Jon Joseph

Love the idea. But cooperation among 2 conferences is difficult and for the P5 to cooperate when 2 have 'all' the money? I don't see it. After all, the ACC. B1G and Pac-12, notwithstanding GK's post, just voted to leave multi-millions of dollars on a financially ripe playoff expansion table. Geographically, the merger of the 'lesser' 3 that makes some semblance of sense. I can see a possible accord between the Pac-12 and the B12. I believe the ACC with its playoff recalcitrance has set itself up to be poached by the SEC and perhaps, the B1G. I do not believe the SEC in particular, has any desire to level the playing field. If it did so desire to do so it would not have poached OK and TX. I think the B1G ultimately expands east, Kansas, Pitt, UVA, UNC, Georgia Tech, Duke, all AAU members; or, west with UW, OR, Stanford, USC, CU and Utah, all AAU members. I hope that Oregon is at least sub rosa, discussing with the B1G the B1G moving west I just do not see USC having finally opened the Blue Blood pocket book hanging in and sharing equal money with WA ST and others not equally CFB invested. IMO, the Pac-12 money teams. including the Ducks, must find a more lucrative place to play, including considering a merger of some kind with the B12 and going coast-to-coast.

No. my friend, I reluctantly and unfortunately would say 'no' and not 'yes.' And most excellent point on the Pac-12 moving to the Pac-20 costing any existing Pac-12 conference any money. The Pac-12 would have raised Houston from the G5, 'saved' a number of the left-over B12 members with an entry to what should have been the P4 .The conference would have been able to negotiate, like the B1G did with Maryland, Nebraska and Rutgers, a phased in equal piece of the pie. To argue otherwise is a complete red herring. Pac-12 member schools are not all AAU members. Utah was not an AAU member, it is now, when it joined the conference. And before deciding to stand still, GK made note that AAU membership would not be a requirement to join the Pac-12. Whom is cutting GK's legs out from under him? The same Pac-12 'leader' who decided to launch a media network without a media partner and without key distribution placements in place. Is not doing the same thing and expecting a different result a definition of 'insanity?' How with the same media footprint do the folks in charge believe their investment in the network can be saved? Are they this clueless or do they just not care? Big goes to big in big business. CFB is a big business. Why Oregon and USC, programs that spend significant money on CFB, would hang in with a conference destined to fail as-is, is beyond me? Is there is a collective way out of here? If not, then the Pac-12 money teams should say goodbye to the jokers 'free riding' on their backs; at least attempt to relocate to a place where the partners still want to be a king.

As has been widely reported, come 2023, the new B1G media deals are projected to bring in $1B a year for the B!G. That is B1G money. Add to that the income from the very successful B1G Network, 51% owned by and operated by FOX, and other sources of income including the CFB Playoff and the CBB Tournament and by 2025, each one of the 14 member B1G schools is expected to collect $100M a year. The SEC has already done a deal with ESPN for its tier 1 and 2 media rights. What CBS was paying $55M a year for, ESPN will be paying $300M+ for the same media rights. The exact number of the increase will be determined when Oklahoma and Texas officially join the SEC. The SEC also has a very profitable network operated by the ESPN media cartel. And the SEC has scored and will continue to score significant dollars from the Playoff and its 6NY Bowls, and also, after putting an emphasis on basketball 3 seasons ago, from the CBB tournament. The SEC will not equal the amount earned by the B1G but it will come darn close. The ACC is saddled with a terrible media deal that runs through 2036. Each ACC team receives $17M a year from ESPN for the ACC's tier 1 and 2 media rights. The deal with ESPN can only increase if Notre Dame becomes a full time football member of the ACC. Something that Notre Dame, especially with its own deal with NBC, has no desire to do. The ACC does benefit from its successful network that is also operated by ESPN, but it will at least through 2036, come nowhere near what the B1G and the SEC are bringing in. The Pac-12's new media rights deal will come to fruition in 2024. As we all are aware, the Pac-12 network, owned and operated by the conference has never met even the lowest amount of revenue that was projected when the the network was formed and capitalized by Pac-12 member schools. The Pac-12 does benefit from getting 1 team into the CFB Playoff and from the CBB Tournament. But lags behind the B1G and SEC in CFB Playoff participation and revenues and often makes less than the two conferences make off of the CBB Tournament. And unlike the B1G and the SEC, the Pac-12 does not feature large stadiums that are filled to capacity for B1G/SEC football games. B12 media rights come up for re-negotiation in 2025. Obviously, the media rights to Oklahoma and Texas sports will be dearly missed. But in saving the B12, commissioner Bob Bowlsby (former AD at Iowa and Stanford) brought in a national brand in BYU, the huge Houston market, a decent sized Cincinnati market and the Orlando market that has just eclipsed the Miami market in size. In my opinion, having decided not to expand and thus coming to the market with the same goods Larry Scott came with close to a decade ago, and being a non-entity in the CFB Playoff, it certainly could not hurt the Pac-12 or the B12, if Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff was to reach out to Bowlsby and offer the following deal. The Pac-12 will go to the market independently, but also go to the market to secure a bid based on the Pac-12 and its markets merging with the B12 markets. Make the effort to collectively sell both conference's media rights. What can the conferences expect to make independently compared to what might be earned collectively? This investigation could be done program by program to determine what each member school individually brings to the market. Accordingly, revenue could be shared based on a given school's financial impact. A merger of the two conferences would also take the CFB P5 to the P4. Among other things this would help facilitate a needed expansion of the CFB playoff field. A Pac-12 division and a B12 division under the same umbrella would limit travel for basketball and non-revenue sports. Should the media numbers not add value collectively, the Pac-12 and the B12 would each do its own media deal. Unless the Pac-12 and the B12 merge in one fashion or another, there is no way either conference will come close to the income that will be brought in by the B1G and the SEC. And such a merger could well make the Pac-12/B12 Network financially viable? Perhaps bring enough subscribers to the network to interest a media partner in buying all or a share of the Pac-12/B12 network and operating same on a professional level? I see nothing but potentially potentially positive results coming from collectively going exploring a combined media deal. As noted above, if the money isn't there collectively, it isn't there and each conference can remain as-is. Is this topic as sexy as pondering the outcome of Oregon football in the 2022 season? Heck no! But CFB/CBB is a big business and unless something is done to dramatically improve Pac-12 finances the very existence of the conference is at risk.

