Incompetent PAC-12 Leadership

[QuackAttack]

The recent developments with the 4 corner schools and the Big 12 wouldn’t be happening if Kliavkoff was able to close the deal. He needs to stop worrying about streaming and focus on the big two cable sports outlets. If I were in other conferences and wanted to sabotage the PAC-12 I’d put one of my people in to attack it from within. If I’m the Big 12 commissioner, I go after SDSU and SMU while I’m at it and finish off the PAC-12’s ability to expand their footprint.

[HappyToBeADuck]

The BIG12 had the opportunity to invite both SMU and SDSU into their conference. But chose to replace Texas and Oklahoma with the likes of BYU, Cincinnatti, Houston and one of the Florida schools.

 

An invite for SMU was blocked by TCU and Baylor. Their was no economic or recruiting value in diluting the DFW market with the SMU addition. The BIG12 snubbed the Mustangs........

 

A possible invite to SMU by the PAC would benefit the Mustangs. They would move from G5 to P5 status. Enabling them to compete against TCU and Baylor for 4 and 5 star Texas talent. As a PAC member they should make 3 or 4 times more money per year than the $7 million a year they receive now.......

 

SDSU is a different story for the BIG12 conference. This opens up the PST time zone and California recruiting for the other BIG12 schools. They could invite Fresno State as a travel partner for SDSU. The BIG12 is driven more by money than whether a school is a research university.

 

This allows the BIG12 the window to enter the 4 and 7:30 pm television broadcast window on Friday and Saturday. With usc and ucla the BIG also has the same window to broadcast in. 9:30 or 10:30 kick offs are not ideal for fans who live in the CST or EST time zones. Welcome to the world of PAC after dark......

 

The only thing keeping SDSU out of the BIG12 is SDSU. They want to be in the PAC, not the BIG12. The only thing the BIG12 offers SDSU is a bargaining chip against the PAC for an immediate full share of the media money.

 

Only time will tell how this plays out for both SMU and SDSU. Both schools have made massive investments into their athletic facilities. They both meet the academic profile for expansion into the PAC.

 

Now neither school can replace the TV sets lost by the 2 traitors departure. However, both schools are in the top 30 TV markets. Both schools are in rich fertile receuiting areas. Good for them and good for the PAC.

 

Patience, patience and more patience. Good things come to yhose who wait.

[Pennsylvania Duck]

On 3/5/2023 at 8:20 AM, HappyToBeADuck said:

Patience, patience and more patience. Good things come to yhose who wait.

Hi Happy. I agree with you that patience is a virtue. However, with this long media ordeal, patience is wearing thin or even beyond thin. I believe George K misread the media market and the market economic conditions when he started this process. Will he be able to turn a miracle? Hard to tell but with all the bad press, it definitely has hurt the conference's brand.

[HappyToBeADuck]

On 3/5/2023 at 7:13 AM, Pennsylvania Duck said:

Hi Happy. I agree with you that patience is a virtue. However, with this long media ordeal, patience is wearing thin or even beyond thin. I believe George K misread the media market and the market economic conditions when he started this process. Will he be able to turn a miracle? Hard to tell but with all the bad press, it definitely has hurt the conference's brand.

It certainly looks like GK misread the media market. Or, due to the unstable economy, the available dollars simply diminished.

 

Also, FOX no longer needs the PAC for after dark viewing. They have usc and ucla home games to broadcast in the late viewing window. FOX doesnt need to spend money to compete with itself.

 

And no one, including GK, all other conference commissioners and AD's could have known that ESPN would tighten their belt and spend less. Both FOX (BIG) and ESPN (SEC) are all in on their conference partners. Both networks spent leftover dollars together to tie up the BIG12 until the next major expansion round 

 

The PAC is guilty of slow play and arrogance, maybe more than anything.

