THE PAC-16 - Time to Go to a 'Super Conference?'

[Jon Joseph]

First, allow me to specifically state that I expect the Pac-10 to stay together; all ten teams will sign on to the new media deal.

 

Second, Oregon with its sterling brand will be fine one way or another.

 

However, the Pac-10 conference must increase its inventory of college football and college basketball games; have more inventory for sale in the so-called Moneyball sports.

 

I suggest the following not only to provide more Moneyball game inventory for the Pac-10 but also to keep the B12 away from the west coast.

 

PODS

 

North - Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State

 

West - CAL, Fresno State, San Diego State, Stanford.

 

Central - Arizona, ASU, UNLV, Utah

 

East - Colorado, SMU, Tulane, UTSA

 

The above includes the defending Pac-12 champ, Utah. The defending Mountain West champion, Fresno State. The defending AAC champion, Tulane. The defending CUSA champion (currently headed to the AAC) UTSA.

 

Ranked in the final playoff committee poll: 8 Utah: 12 Washington, 14 Oregon State, 15 Oregon, 16 Tulane, and 25 UTSA.

 

Ranked in the post-bowl game AP final poll: 8. Washington, 9 Tulane, 10 Utah, 15 Oregon, 17 Oregon State, and 21 Fresno State.

 

This would not be a cupcake conference.

 

The above additional teams would bring in the California Central Valley market, the San Diego market, and the large and growing Las Vegas market already home to the Pacific conference football championship game and basketball tournament, the Dallas/Fort Worth market, the untapped and large San Antonio market and a good sized New Orleans market that lies in SEC territory. (Coach Prime would love having a team in Louisiana and recruiting 'down south.') 

 

Is UTSA the academic equivalent of Rice? Heck no. But Rice is an after-thought in the Houston market and has done nothing in decades to excel in football or basketball. IMHO the conference does need another great academic school that could give a whip about athletics.

 

The Mountain West schools and the AAC schools SMU, Tulane, and UTSA (that is moving up to the AAC) would welcome less than a full share of the Pac revenue pie. Mountain West schools today receive $4M (slightly more for Boise State) annually from its media deal. AAC schools receive slightly more but nowhere in range of what the new Pacific Conference media deal will bring to the table.

 

In my humble opinion it's time for the Pac to go big, not B1G, and create a conference with the same number of teams as the B1G and the SEC.

 

Would the Pac-16 bring in the same money as the B1G, SEC? No. But it would establish a conference that covers the Pacific, Mountain, and Central time zones and would keep the B12 out of the Mountain and Pacific time zones.

 

Apologies to Pennsylvania Duck and his excellent 'realignment post.' I hope the above gives more food for realignment thoughts The Pac-10 cannot yet again screw up on expansion opportunities.

 

It's about Benji's today and not the grade point average. 

 

 

 

 

[HappyToBeADuck]

JJ this is a great, out of the box, vision for a expanded PAC! Others on this great Forum have proposed a number of interesting realignment plans.

 

You are correct that the Oregon brand is strong and will stay with the PAC or land on its feet. But for the next 4 to 6 years, ESPN will cover every Duck game on the CHEAP. The 7th largest draw in college football for pennies. Ask your self, how did this come to this?

 

I can give you 10 reasons why this happened. That would be the 10 Presidents of Arizona, ASU, Cal, Colorado, Oregon, OSU, Stanford, Utah, washington, WSU  and Utah.

 

Why would the Presidents who, rejected UT and OU (football blue bloods), who rejected the entire BIG 12 last summer and who have snubbed their nose at SDSU and Fresno State for years all of a suddenly decide SMU and UTSA are better fits than any of those schools?

 

Think about this, these are the same Presidents who had all the top BIG 12 schools handed to them on a silver platter. Yet these 10 have made poor decision after poor decision and rejected them. Now the PAC goes after table scraps in the Texas media market.

 

Perhaps and just perhaps, desperation may force them to exercise forward thinking. So JJ do you think any of these Presidents feel deperate, yet? Desperate enough to make a good decision?

