bbmichaels No. 1 Share Posted August 16, 2023 Inside the Pac-12 collapse: Four surprising moments that crushed the conference SPORTS.YAHOO.COM How did the Pac-12 die? These surprising decisions by USC, Oregon, Washington and others thwarted efforts to save the conference. Interesting read about the entire saga, and the first, at least that I've seen, that states Phil Knight apparently liked the Apple deal and UO was inclined to stick, and it was UW that initially pulled the trigger to leave. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Fischer Administrator No. 2 Share Posted August 16, 2023 For a big article...it was pretty skimpy of what the article was supposed to be about. "Washington left and Oregon followed..." That is it? No more elaboration, no source, no proof, not even logic as to why from the Oregon angle? 1 Mr. FishDuck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
latracey No. 3 Share Posted August 17, 2023 This is largely a rehashing of a couple of other articles I’ve read. Interesting that USC’s Carol Folt seems to have put the skids on adding Big 12 teams which would have fortified the PAC, and then worked out a secret deal that resulted in USC leaving the PAC which was the beginning of the end. Also interesting that Phil Knight liked the Apple deal. Washington deciding to leave before Oregon doesn’t really matter. It’s clear that by the time Kliavkoff finally presented the Apple deal, the PAC was a teetering house of cards and the solidarity he believed he had didn’t truly exist. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
idontrollonshobbas No. 4 Share Posted August 17, 2023 The shadowy consultant who convinced an AD the teams were worth $50 mil/year is an interesting factor. Inquiring minds want to know more details. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cacker Guy No. 5 Share Posted August 17, 2023 Thanks for posting, bb. I am not familiar with McCollough, but his resume looks pretty legit. I believe Phil liked the Apple deal, because -- well, I was very intrigued by it. I think it might have worked out quite well in the long run. I still think we will look back at this as a very poor decision -- maybe even disastrous. I hope I'm wrong. But it's water under the bridge now, so on to the B1G, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirklandduck Moderator No. 6 Share Posted August 17, 2023 On 8/16/2023 at 6:11 PM, idontrollonshobbas said: The shadowy consultant who convinced an AD the teams were worth $50 mil/year is an interesting factor. Inquiring minds want to know more details. I'd like to know who that AD is and slap them with a cold fish. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirklandduck Moderator No. 7 Share Posted August 18, 2023 Pac-12 collapse speculation swirls around Arizona State president Michael Crow amid report WWW.AZCENTRAL.COM Speculation about the reasons for the downfall of the Pac-12 are running rampant. Arizona State president... It's looking like ASU president Michael Crow was the one responsible for coming up that ridiculous $50m per team valuation. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Marsh No. 8 Share Posted August 18, 2023 On 8/16/2023 at 8:01 PM, Cacker Guy said: I believe Phil liked the Apple deal, because -- well, I was very intrigued by it. When I learned more details about it became more interesting. 25 mil as a base and then a proportion of a growing revenue. The sub was roughly $100 a year so that works out to be just slightly more than 8 dollars a month. I know I have things that cost me more per month that I don't fully use. I don't find that number too ridiculous in honesty. The problem was certainly exposure. If Apple would have a "featured" game or two every week to bring in the viewers I could see that helping to bring in subs. The Pac-12 network as it stands today is roughly 13 mil subs and that's it. That's pretty pathetic. If the Pac-12 on Apple had that many subs the payout per school would probably be fairly reasonable. The biggest difficulty would be to get non-Pac-12 fans to sign up, they probably wouldn't. Which goes back to the exposure problem. As this sub would probably just be Pac-12 sports that is a pretty hard sell to non-Pac fans. If it was part of a larger sports package then different story because we start getting people watching Pac games because they have the service. I think revenue probably would have been ok with the apple deal after a year. Exposure would have been a pretty big fail though with Apple only having one conference's worth of games. And 8 dollars a month is too steep for a non-conference fan to pay. I wouldn't pay that to watch SEC, B1G, Big-12, or ACC football because my main team wouldn't be on that platform. The whole Apple deal felt half baked to be honest. It had some interesting bits in it but the missing pieces were massive glaring wholes that needed to be addressed, namely non-conference exposure. 2 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDuck Moderator No. 9 Share Posted August 18, 2023 ESPN President of Content expands on reports of network's failed talks with Pac-12 ESPN President of Content expands on reports of network's failed talks with Pac-12 - On3 WWW.ON3.COM . