Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

bsu_alum9

PAC 12 new Commissioner - MGM's George Kliavkoff

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

No.  What move conversation?  They are not in any, period.  Certainly not in a P12 or B12.  SDSU did not even make the Big 12's top 12 last round.  

You are Boise's bitch, our tag along.  That is your place.  

Boise is SDSU’s bitch. We own the blue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Fowl said:

Boise is SDSU’s bitch. We own the blue. 

It's simple.  Boise, being a nationally known program that the media values, got invited to the Big East.  SDSU, our bitch, we asked to come along, the Big East did not care for your school at all, you were only invited as our tag along, at our request.

Now here is where it gets REALLY good. When we came back to the MWC we had to put in a provision that allowed SDSU back as most of the conference did not want you.  Seriously, look it up.  "SDSU back" was part of our term sheet deal.  Few MWC schools wanted you back, they were pissed you agreed to be our gimp.  Meanwhile Boise got to rape this conference with our own terms, because they knew we ARE the MWC.

We are not the same.  SDSU is our dog.  When we say "here boy" you come running.  That is the dynamic.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, RebelRobert said:

 

Wow. Whoever drafted this nonsense clearly doesn’t understand the P12 and it’s politics. 
 

There’s several non starters like UNLV, Boise, Wyo and BYU. 
 

Keep reaching for the moon rob. Forget credible sources. Game on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another lie in that trash is saying the new commish is considering expansion. There’s no such credible news coming from the brass.  Maybe internet hack rumors. 
 
There’s plenty of other holes to fix first. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, utenation said:

Another lie in that trash is saying the new commish is considering expansion. There’s no such credible news coming from the brass.  Maybe internet hack rumors. 
 
There’s plenty of other holes to fix first. 

Hack?  You nailed it.

Has anyone ever seen RebelRobert and Pete Fiutak in the same place at the same time?  Hmmmmm?

https://collegefootballnews.com/2021/05/pac-12-expansion-what-schools-should-the-conference-target

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, RebelRobert said:

 

The PAC 12 having the ability to take teams from the Big XII or B1G?  :lol:  They didn't have the juice to pull it off a decade ago and they've become significantly weaker in the interim.  Delusional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2021 at 11:08 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

No.  What move conversation?  They are not in any, period.  Certainly not in a P12 or B12.  SDSU did not even make the Big 12's top 12 last round.  

You are Boise's bitch, our tag along.  That is your place.  

You seem to be protesting too much. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Koji Vu said:

This is kind of how I see it too. The two best options for Pac 12 expansion are SDSU and BYU. Whether or not BYU can overcome their religious school issues is another story.

https://nevadasportsnet.com/news/reporters/murrays-mailbag-which-mountain-west-schools-are-best-prepared-for-jump-to-pac-12

The PAC doesn't have any good options for expansion.  That's not a problem for them as they have no reason or need to expand. 

 

"Don't underestimate Joe Biden's ability to F@*k things up."

Barack Obama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Aslowhiteguy said:

The PAC doesn't have any good options for expansion.  That's not a problem for them as they have no reason or need to expand. 

 

I have a hard time believing they will expand as well - unless the Big 12 tries to snipe SDSU - then they might do it as a defensive measure. 

That said, this article is yet one more example that SDSU is always at the center of any MWC2wherever talk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the schools that look best prepared budget wise are Boise, CSU, and Nevada (if you are excluding academic side subsidies which should always be done)

Fresno and UNLV are not far behind and SDSU could improve with a new stajium, but they are a bit further behind

the academics would be CSU, SDSU, and Nevada in that order I believe

I really don't think expansion solves their main issues their network is a turd and adding teams is not going to improve that especially with cord cutting and paid TV MSOs resisting channel cramming more than ever (if the PAC 12 got a partner that could try and cram their network on MSOs)

I just saw this article earlier today I knew WSU was having major issues with budget deficits over and above their high athletics subsidies for a number of years and I knew their academic side was getting hit hard too, but it looks like students and faculty are really making noise.....it is difficult to really care what faculty think because so many are over paid and useless themselves, but when you start losing them you are going to lose the good ones and the useful ones first

https://www.inlander.com/spokane/can-wsu-afford-to-keep-pouring-millions-into-athletics-while-other-departments-shrink/Content?oid=21234695

they know they are in a can't win situation where they take a major financial hit to step down from the PAC 12, but at the same time how they still compete and you are going to chop a lot more than just the PAC 12 payout out of their budget if they were in the MWC or worse D1-AA

Houston fans think they are the answer and the savior to the PAC 12, but their budget is an embarrassment without the academic side subsidy, "cable markets" mean nothing these days and the last thing the PAC 12 needs is a program that actually willingly says they will spend $48 million from the academic side to compete

I think the options for the PAC 12 are to make a push to get the cost of college sports under control and that will always start with getting rid of the waste of a classroom space "get paid" types and getting back to having players that are there for an education and the "get paid" types can go wash out in some semi-pro league

the issue there is the SEC has no interest in that and the Big 10 makes enough money that even their schools that do not care about athletics as much as academics are breaking even or only giving a small subsidy....I think a lot of programs in the Big 12 would love to cut the expense too even Texas and OU, but their programs can afford to wait it out right now.....I think a large number of the ACC would like the same, but they want to keep up with the SEC so who knows what they would be for or against

the other option for the PAC 12 is to go back to uneven revenue sharing and basically see how uneven and for how long any new members might be willing to take that

basically offer them say 75% of the new TV money they bring in and say 25% of other conference distributions which might total about $15 to $16 million and see who bites.....put a few incentives in there for performance that might cost some current members money for horrid performance and might bump new members up a couple of million for better performance and throw the offer on the table and see who bites