 

[Pennsylvania Duck]

On 2/19/2023 at 7:52 PM, HappyToBeADuck said:

Perhaps and just perhaps, desperation may force them to exercise forward thinking. So JJ do you think any of these Presidents feel deperate, yet? Desperate enough to make a good decision?

Hi Happy. I am not sure if our conference presidents are wise enough to be forward thinking in the sports world. They are too full of themselves to be desperate IMHO. An article I read today but didn't post should make them think twice. It is the story of the collapse of the Big East in the Deseret News, click here  to read.

 

Jon Joseph, I think your plan is great! Send it to George Kliavkoff because his vision seems to be much smaller. I don't know that we have ever had commissioners/leaders who are/were truly visionaries, so this might give them thought for pondering.

[HappyToBeADuck]

Thanks P Duck. That was a informative read and lends some credence to the possible slow movement  on the media deal.

 

I have been thru a number of negotiations, expansion and business mergers. In the middle of one right now that may wipe out 44 years of business equity. Its business and sometimes this happens.

 

Being a great listener and paying close attention to the other party is critical. At some point, it takes understanding what the other side REALLY wants and needs.

 

This will be boring and maybe redundant but hopefully fruitful. ESPN valued the remaining 10 PAC members media rights at $300 million annually. Unless it has been pulled off the table, that is the media rights basement. That may be lower as the economy tightens. $30 million a school per year.

 

So we have only heard that Amazon and ESPN+ Streaming companies are interested in the PAC. Maybe or maybe not, but lets say they are. So ask yourself, as a network executive for a streaming company, what do i need from the PAC?

 

Streamers need good quality games and plenty of them. And i would need them in different time zones to maximize broadcasts.The remaining 10 PAC members cannot deliver enough quality games weekly to satisfy both streamers and linear broadcasters. Its not that the sky is falling, it simply takes time to put that together.

 

Now remember the PAC told us media contract first then we might expand. Well that didnt work out. Perhaps the streamers told GK to go get more quality games for us to broadcast. Then the money will come. Just a thought.......

 

JJ and PDuck are correct. Go big. Create a conference that consumers want to see. In most negotiations you reveal just enough, never your full hand. Let's hope GK has a few aces up his sleeve to fill his hand.

[Smith72]

On 2/19/2023 at 3:56 PM, Jon Joseph said:

First, allow me to specifically state that I expect the Pac-10 to stay together; all ten teams will sign on to the new media deal.

 

Second, Oregon with its sterling brand will be fine one way or another.

 

However, the Pac-10 conference must increase its inventory of college football and college basketball games; have more inventory for sale in the so-called Moneyball sports.

 

I suggest the following not only to provide more Moneyball game inventory for the Pac-10 but also to keep the B12 away from the west coast.

 

PODS

 

North - Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State

 

West - CAL, Fresno State, San Diego State, Stanford.

 

Central - Arizona, ASU, UNLV, Utah

 

East - Colorado, SMU, Tulane, UTSA

 

The above includes the defending Pac-12 champ, Utah. The defending Mountain West champion, Fresno State. The defending AAC champion, Tulane. The defending CUSA champion (currently headed to the AAC) UTSA.

 

Ranked in the final playoff committee poll: 8 Utah: 12 Washington, 14 Oregon State, 15 Oregon, 16 Tulane, and 25 UTSA.

 

Ranked in the post-bowl game AP final poll: 8. Washington, 9 Tulane, 10 Utah, 15 Oregon, 17 Oregon State, and 21 Fresno State.

 

This would not be a cupcake conference.

 

The above additional teams would bring in the California Central Valley market, the San Diego market, and the large and growing Las Vegas market already home to the Pacific conference football championship game and basketball tournament, the Dallas/Fort Worth market, the untapped and large San Antonio market and a good sized New Orleans market that lies in SEC territory. (Coach Prime would love having a team in Louisiana and recruiting 'down south.') 

 

Is UTSA the academic equivalent of Rice? Heck no. But Rice is an after-thought in the Houston market and has done nothing in decades to excel in football or basketball. IMHO the conference does need another great academic school that could give a whip about athletics.