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Joseph No. 10 Share Posted August 21, 2023 As long as Puddles found a seat in the last lifeboat, I do not care which Northwest school decided to first get off the Titanic. As Charles has noted, Puddles is moving up B1G. Below is an example. The B1G placed the most players on the preseason All-American team. AP Preseason All-America: B1G leads all conferences in first-team selections SATURDAYTRADITION.COM AP Preseason All-America: The B1G led all league's with a dominant first-team showing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatOrlando No. 11 Share Posted August 22, 2023 Washington athletics was in debt. They were more desperate for the money. It can't have felt good to hear about potential dollars, when you are needing funds now. Even at a reduced rate, the B1G was offering about ten million more than the baseline Apple deal. Washington likely knew USC played them for a fool a year ago. Were they gonna sit around and trust that Oregon , and Stanford wouldn't bolt first? They needed money, they knew the B1G could offer them more. The longer they waited, the odds grew that possibly it was the Big 12 lifeboat they would have to take. Oregon wasn't in the same financial straits, but they got blinded last year too. Were they really gonna trust the PAC leaders? I mean Colorado jumped before even hearing about the Apple money. Could they trust Stanford not to backstab them? Would Oregon be as secure if it was the Big 12 lifeboat? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDuck No. 12 Share Posted August 22, 2023 excerpt from Wilner today.... "What changed in early August, other than Fox’s willingness to fund the expansion? Arizona’s application for membership in the Big 12 played a key role in the process, according to a source. The Wildcats weren’t the only school to seek a lifeboat; Utah and ASU would follow them into the arms of the Big 12 (and Colorado, of course, had already jumped). But in an attempt to secure a home in case the Pac-12 collapsed, Arizona formally applied for membership in the Big 12 in the middle of the week — before Oregon and Washington rejected the Pac-12 grant-of-rights agreement on that fateful Friday morning. The Big Ten became aware of Arizona’s application to the Big 12, according to the source. “So (Big Ten commissioner) Tony Petitti tells his presidents, ‘We aren’t the ones,’” the source said. “They felt like they weren’t the ones to fire the kill shot.” That triggered the Big Ten presidents to approve membership for Washington and Oregon without guilt — and with Fox’s cash as their carrot, the source said. Arizona’s application was approved by the Big 12 on Thursday evening, according to a Yahoo report....before the Friday meeting" Me...Arizona could have backed out on the Big12. But, when you go so far as to apply for admission, and know there's approval, that appears unlikely to me. Another source said UW announced first that Friday morning, but I think that is a distinction with little difference as Oregon likely knew it was a two-fer before Huskies announced. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Marsh No. 13 Share Posted August 22, 2023 On 8/21/2023 at 9:18 PM, HDuck said: excerpt from Wilner today.... "What changed in early August, other than Fox’s willingness to fund the expansion? Arizona’s application for membership in the Big 12 played a key role in the process, according to a source. The Wildcats weren’t the only school to seek a lifeboat; Utah and ASU would follow them into the arms of the Big 12 (and Colorado, of course, had already jumped). But in an attempt to secure a home in case the Pac-12 collapsed, Arizona formally applied for membership in the Big 12 in the middle of the week — before Oregon and Washington rejected the Pac-12 grant-of-rights agreement on that fateful Friday morning. The Big Ten became aware of Arizona’s application to the Big 12, according to the source. “So (Big Ten commissioner) Tony Petitti tells his presidents, ‘We aren’t the ones,’” the source said. “They felt like they weren’t the ones to fire the kill shot.” That triggered the Big Ten presidents to approve membership for Washington and Oregon without guilt — and with Fox’s cash as their carrot, the source said. Arizona’s application was approved by the Big 12 on Thursday evening, according to a Yahoo report....before the Friday meeting" Me...Arizona could have backed out on the Big12. But, when you go so far as to apply for admission, and know there's approval, that appears unlikely to me. Another source said UW announced first that Friday morning, but I think that is a distinction with little difference as Oregon likely knew it was a two-fer before Huskies announced. In short... Fox got their way and landed the death blow on the Pac-12. They took the two biggest remaining brands for their own conference, the B1G. And then followed up by taking the remaining good but not major brands and stuffing them into their tier two conference than they share with ESPN. Utah, ASU, Arizona and Colorado. Colorado has potential but they were also by far the weakest link in all of this to get the dominos to fall. Then Fox and ESPN discarded the properties not worth as much to them by leaving them behind, Cal, Oregon State, Washington State and Stanford. If they actually wanted any of those programs the Big 12 would have had room. It's not up the commissioners, but the media executives. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