And no position group is affected more by reduced practice time than is the OL.

IMO, I'll never forgive Chip for his stubborn play calling. Running into a formidable D line instead of using the passing game which was lighting up an 'old-fashioned' SEC pass D.

Great take. But IMO, Purdy also benefited from far better coaching and playing in a far better system.

Great post Southern, thank you. And great comments. The entire enterprise seems to be so ephemeral today. These young men are touted from the time they are in junior high school as being the next great player at their position; certain to be a star in the NFL one day. The recruiting star system just encourages the belief that 'I am a 4/5* recruit and any program who signs me will be fortunate.' Add in agents who want to make money off of a player's talent. Add in multi-million dollar coaches telling young men how great they will be if they only come to school X. Add in boosters paying unproven young men to come to school X. Then, when a player does not immediately start and thrive on the field, is it any wonder that Team is far less important than Me. And how much discipline can be instilled before a coach is run off for being a 'meanie?' How has Kansas played since running off Mark Mangino for this reason? In fairness to the coaches, consider the restrictions on practice time and contact allowed in today's high school ball and in CFB. And do the adults in the room help? Do parents allow high school coaches to use 'tough love' when coaching? Do parents encourage their sons to tough it out and compete for the good of the team; or, to enter the portal for playing time and NIL money. But who can blame them when for a few dollars more, coaches and assistant coaches are off to greener pastures. To heck with the young men I recruited to play for good old State or U. As to Mike West's great comment to this great take, are the majority of coaches 'coached-up' to the point where they can provide adequate coaching? I look at Mario and see a man who could recruit like a champion but on game day could not get his recruits to play up to the level of their ability and instead often played down to the level of the competition. Mario's OL coach was a hire of his best buddy and not a capable coach. After hiring Joe Moorhead, how much freedom was given Moorhead to coach the offense? Yet, with a 62-60 record as a HC, Mario is being paid $9M+ a year, more than many the HC in the NFL. I note many the great references to Saban above. But the Bama O today is not the Bama O when Saban arrived in Tuscaloosa. Saban evolved. Bama plays a far difference O than before Kiffin arrived as the OC and the Bama D recruits a different style of players and plays a different D system than before the game went 'hurry-up.' Saban is an excellent CEO who hires the best people and delegates properly within the concept of 'the process' and within his system. And Saban also excels at the sine qua noon of CFB, he recruits great players who are willing to wait and learn before playing and today, he also takes the cream of the crop from the portal. (Unlike coaches in the Pac-12, Saban is aided and abetted by a solid network and a CFB media cartel. No team in the Pac-12 comes close to the money Bana spends on CFB.) How many Saban's are there in CFB? Most of his protege's have failed as HCs with the notable exceptions of Jimbo and Kirby Smart. Two guys who like Saban, bring in the Jimmies and the Joes and like Saban, and have an 'unlimited' budget to do so. Even though star rankings may be off, the one constant in CFB is bringing in the best recruits and creating the best Blue Chip rosters. Again, what a great post and great comments. But I am not surprised in today's social and social media culture, that young men do not know how to play as Mike West so ably points out, and that team means little or nothing (sorry, but I am ticked off about Dye leaving and I do not give him a pass for abandoning his teammates.)