 

The Mountain West schools and the AAC schools SMU, Tulane, and UTSA (that is moving up to the AAC) would welcome less than a full share of the Pac revenue pie. Mountain West schools today receive $4M (slightly more for Boise State) annually from its media deal. AAC schools receive slightly more but nowhere in range of what the new Pacific Conference media deal will bring to the table.

 

In my humble opinion it's time for the Pac to go big, not B1G, and create a conference with the same number of teams as the B1G and the SEC.

 

Would the Pac-16 bring in the same money as the B1G, SEC? No. But it would establish a conference that covers the Pacific, Mountain, and Central time zones and would keep the B12 out of the Mountain and Pacific time zones.

 

Apologies to Pennsylvania Duck and his excellent 'realignment post.' I hope the above gives more food for realignment thoughts The Pac-10 cannot yet again screw up on expansion opportunities.

 

It's about Benji's today and not the grade point average. 

 

 

 

 

Jon, I said over a year ago you should be the Pac-12 Commissioner.  Great plan!  Here's hoping Commissioner GK and the Presidents could listen and agree with you!

[TexasDuck]

You’re spot on regarding UTSA.  As a San Antonio resident, I can tell you that the Alamodome would be packed if UTSA were a Power 5 program.  I believe there’s more potential here than either Rice or SMU.  

[chrisjenn99]

As long as the BIG XII is forced to stay put, the PAC should be fine.  Take SDSU & Fresno St to fill in.  Then wait and see what the BIG XII does.  Nothing that gets done at this point is going to move the needle financially, but doing nothing could severely limit the future.  Maybe in a few years the BIG XII, without OU & Texas, loses all of its luster.  Then you have a Texas Tech and / or Baylor come available.

Seems better than a Houston, UTEP, UTSA, North Texas, et al....

[Atxwave]

Atxwave here....I posted the almost exact same suggestion on one of our boards on Saturday morning except I included Memphis instead of UNLV:

 

PAC was earning about $33 million per school but obviously loses the LA market (USC and UCLA)

We'll keep it close to what it was and make the payment amount a 2 year commitment based on football and basketball ranking (a formula whereby each school will be re-evaluated every 2 years and can move up or down a tier). This gives the schools incentive to stay competitive. It's like a promotion/relegation system.

New 16 school conference - a cost of $405 million/year with an 8 year commitment (8 years is not a long commitment for the schools being looked at by BIG and Big12 so this buys those schools some time to see how those other conferences shake out as well as the overall landscape). If you can't find more than $250 million/year (which is the rumor) sell the naming rights of the conference to NIKE for $155 million/year and make all the schools NIKE schools. The Pac 16 presented by NIKE or The NIKE 16. This will be amazing branding for them and a completely new way to brand the product.

This keeps all the current schools, adds San Diego (27) market, Fresno (55) market...2 solid football schools in California. It also adds the Dallas market, Houston (8) or San Antonio (31) market, Memphis (51) market, and New Orleans (50) market. This also adds 4 schools in the central time zone to expand the Pac16 audience as well as makes it easier for non-football teams to have travel partners.

You've added 2 strong academic schools in SMU and Tulane...possibly 3 if you take Rice over San Antonio (personally I take San Antonio as UTSA has tremendous growth potential and it's a good tv market). All of the 6 additions have had respectable football and basketball programs off and on within the last 6 years.


Tier 1 - $35 million
Washington
Oregon
Utah

Tier 2 - $30 million
Washington State
Oregon State
Colorado
Stanford
Cal
Arizona
Arizona State

Tier 3 - $15 million
San Diego State
Fresno State
SMU
Memphis
Tulane
Rice or UTSA

[Haywarduck]

I always liked the saying the reason there are so many problems is those with the answers are cutting hair and driving taxis. I think the same can be said of the issues with college sports, those with the answers are on Fishduck. We can all agree those without the answers have been in charge for way too long in the Pac-?.

 

 

[Jon Joseph]

Thanks so much for all of the great replies and suggestions. 

 

Unfortunately, I have no connection with GK or the Pac-10 presidents. 

 

In the SEC all presidents including the president of academically elite Vanderbilt, are on the same page when it comes to athletics and understanding that success in athletics, especially in the Moneyball sports lifts all boats.