[anyotherduck]

I stopped holding my breath weeks ago. GK will leave the PAC weak, broken or dissolved. Oregon should be looking out for Oregon. USC and UCLA are looking smarter by the day. Go Ducks!

[Jon Joseph]

On 3/5/2023 at 10:13 AM, Pennsylvania Duck said:

Hi Happy. I agree with you that patience is a virtue. However, with this long media ordeal, patience is wearing thin or even beyond thin. I believe George K misread the media market and the market economic conditions when he started this process. Will he be able to turn a miracle? Hard to tell but with all the bad press, it definitely has hurt the conference's brand.

B12 Commissioner, Yack-Yack Yarmack talks a big game but the reality is he rushed to the market and made a deal with ESPN and FOX for $31.7M per team beginning in 2024. This is not a home run of a deal. I believe GK will match or exceed this deal. And even if a few million short of the B12's $31.7M I do not see any of the 4 corners schools leaving for the B12. 

 

GK probably delayed too long but the fact of the matter is that after FOX engineered the USC/UCLA move to the B1G, FOX has no further interest in televising Pac-12 sports. So, one linear broadcaster ESPN is left for GK to negotiate with and ESPN, with parent Disney in a cost-cutting mode, is not going to bid against itself. ESPN orchestrated the move of OK/TX to the SEC and a year earlier than expected will have to step up and pay the two former B12 members a full share; approximately $70M a year. (Former B12 Commissioner, Bob Bowlsby, who added the 4 new B12 teams called out ESPN. We have not heard anything from GK regarding FOX's 'theft' of the LA schools but if not illegal it was certainly unethical on the part of the B1G, B1G Commissioner Kevin Warren, FOX, and the USC, and UCLA administrations. I'd be looking to bring suit against above named entities but being academia this will not happen.)

 

To close a transaction equal to or exceeding the B12 deal GK has to break new ground. He has to convince a tech company to stream college athletic events. And he has to parse lesser inventory, with SC/UCLA gone among a linear traditional broadcaster and a streaming service or two. Additionally, GK has a functionally insolvent network he is attempting to sell or failing such a sale, doing something to get the conference network into the black. Also, he is likely working on a media disbursement plan that if not doling out differing amounts of revenue to different schools will at least likely benefit teams that succeed on the field and the court and bring additional income to the conference.

 

As to the Pac-12 brand I don't believe after the LA schools announced they were leaving the brand could be any worse than it is today. Rumor-mongering regarding the demise of the Pac-10 is rampant in part likely due to consultants representing the B12 and others looking to benefit from the demise of the conference.  Numerous entities that cover college football have also jumped on board the rumor mill because after all, what is there to write about before spring practice begins? I trust John Canzano and Jon Wilner both of whom have called out unsourced rumor-mongering and who both believe that the Pac-10 is not going away.

 

All of this speculation will be brought to a close shortly. As a poster noted on Canzano's site yesterday, measure twice, and cut once. You will get zero arguments from me regarding the mismanagement of the conference since even before Larry but the university presidents cannot vote on a deal until one is presented.

 

This too shall pass.

 

[Steven A]

On 3/5/2023 at 7:58 AM, Jon Joseph said:

This too shall pass.

Just not soon enough!!!

[Kurt Rambis]

For every report that the Pac-10 is about to expand, or sign a deal, or that the Big12 is about to poach schools, the money has dried up, schools are looking to leave, it'll all be streaming, or anything else, there are other reports of exactly the opposite.  

 

Some people naturally tend to be pessimists, so I believe they gravitate towards the "the sky is falling" reports.  Others tend to be optimists, so I believe they gravitate towards the "be patient - it'll all be fine" reports.  Likely one side or the other will be proven very right.

 

Either way, none of us really has any idea of what's happening.  Canzano recently reported that no schools are seriously looking to leave, that administrators continue to be confident the new deal will be close to or even exceed what the Big12 is pulling in, etc.  

