be more than 4 desirable teams left.
There's a point of diminishing returns in here somewhere for conference size. There's not going to be a 24-32 team super conference that happens.
Specifically here though, we'll lose the chance to get the ACC teams because we'll have 6 western teams including 4 who are basically coast to coast travel. Are Pitt, Louisville, and VT signing up for that when they can probably just offer our 3 eastern teams spots in their conference instead and get them, then take a few others once the Big 12 is destabilized. Going all in for the west coast will never be a good long term plan for the conference.
If this last part does happen isn't that all the more reason to add strategically? Where do those 2-4 PAC schools stack up with the rest of the ACC options? For those who will likely still be there I gotta go deep before I hit one of those teams. VT, Louisville, Pitt, NCST, Duke, and Cuse are all for sure above the 4PAC members left. We're leaving long term value behind for a small short term boost.
That's also probably the end of any basketball schools and selling that contract separately as well, which is the one major thing the Big 12 can do to push forward and really make it so they can survive in whatever may come. Gonzaga, Creighton, Villanova, UConn, Marquette, etc are worth losing to take 4 west coast teams, 2 of which don't even want to be good at sports? Nope