 

I wonder if someone (Charles?) could create an online petition whereby those concerned about the conference's future could make our concerns known.

 

I reiterate when I say I expect the conference to hold together and for Oregon to be just fine. I just hope the leaders of the conference act like intelligent business people. Block the B12 from the Pacific time zone and make the move into the central time zone significant by adding more than 1 school, SMU.

[Santa Rosa Duck]

Real good article Jon. Seems smart to me. I hope George K is listening because it seems our conference is struggling. 

[Kurt Rambis]

On 2/19/2023 at 11:56 PM, Jon Joseph said:

Apologies to Pennsylvania Duck and his excellent 'realignment post.' 

A second apology due to Pennsylvania Duck:  it was her excellent 'realignment post.'

 

Credit where credit is due.   

[Charles Fischer]

On 2/20/2023 at 10:22 AM, Jon Joseph said:

I wonder if someone (Charles?) could create an online petition whereby those concerned about the conference's future could make our concerns known.

I have enough on my plate.  If those who are retired can take the time to research it and get the information to GK--that would be best.

 

It's not a good fit....

 

[Steven A]

On 2/20/2023 at 10:51 AM, Charles Fischer said:

I have enough on my plate. 

Sleep is over-rated.

[Jon Joseph]

Charles, I know your plate is loaded. But it was worth mentioning your name to get another great cat gif.

 

 

[Notalot]

A good and reasonable proposition, Jon. The teams and alignments that you suggested make sense. I'm sure that you would agree there are other good options as well.

 

The rock-crusher of change in conference alignments is in motion. There may never again be the opportunities to assemble so many great programs into a great new conference. The time is now.

 

I prefer a 20-team structure, but sixteen or twenty are mere details of alignment. I prefer The inclusion of both Cincinnati and Memphis, along with Houston then west to the Pacific.

 

Frankly, I do not feel good about the Presidents or the Comissioner. The AD's should be lighting fires, but do not appear to be doing so.

 

Without significant additions and realignment, I would rather see Oregon leave for the B1G+ or B12+.

 

The biggest dogs have already left the Pac. As is, there are too many weak links in the Pac. Adding several new members does not resolve or avoid the looming problems.

 

Thank you, Jon, for laying out a vision for change.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 21, 2023 by Notalot

[CalBear95]

Saw an interesting take from Forbes on a super conference but it goes in a different direction 

 

Forbes suggests the PAC stay smallish (not the size of regional teams listed in your idea…that’s step 2) and get a 5 year deal.  
 

Then, in the interim, the ACC and PAC find a merger model for a bi-coastal conference.  The writer suggests some teams are likely shed in the process (but not definitely)

 

Given the magnitude of the value of such a pairing (all four time zones and premium markets in all), the ACC contract becomes easier to manage 

 

The 5 years between a new rights deal gives enough time to solve.  
 

IDK if it’s at all feasible but I like the idea.  ESPN had an article about the PAC that I think is largely right, namely that the BIG will eventually come for Oregon and UW (w/in next 5 years which will always leave the conference a little unstable)

 

A pairing with a higher value group of markets (ACC) probably fixes a lot of that

 

Anyhow, all speculation which is why this is fun for us and probably nerve wracking for people like GK

 

Glad I don’t have his job.  I’d age 10 years in 1

[Jon Joseph]

On 2/21/2023 at 11:48 AM, CalBear95 said:

Saw an interesting take from Forbes on a super conference but it goes in a different direction 

 

Forbes suggests the PAC stay smallish (not the size of regional teams listed in your idea…that’s step 2) and get a 5 year deal.  
 

Then, in the interim, the ACC and PAC find a merger model for a bi-coastal conference.  The writer suggests some teams are likely shed in the process (but not definitely)

 

Given the magnitude of the value of such a pairing (all four time zones and premium markets in all), the ACC contract becomes easier to manage 

 

The 5 years between a new rights deal gives enough time to solve.  
 