 

Is he right?  No clue.  But it certainly contradicts some of the doom and gloom we're hearing from other sources.

[12Duck72]

On 3/5/2023 at 10:37 AM, Kurt Rambis said:

For every report that the Pac-10 is about to expand, or sign a deal, or that the Big12 is about to poach schools, the money has dried up, schools are looking to leave, it'll all be streaming, or anything else, there are other reports of exactly the opposite.  

 

Some people naturally tend to be pessimists, so I believe they gravitate towards the "the sky is falling" reports.  Others tend to be optimists, so I believe they gravitate towards the "be patient - it'll all be fine" reports.  Likely one side or the other will be proven very right.

 

I guess the reason why I'm a pessimist Kurt is because I read an interview the AD at ASU did with a local station and the President of OSU went on Canzano and said they haven't even seen a deal yet after 9 months and that they are hoping that numbers will be close to the BIG 12. She also stated that unequal revenue sharing was discussed. That never works out.

 

These aren't sports writers, these are people who are in the room. Doesn't instill much confidence.

[Jon Joseph]

On 3/5/2023 at 3:08 PM, 12Duck72 said:

I guess the reason why I'm a pessimist Kurt is because I read an interview the AD at ASU did with a local station and the President of OSU went on Canzano and said they haven't even seen a deal yet after 9 months and that they are hoping that numbers will be close to the BIG 12. She also stated that unequal revenue sharing was discussed. That never works out.

 

These aren't sports writers, these are people who are in the room. Doesn't instill much confidence.

The Pac-10 had unequal revenue shares before CU and Utah were added and Larry in 2009, went to equal shares. SC's frustration over this change has been festering since 2009.

[2002duck]

On 3/5/2023 at 5:20 AM, HappyToBeADuck said:

2 traitors

If Oregon and Washington were offered by the B1G we would have been gone in a heartbeat. I highly, highly doubt UO and UW do not go to the B1G when the next PAC media deal ends (if they even make it to the end of the deal).

 

Keep that in mind when calling schools traitors. USC and UCLA were one part smart and one part lucky.

[Jon Joseph]

On 3/5/2023 at 7:56 PM, 2002duck said:

If Oregon and Washington were offered by the B1G we would have been gone in a heartbeat. I highly, highly doubt UO and UW do not go to the B1G when the next PAC media deal ends (if they even make it to the end of the deal).

 

Keep that in mind when calling schools traitors. USC and UCLA were one part smart and one part lucky.

How about 'Too big to fail?' Both schools floundered in football for a decade plus and the UCLA athletic department is deep in red ink.

 

Bailed out by the LA market and by FOX. The B1G may as well be referred to as FOX Inc. Like the SEC should be referred to as ESPN, Inc.

 

Great take, 2002, but I don't think they were smart. I think they were seduced by FOX and by a scheming liar in B1G commish Kevin Warren and by an accident of geography.

 

Would Oregon and UW leapt at a B1G invitation? Probably. But FOX/B1G is not going to expand beyond LA until FOX knows what Oregon and UW will receive under the new media rights deal. If invited, neither Oregon nor UW will receive a full share of B1G media revenue.

[2002duck]

On 3/5/2023 at 5:24 PM, Jon Joseph said:

If invited, neither Oregon nor UW will receive a full share of B1G media revenue.

I agree, UO and UW got outFOXed in this mess. The B1G and FOX probably really wanted USC, and taking UCLA was necessary. Not that UCLA can't be really successful someday. 

 

Personally, I don't see the streaming transition to be as great as people think. The PAC has been left at the alter. 

 

My older brother has been a streaming rights executive/negotiator/facilitator in the film industry for about 15 years- pretty much when it started. While he is not at all connected to TV or sports, his general attitude and opinion about media and profits/financing is that it's always bad.

 

He's not exactly paid to be a pessimist (he's one in real life), but for every motivational speech he gives at a conference or meeting, or whatever deal he facilitates- he always says the whole industry is a house of cards. 