After the B1G comes to the media negotiation table and with the SEC already scoring big with the ESPN deal, the Pac-12 conference will get the left overs. And the conference still has to figure out what to do with a network that is basically insolvent, a drag on recruiting and broadcasting games being played at a time and on a network that people cannot and/or will not watch. I'm sorry, but the slice of the pie could have been negotiated and OK ST, TX Tech, TCU, Baylor, Houston, KS, K ST and Iowa State would have added eyeballs, an entirely new time zone, football mad Texas and perhaps enough new subscribers to put the Pac-12 network in the black. And please don't tell me it's all right to schedule Baylor and TCU as a number of Pac-12 schools, including in the case of Baylor has done, but not kosher to sit down with them at a Pac-20 meeting because the two schools are not secular. Both schools have more students who are followers of Islam than do many the Pac-12 school. Your comment is spot on and entirely correct; it is perfectly representative of the oxymoron that is Pac-12 'leadership.'

Darren, how much closer to Westwood is SoFi compared to the Rose Bowl? Thank you + sorry for being a geography know nothing.

I think, emphasis on THINK, that against Pac-12 competition, Nix' stats will be superior to what he put up at Auburn? And reuniting with his former OC who coached Nix when he had his best season at Auburn, will help Nix' cause. But I certainly do not think he is close to Stafford. And I don't believe Cota is close to Kupp. Brown was 'seviceable.' I think Nix' stats will be far better than Brown's stats. He is better than Brown and will, I hope, be playing in a far better system under Dillingham than Mario allowed Brown to play under.

Good call Axel. I'll be surprised if the SEC does not go tp pods, get rid of divisions and play 9 when OK/TX join up. But regarding the in-conference play and looking at Pac-12 recruiting, the Pac-12 is a long way from the SEC and B1G when it comes to competition. The Pac-12 N is a heck of a lot easier than the B1G E and the SEC W.

In light of the Alston decision, the NCAA is powerless regarding NIL. The only way to control NIL will be if the players are allowed to form a union and collectively bargain with. the Super League? With the recent constitutional convention, the NCAA has distanced itself from regulating P5/G5 football.

I believe he is taking a shot at those blaming the ACC, B1G + Pac-12 for cratering playoff field expansion. Especially in response to the SEC commish Greg Sankey. The field would be expanded and the expanded playoff would have started in 2023, had Sankey not under-the-table poached OK/TX from the SEC. But, the PO also would have expanded if the ACC, trying to entice Notre Dame to join the conference as a full time football member and thus re-work its media deal with ESPN, hadn't said 'no go' to PO expansion. The B1G's issues, all P5 champs in and protection for the Rose Bowl, and the Pac-12's desire to protect the Rose Bowl, could have been resolved. If given the chance I think Kialvkoff would be more than happy to head back to his job at MGM? Shortly after GK said that AAU membership would not be a requirement for Pac-12 conference expansion, this after it was known that Texas Tech had reached out to the Pac-12, the conference, an "exclusive club,'" decided to stay as-is. Decided to play the same media hand come 2024 that that Larry Scott had to play with back when. (BTW, I'd love to know where Schill came down on expansion? Schill is the current chairman of the conference leadership committee.) Meanwhile, the SEC and the B1G will just continue to financially and on the football field, leave the other P5 conferences and especially the Pac-12, in the financial and playoff dust.

Kupp went off the charts with a former SEC QB throwing the ball to him; can this happen at Oregon?

SEC vs SEC, Bama vs UGA, has happened 2 out of 8 seasons. But its not just the final 4 that's the problem, it's the fact that season after season the SEC puts at least 3 and often 4, teams into the lucrative NY 6 bowls. This and the SEC champ being in the final 4 every season, just gives more recruiting ammunition to a conference that doesn't need it. I get the angst over Sankey sub rosa taking in OK/TX from the B12, but not to expand is shooting the ACC and the Pac-12, in particular, in the financial foot. Another short sighted, parochial, stupid decision by people who should know better. For goodness sakes, UCLA is $60M in the red! Is anyone in the ACC and the Pac-12 paying attention to the bottom line? SEE ABOVE: noDucknewby nailed it!