IDK if it’s at all feasible but I like the idea.  ESPN had an article about the PAC that I think is largely right, namely that the BIG will eventually come for Oregon and UW (w/in next 5 years which will always leave the conference a little unstable)

 

A pairing with a higher value group of markets (ACC) probably fixes a lot of that

 

Anyhow, all speculation which is why this is fun for us and probably nerve wracking for people like GK

 

Glad I don’t have his job.  I’d age 10 years in 1

I could see a 'merger' with the ACC working for CFB and CBB and keeping all other sports as-is. But the ACC media deal is lousy and runs through 2036. So unless ESPN was willing to rewrite its deal with the ACC this great thought of yours would not work. And the travel for basketball would be a witch.

 

Love the idea and all other thoughts regarding realignment including simply staying at 10 teams for 5 years.

[Duckhart]

On 2/20/2023 at 4:09 AM, Atxwave said:

Atxwave here....I posted the almost exact same suggestion on one of our boards on Saturday morning except I included Memphis instead of UNLV:

 

PAC was earning about $33 million per school but obviously loses the LA market (USC and UCLA)

We'll keep it close to what it was and make the payment amount a 2 year commitment based on football and basketball ranking (a formula whereby each school will be re-evaluated every 2 years and can move up or down a tier). This gives the schools incentive to stay competitive. It's like a promotion/relegation system.

New 16 school conference - a cost of $405 million/year with an 8 year commitment (8 years is not a long commitment for the schools being looked at by BIG and Big12 so this buys those schools some time to see how those other conferences shake out as well as the overall landscape). If you can't find more than $250 million/year (which is the rumor) sell the naming rights of the conference to NIKE for $155 million/year and make all the schools NIKE schools. The Pac 16 presented by NIKE or The NIKE 16. This will be amazing branding for them and a completely new way to brand the product.

This keeps all the current schools, adds San Diego (27) market, Fresno (55) market...2 solid football schools in California. It also adds the Dallas market, Houston (8) or San Antonio (31) market, Memphis (51) market, and New Orleans (50) market. This also adds 4 schools in the central time zone to expand the Pac16 audience as well as makes it easier for non-football teams to have travel partners.

You've added 2 strong academic schools in SMU and Tulane...possibly 3 if you take Rice over San Antonio (personally I take San Antonio as UTSA has tremendous growth potential and it's a good tv market). All of the 6 additions have had respectable football and basketball programs off and on within the last 6 years.


Tier 1 - $35 million
Washington
Oregon
Utah

Tier 2 - $30 million
Washington State
Oregon State
Colorado
Stanford
Cal
Arizona
Arizona State

Tier 3 - $15 million
San Diego State
Fresno State
SMU
Memphis
Tulane
Rice or UTSA

You could lose Colorado, AZ, ASU to B12. May lose them anyway.

[Jon Joseph]

Somewhat OT but with SMU on the conference radar I thought this would be of interest.

 

SMU HC Rhett Ashley a former OC at Miami is bringing in 6 transfers who were on Mario's roster at the close of last season.

 

Mario signed a very good class in 2023 but many Miami players and coaches are bailing out.

[GeotechDuck]

On 2/20/2023 at 6:09 PM, Notalot said:

Frankly, I do not feel good about the Presidents or the Commissioner. The AD's should be lighting fires, but do not appear to be doing so.

 

Without significant additions and realignment, I would rather see Oregon leave for the B1G+ or B12+.

 

The biggest dogs have already left the Pac. As is, there are too many weak links in the Pac. Adding several new members does not resolve or avoid the looming problems.

 

Thank you, Jon, for laying out a vision for change.

 

 

 

 

 

I was in the "do anything to save the conference" group, but I think I am moving more towards this way of thinking.  I don't see how adding SMU, Fresno, Boise, UNLV, Tulane, and/or SDSU is a long-term solution. What happens when those schools are up for a full share in the next media rights window?  Everyone in the conference is going to take a smaller piece of the pie and the PAC gets further behind?      

 

I am leaning towards a move to the Big-12 under the right circumstances.  Would the Big-12 be willing to add Oregon and Washington with an escape clause in the GOR if the BIG comes calling?  Without Oregon and Washington, the PAC-10 crumbles and the four corner schools all head to the Big-12.  Now the Big-12 has was they want - the 4 corner school under a GOR, plus they get Oregon (national brand) and Washington (Seattle Market) until the BIG comes calling.  If the BIG never comes calling, they have probably secured themselves as the 3rd best conference in football and the best conference in college basketball....by a mile.   