 

"There's just not a lot of profit to be made in streaming or for theatrical releases. If you are not a super hero or franchise player, you're out of luck." 

Edited March 6, 2023 by 2002duck

[HappyToBeADuck]

On 3/5/2023 at 4:56 PM, 2002duck said:

If Oregon and Washington were offered by the B1G we would have been gone in a heartbeat. I highly, highly doubt UO and UW do not go to the B1G when the next PAC media deal ends (if they even make it to the end of the deal).

 

Keep that in mind when calling schools traitors. USC and UCLA were one part smart and one part lucky.

It's not what they did, its how they did it. Keep in mind that usc and ucla blocked UT and OU from PAC membership. If those 2 schools had joined the PAC, then  ALL the media giants would be BIDDING for the PAC 14 media rights.

 

Payouts would be $70 million plus per year. They put FOX in near linear control and gave them direct west coast prime viewing slots. Slots that compete against the remaining PAC members.

 

Then last summer, knowing they were going to head to BIG, they blocked the PAC 12 - BIG 12 merger. THEY BLOCKED IT.. ...  

 

I respect how you feel, i just have a different view poibt. The 2 traitors were not one part smart and one part lucky. They planned this exit. Keep in mind if they had stayed in the PAC, the media market value was around $500 million. And that is before the bidding. FOX would have had to bid to have west coast content. ESPN would have had to bid to keep their west coast content.

 

The 2 traitors made it possible for FOX to get what they wanted and ESPN to low ball the PAC. They left the PAC high and dry.

 

I would have been disappointed if Oregon had done this to the PAC and my financial support would have stopped.

 

This move was not necessary, IMHO, but it was planned.

[2002duck]

On 3/5/2023 at 6:15 PM, HappyToBeADuck said:

usc and ucla blocked UT and OU from PAC membership

I went to fact check this, because I recall an issue with Texas wanting to remain on the Longhorn Network and not share money, along with ESPN and FOX not wanting to pay anything regarding a future PAC Network.

 

Anyway, asking ChatGPT to recall when OU and UT considered coming to the PAC did not go so well:

 

"Yes, I am aware of the discussions that occurred in the early 2010s regarding the University of Oklahoma and the University of Texas potentially joining the Pac-10 conference.

 

In fact, these discussions ultimately led to the formation of the current Pac-12 conference, which includes both Oklahoma and Texas's longtime rival, Texas A&M, as well as several other universities from the former Pac-10 conference.

 

The addition of Oklahoma and Texas to the conference was seen as a major boost to the Pac-10's national profile and revenue streams, and has had a significant impact on the college sports landscape as a whole."

 

Ouch, ChatGPT!

 

"I apologize for the confusion in my previous response. The talks ultimately fell through, and the Pac-12 ended up adding Colorado and Utah instead. I apologize for any confusion my previous response may have caused."

 

 

Edited March 6, 2023 by 2002duck

[HappyToBeADuck]

On 3/5/2023 at 6:57 PM, 2002duck said:

I went to fact check this, because I recall an issue with Texas wanting to remain on the Longhorn Network and not share money, along with ESPN and FOX not wanting to pay anything regarding a future PAC Network.

 

Anyway, asking ChatGPT to recall when OU and UT considered coming to the PAC did not go so well:

 

"Yes, I am aware of the discussions that occurred in the early 2010s regarding the University of Oklahoma and the University of Texas potentially joining the Pac-10 conference.

 

In fact, these discussions ultimately led to the formation of the current Pac-12 conference, which includes both Oklahoma and Texas's longtime rival, Texas A&M, as well as several other universities from the former Pac-10 conference.

 

The addition of Oklahoma and Texas to the conference was seen as a major boost to the Pac-10's national profile and revenue streams, and has had a significant impact on the college sports landscape as a whole."

 

Ouch, ChatGPT!