Chip found the serendipity of perfect time, perfect place. He had a built in staff of excellent assistant coaches. He had a then novel system on O and the freedom and encouragement to run the system. He had a most underrated DC in Nick A and USC had been mugged by the NCAA. He had the backing of the entire NIKE enterprise and the enthusiasm of Autzen crowds who watched an exciting brand of football put the Ducks on the national map and take the Ducks to a BCS champ game. Then? Chip, who hated recruiting then and hates it now, went out on his own to the NFL, but only after being dinged by the NCAA and putting Oregon on modest probation. After some modest success in Philly, he fell flat on his face. It was 'in-your-face' in San Francisco with the 49ers. UCLA looked to recapture the magic. Looking for Chip to return to glory in CFB, like Steve Spurrier and Nick Saban, after not making it in the NFL. Today, UCLA does not have the money and perhaps does not have the interest, to hire a better college football coach; one who can recruit the fertile southern California recruiting ground. The Bruins play in an aging stadium miles from campus, in front of a whole bunch of empty seats. The student section for UCLA 'home games' is basically empty. CFB is a roster-driven sport. If you do not recruit hard and recruit 24/7, eight wins in a season is likely the zenith, even in a weak conference. As willville noted above, Chip will start 3-0 this season. At least, he better start 3-0 with one of if not the softest P5 OOC schedules in the nation. But UCLA is not a serious contender for conference let alone national titles, and never will be under Chip. Chip caught a break in 2021, playing a Joe Burrow-less LSU with a HC, Ed Orgeron, who basically checked out after LSU's national title. (When he plays at LSU vs Brian Kelly down the road I think we will see a different result?) He also benefited from USC being dysfunctional under Clay Helton. He posted a 'phantom' 8 win season in 2021, with no wins against a team that finished with a winning record. He never won a conference title at UCLA and he never will. Chip caught lightning in a bottle in Eugene, and thought he was Zeus.

I'm shocked. Didn't hosing over SC and putting Chip Kelly on 'probation' put a stop to all of THIS? NCAA = Breasts on a Bull.

How about 'make it no,' instead of 'make it so?'

It does tick me off that Oregon and SC that spend far more money on CFB than do the majority of the Pac-12 get an equal piece of the pie with WSU, CU and OSU, etc. The UCLA athletic department is $60M in the red.

Great take. Close in on the B1G and SEC financially? That's a big ask. But the Pac-12 certainly has a shot at being 3rd in the P5 pecking order.

Great take. But 2 or even 3 teams in the top 10 make the path to the playoff far easier. The Pac-12 is not situated on the east coast as is Clemson and the Pac-12 does not have a network owned and operated by ESPN. To be more than a CFB after thought the conference has to put winning teams on the field and have success OOC including not losing to MW teams. As you so correctly noted, SC has 11 CFB titles. SC is the conference blue blood. The team that even folks in SEC country recognize. It will significantly help media negotiations come 2024 if the conference has a viable playoff contender in LA. My dream is to have SC and Oregon ranked in the top 5 when they meet in Las Vegas in the title game. This means the winner is likely in the final 4 and the loser is playing in a NY6 Bowl.

With the announcement today that the playoff field will remain at 4 through 2025 the spotlight most certainly will not be off of the SEC. I think 2 SEC teams in the field which has happened twice in 8 years, is likely to happen again at least twice before the field expands in 2026. Then, count on 3 if not 4 SEC teams in the field.

David, so spot on. Compare Kelly's situation in his first season as HC of the Ducks with that of Dan Lanning. Kelly was handed the keys to a luxury vehicle while Dan has to build from the ground up.

Staying with a 4 team field through the existing contract that expires in 2025 was confirmed by the CFB Playoff Committee today. If the conference stays at 9 conference games which appears most likely to be the case, will a Pac-12 team make the field prior to anticipated expansion of the field in 2026? Likely not happening unless USC can defeat Notre Dame and go 12-1; or, the Ducks or Utah go 12-1. With the Alliance scheduling agreement on the rocks I don't think the conference can weaken the inventory of games by adding a 4th OOC game. But the conference can help the cause by getting rid of divisions, ending the CA school scheduling agreement and assuring that the 2 best Pac-12 teams play for a conference title. This decision was not unexpected but it is leaving millions and millions of dollars on the table before 2026.

Correct, when it comes to Oly sports its not always about money. But when it comes to CBB and CFB, it most certainly is about the $. $ that pays for the Oly sports. Academics? 13 of the 14 B1G member schools are AAU member universities. Nebraska is the outlier, but Nebraska was an AAU member when it joined the conference.