 

     

[noDucknewby]

From the conference perspective it's safety in numbers.  For Oregon it's more like the law of diminishing returns.  I just don't see how we get a competitive TV deal as 1/16th of a new megaconference, especially since none of the 6 new members is likely to come from a Power 5 conference.  That ship has almost certainly sailed IMHO.

 

The Pac-12 as we know it is done.  Not saying the conference won't survive, but nowhere near on par with the B1G or the SEC, probably not the B12 and maybe not even the ACC.

 

If I'm looking out for the conference, I figure out a way to keep Oregon-Washington and the four corners schools in the fold.  That probably will require unequal revenue distribution, but I have doubts that the existing members would sign off on that.  A performance-based payout for the P12 Championship, CFP and bowl appearances might work though.  Bring in new members at 50% on an escalating scale.  That may give the conference's top-tier programs enough revenue to keep them from looking elsewhere in the near term.

 

That said, for Oregon the B1G is still the best option IMHO.  I hate what's happened to the P12, but my loyalties are to Oregon first.

 

 

[Mike West]

Some thoughts here:

 

1) Expansion as Jon suggests.  I like the idea of adding inventory Eastward.  In addition, if the schools collaborate on truly developing teams the way Utah did in the MWC, in order to develop Boise State credibility (most especially a few upsets of the Blue Bloods), AND a very short term deal ( I'm talking four years tops) with a very serious effort from Utah,UW and Oregon to bolster the additions by any means necessary ( to bolster the Brand of the conference in football).  I'm for that. 

 

Given the prestige hit the conference will definitely take, serious collaboration at nailing playoff contenders is essential.  The aim being enhancing the Brand and doing everything to get two conference teams in the playoffs.  This requires some serious thinking out of the box and commitment to athletic excellence.  

 

Given that the current Presidents want the Research Funding- a WRITTEN Agreement with penalty clauses (am I dreaming here or what?) may entice Tulane and SMU to bite. Nothing would be more awesome than to go after the second tier of the SEC - say an up and coming Tennessee or better yet FULLY FUNDED  A&M - and ruin their rise while bolstering the conference.  Especially at Noon Eastern or 4:30 Eastern while a Blue Blood is on( I can see the highlight reels interrupting those games lol).

 

Given that thought, THIS YEAR IS A MAJOR YEAR FOR THE REMAINING TEAMS.  Upsets this year are an absolute must.  Same for any teams joining the fray.  Nothing can bolster a conference better than what UW did to MSU last year, and OBD did to tOSU recently.  

 

Another option for OBD to stay, and negotiate its own Network, with some sort of revenue sharing once the deal is inked.  The 7th most popular brand in football should be able to Garner an extra 10-25 million on its own ( and yes playoff appearances would truly help).

 

If course, this requires an extreme amount of trust, and forward thinking.  But heck, the only other thing I can think of is flat out calling the other conferences chicken for not inking home and home deals with the conference ( tOSU bailing out anyone- especially after talk of keeping OBD out of the BIG).  

 

I would be relentless about it too, and seriously prepare in collaboration to seal upsets.  

 

Unfortunately, the focus has been so academic centric, we might see our schools morphing into Ivy League West.

 

Not a bad thought Jon.  Maybe some WWE style tactics can keep the conference relevant with an upset or two.  Perhaps all those brilliant minds in the conference can learn some marketing and sports management.

[Nevada Dawg]

I have hesitated to respond to this thread for various reasons. I like most of Jon's posts and might like this one except for the inclusion of two teams, UNLV and UTSA that, from a competitive football standpoint, seem to weaken rather than strengthen the proposed conference (although they do add growing media markets). Calling it a super conference seems a real stretch in my humble opinion.

 

Having said that, I admit that I know little about the schools I have called out (other than UNLV has trouble beating University of Nevada Reno) so my opinion is more of a "gut feeling" than a truly informed stance. 

 

Just my two cents worth.