 

"I apologize for the confusion in my previous response. The talks ultimately fell through, and the Pac-12 ended up adding Colorado and Utah instead. I apologize for any confusion my previous response may have caused."

 

 

No worries. U r correct that UT killed the expansion move in 2011 or 2012. They did not want to give up their Longhorn network.

 

I am trying to find the article where they were looking to join the PAC again before they made the decision to move to the SEC.  UT amd OU would have found the money in the PAC (with them as members) substantial. And a little easier than climbing over The Dawgs and Bama.

 

Normally, things work out for the better in the long run. In this case it is difficult to vision the long run when the short term is not set.

 

Appreciate your comments and well thought out breakdowns. This forum is great.

[Tandaian]

It will be interesting to see if Fox forces UCLA and USC into repeatedly playing games at 7 PM PST.  That would essentially force them to play all their home games at 7 PM and they would have make sure they alternate home games even for OOC.

[McDuck]

On 3/6/2023 at 8:01 AM, Tandaian said:

It will be interesting to see if Fox forces UCLA and USC into repeatedly playing games at 7 PM PST.  That would essentially force them to play all their home games at 7 PM and they would have make sure they alternate home games even for OOC.

I hope not, I don't think I could stand to wait all day for an exciting Rutgers/U$C contest at the Mausoleum.  Indiana vs the Bruins, another day of eager anticipation. 

[Duck Fan 76]

On 3/5/2023 at 4:11 AM, QuackAttack said:

He needs to stop worrying about streaming and focus on the big two cable sports outlets

You may be forgetting that GK is only responsible for negotiating the deal, the university presidents have to agree to it and nothing forces any of them to agree to anything.  If GK comes up with a deal that Oregon doesn't like they can say "no, thanks" and leave for another conference.  If GK comes up with a deal that only Oregon & Washington likes the four corners schools can say "no thanks" and leave for another conference.

 

How this process works is that GK got input at the start from all of the universities on what they need to sign on to the PAC's media deal.  His job is then to negotiate a deal on behalf of the universities that meets EVERYONE's requirements.  The reason the deal is delayed isn't because GK hasn't got decent offers from Fox/ESPN, it's because the offers don't meet everyone's requirements so they wont sign it.

 

The rumors of schools leaving are about their backup plans if the deal doesn't meet their requirements.  They ALL want to stay in the PAC if they can get a deal that is amenable.  If they don't then they are all willing to leave for another conference.  The rumors of streaming heavy deals are most likely either trial balloons designed to gauge fan reactions or negotiating tactics to nudge Fox/ESPN.  The response has mostly been negative which works in Fox/ESPN's favor and will result in a lower final number. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Duck Fan 76]

On 3/6/2023 at 8:01 AM, Tandaian said:

It will be interesting to see if Fox forces UCLA and USC into repeatedly playing games at 7 PM PST

It's actually a pretty straight forward calculation to determine what time slots games are played in.  The NCAA sets requirements about when games can be played so those are the basic windows.  Fox has its list of games for the coming Saturday and they have the list of competitors games.  They run an algorithm that maximizes their expected viewership against the competition but the NCAA rules prevent east coast games from starting at 10PM EST so usually only west coast games (and Hawaii) are viable there.  UCLA and USC are Fox's premier west coast assets so their position will be determined wherever Fox can maximize its total views. 

 

So it's a balance between the potential quality of the USC or UCLA game vs the competitors timeslots.  In the end their value to the Fox contract is the 10PM EST timeslot so yes, they are going to end up playing a lot of night games.  When USC play Ohio St. however that game will have a much higher total viewership and will be slotted earlier to draw views away from ESPN games.

[Rufus]

I agree that a backup plan is the Big 12. If the PAC deal is awful, it might be worth exploring joining the Big 12.  Maybe. Maybe not. 
 

I don’t agree that the B1G is a backup plan for anyone. If the B1G wants any PAC school, it doesn’t matter how much the new PAC contract might be. Those schools will join the B1G in a heartbeat.  

[Jon Joseph]

On 3/6/2023 at 12:44 PM, Rufus said:

I agree that a backup plan is the Big 12. If the PAC deal is awful, it might be worth exploring joining the Big 12.  Maybe. Maybe not. 
 

I don’t agree that the B1G is a backup plan for anyone. If the B1G wants any PAC school, it doesn’t matter how much the new PAC contract might be. Those schools will join the B1G in a heartbeat.  

Join in a heartbeat?  One would think so but the revenue share will be negotiated by B1G (FOX) and will not be a full share equal to that SC/UCLA will receive. 

 

More than the Pac-10 new media deal? Probably but not a whole lot more. Enough to entice Oregon and UW to abandon OR ST and WSU and subject the athletes, especially in CBB and non-revenue sports to absurd travel requirements?

[Tandaian]

I think it only makes sense if there is a group of 6 teams in the Pacific time zone.  4 is not enough, IMO.  The Olympic sports need at least 1/3 of their conference away games to be close to them.

[Mike West]

On 3/5/2023 at 9:58 AM, Jon Joseph said:

Additionally, GK has a functionally insolvent network he is attempting to sell or failing such a sale, doing something to get the conference network into the black

I believe this failed network has been the canary in the coal mine for nearly a decade.

 

It is difficult to justify spending 40 million a year per team when the most popular matchup meets 11 million fewer eyeballs than the most popular matchup in the game, much less only a million more for an average game in the SEspnC.

 

I believe the Fusky game at home this year was also a PAC12 night game ( correct me if I'm wrong) that had CFP implications as well as OBD needed to win out, and those foul Dawgs had already defeated Utah.

 

Obviously the nation is hypnotized by tOSU v. Michigan games, but their Rose Bowl cousins have a very difficult time drawing interest even when the playoffs are on the line (on an exclusive broadcast with no competition at that).

 

Untill the conference can demonstrate it can attract Five million plus eyeballs mid day, I don't see much value the teams can present to TV executives ( that's the average for also rans in the SEC like Florida and Tennessee each year.  I wonder if Penn State and Michigan State get a many or more eyeball a week than even UCLA and USC). 

 

That's the crux of it in my eyes- the PAC12 Network couldn't compete on any level at any time with the Big Two conferences the past decade.  Why would any business reduce their revenue for the sake of tradition?

 

Why would a valuable brand like USC effectively destroy their brand for that matter?  Competing at an elite level is expensive.  We all know this.  It makes perfect sense as far as I'm concerned to maximize your revenue in order to maintain your brand and the status that brand provides. 

 

I don't believe ethics is a part of USC's decision.  It's good business sense.  It's sound decision making, and while it affected competitors, it is supposed to.  Self preservation after all is natural.  

 

I recognize this disturbs lots of West Coast fans, but heck, we've certainly not shown the conference much love when it comes to watching the brand if we're truly honest about it.  Action talks and you know what walks.  

 

The West Coast isn't as interested as the South and Midwest in football.  That is a deal killer.  It's the elephant in the room we refuse to acknowledge quite frankly and no amount of tradition can change that.  Does anyone remember when Sears was king of the hill?  Well they died, and so did it's tradition.  That's life unfortunately.  

 

Unfortunately, the Conference of Champions are champs in the wrong sports.  And now those very sports are in danger of losing necessary funding to carry on ( most unfortunately).  

 

The thing that hurts most about this is we're only twenty years outside of dominant football Nationwide as a conference.  Worse, at the beginning of the year it appeared we might have a shot at acquiring a fairly decent TV deal.  

[Jon Joseph]

Now living 'Down South' I can assure you that CFB is close to religious status here compared to viewership and interest on the west coast.

 

The B1G? Many teams supported because of huge graduate let alone student interest.

 

I do believe CAL, Stanford, Oregon, and UW will get a B1G invite but not at a full share like FOX gave the LA schools.

 

The B1G cannot hang SC/UCLA out on a west coast island. But once the Pac-10 media deal is done it's certain that the new Left Coast invitees will not be offered a full share.

 

Then do you abandon OR ST and WSU? Will the payout justify leaving OR ST and Wazzu behind?

 

A 12-team CFB playoff field will soon be here. Might it not be better for the Pac-10 to remain as is and have a better shot at CFB playoff and the coming expanded CBB playoff? A bigger piece of the ultimate, to be determined, Pac-10 pie instead of adding more schools?

 

Will SDSU and SMU be more 'accretive' than the Pac-10 staying as is?

[OST8]

On 3/6/2023 at 11:44 AM, Rufus said:

I agree that a backup plan is the Big 12. If the PAC deal is awful, it might be worth exploring joining the Big 12.  Maybe. Maybe not. 
 

I don’t agree that the B1G is a backup plan for anyone. If the B1G wants any PAC school, it doesn’t matter how much the new PAC contract might be. Those schools will join the B1G in a heartbeat.  

My two pennies: Oregon will eventually be in the BIG along with UW. I know a lot of people think that the BIG would rather have UW and Stanford but I believe, when push comes to shove, Football/brand/rivalries drive this bus and Oregon brings (along with UW) all of those things. Now would USC have the pull or desire to keep Oregon out and make the BIG take Stanford instead of Oregon? You guys have a better feel for that.

 

Regardless, I do think the Ducks end up in the BIG so whether you stay in the PAC or go to the XII in the immediate future I think it's a temporary stop. My point is, you guys just need to "survive" the next 5 or so years and then you'll arrive at your destination. 

[Jon Joseph]

On 3/13/2023 at 10:56 AM, OST8 said:

My two pennies: Oregon will eventually be in the BIG along with UW. I know a lot of people think that the BIG would rather have UW and Stanford but I believe, when push comes to shove, Football/brand/rivalries drive this bus and Oregon brings (along with UW) all of those things. Now would USC have the pull or desire to keep Oregon out and make the BIG take Stanford instead of Oregon? You guys have a better feel for that.

 

Regardless, I do think the Ducks end up in the BIG so whether you stay in the PAC or go to the XII in the immediate future I think it's a temporary stop. My point is, you guys just need to "survive" the next 5 or so years and then you'll arrive at your destination. 

B1G 24?

 

3-6-6 - 3 permanent opponents and 6 others that vary season by season or every 2 seasons allowing for an H+H series. 1 protected game if need be such as Michigan vs Ohio State.

 

CAL, Stanford, UCLA, USC [could be CU and Utah which would make UCLA/SC permanent opponents with OR and UW]

 

Iowa, Nebraska, Oregon, UW [could be CU and Utah; see above.]

 

Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

 

Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue

 

Ohio State, Penn State, Pitt, Rutgers

 

Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia

 

All B1G newbies would be AAU member schools. 

 

SEC goes to 24 including Clemson, FSU, Miami, NC State, and Va Tech. This allows for 10 votes in favor of breaking up the ACC and terminating the crummy media deal before 2036. ESPN is OK with this because it does not have the cost of owning and operating the ACC Network.

Edited March 13, 2023 by Jon Joseph

[Jon Joseph]

I should have noted that AAU member and ACC member Georgia Tech could also be attractive for both the B1G and the SEC.

[GeotechDuck]

On 3/6/2023 at 5:58 PM, Jon Joseph said:

The B1G cannot hang SC/UCLA out on a west coast island.

Serious question - why not?  The BIG already got what they wanted...payday, access to LA recruiting, etc.  What benefit does the BIG have to make things easier on USC and UCLA?  I would almost argue the opposite.  The more that USC and UCLA struggle, the bigger benefit to the existing BIG schools.