I know Houston would sign onto that for life, but i am not sure if others would......it does not bode well for long term success or really bode well for the conference......probably the payments and the length of their new deal would determine how that plays out....the shorter and lower the deal is the more it could happen.....better teams buying time to see where they might move to or who might bow out of the PAC 12 or perhaps some common sense and dumping the expensive "get paid" athletes and all their "needs and cost" could make things better down the road

YOU WANT TRADITION? WELL......HERE 'TIS......The University of North Texas has football wins over: Texas Tech U......Rice U......Baylor U......TCU......SMU......Houston......Oklahoma State......San Diego St.......Kansas State......Arizona State.......Colorado State......Brigham Young......Oregon State......Florida......Indiana......Tennessee (a 6 & 5 SEC team & still our biggest win in school history)......Boise State......Louisville......Cincinatti (our last match-up with UC was a UNT bowl win), plus FOUR (4) NCAA FBS level Bowl Games (one while having a losing season record) in this millennium's 1'st decade while North Texas has had ONE NCAA Division 1 Top 20 ranking.

The North Texas Mean Green Village (located between 2 Texas interstates & which a recent TxDOT study said 200,000 vehicles drive by it daily) is a multi-acre olympic style village of athletc venues*dorms*computer study centers, etc, topped off with what GIL BRANDT: The Father of Modern NFL Scouting who described UNT's Apogee Stadium as a "Tah Mahal of a College Football Stadium" with Brandt adding... 'and I've seen every NCAA D1 FB stadium in the USA." All this along with UNT's fabulous 10,000 seat Super Pit--the Best & Largest on-campus college basketball venue in the D-FW Metroplex......AND THREE PONDS AND A BRIDGE!!!!!

 

This signature is the sole property of Someone and any use of this signature without express written consent of Someone is strictly forbiden by penalty of law

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Someone said:

the schools that look best prepared budget wise are Boise, CSU, and Nevada (if you are excluding academic side subsidies which should always be done)

Fresno and UNLV are not far behind and SDSU could improve with a new stajium, but they are a bit further behind

the academics would be CSU, SDSU, and Nevada in that order I believe

I really don't think expansion solves their main issues their network is a turd and adding teams is not going to improve that especially with cord cutting and paid TV MSOs resisting channel cramming more than ever (if the PAC 12 got a partner that could try and cram their network on MSOs)

I just saw this article earlier today I knew WSU was having major issues with budget deficits over and above their high athletics subsidies for a number of years and I knew their academic side was getting hit hard too, but it looks like students and faculty are really making noise.....it is difficult to really care what faculty think because so many are over paid and useless themselves, but when you start losing them you are going to lose the good ones and the useful ones first

https://www.inlander.com/spokane/can-wsu-afford-to-keep-pouring-millions-into-athletics-while-other-departments-shrink/Content?oid=21234695

they know they are in a can't win situation where they take a major financial hit to step down from the PAC 12, but at the same time how they still compete and you are going to chop a lot more than just the PAC 12 payout out of their budget if they were in the MWC or worse D1-AA

Houston fans think they are the answer and the savior to the PAC 12, but their budget is an embarrassment without the academic side subsidy, "cable markets" mean nothing these days and the last thing the PAC 12 needs is a program that actually willingly says they will spend $48 million from the academic side to compete

I think the options for the PAC 12 are to make a push to get the cost of college sports under control and that will always start with getting rid of the waste of a classroom space "get paid" types and getting back to having players that are there for an education and the "get paid" types can go wash out in some semi-pro league

the issue there is the SEC has no interest in that and the Big 10 makes enough money that even their schools that do not care about athletics as much as academics are breaking even or only giving a small subsidy....I think a lot of programs in the Big 12 would love to cut the expense too even Texas and OU, but their programs can afford to wait it out right now.....I think a large number of the ACC would like the same, but they want to keep up with the SEC so who knows what they would be for or against

the other option for the PAC 12 is to go back to uneven revenue sharing and basically see how uneven and for how long any new members might be willing to take that

basically offer them say 75% of the new TV money they bring in and say 25% of other conference distributions which might total about $15 to $16 million and see who bites.....put a few incentives in there for performance that might cost some current members money for horrid performance and might bump new members up a couple of million for better performance and throw the offer on the table and see who bites

I know Houston would sign onto that for life, but i am not sure if others would......it does not bode well for long term success or really bode well for the conference......probably the payments and the length of their new deal would determine how that plays out....the shorter and lower the deal is the more it could happen.....better teams buying time to see where they might move to or who might bow out of the PAC 12 or perhaps some common sense and dumping the expensive "get paid" athletes and all their "needs and cost" could make things better down the road

Is there a short version of this somewhere? Holy smokes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting... perhaps the Pac 12 CAN snipe a Big 12 school or two. 

 

https://247sports.com/Article/Power-Five-conference-revenues-fiscal-year-2020-Big-Ten-Big-12-Pac-12-SEC-ACC-165594608/
 

""Shockingly, the Big 12 was far below any other conference in the Power Five. The Pac-12 and ACC, while far behind the Big Ten and SEC were over and nearly $100 million clear of the Big 12, respectively.""

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Koji Vu said:

Interesting... perhaps the Pac 12 CAN snipe a Big 12 school or two. 

 

https://247sports.com/Article/Power-Five-conference-revenues-fiscal-year-2020-Big-Ten-Big-12-Pac-12-SEC-ACC-165594608/
 

""Shockingly, the Big 12 was far below any other conference in the Power Five. The Pac-12 and ACC, while far behind the Big Ten and SEC were over and nearly $100 million clear of the Big 12, respectively.""

 

Lower expenses (thanks to P12N) and fewer mouths to feed for the Big 12.  Plus the Big 12 numbers dont include Tier 3.

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RSF said:

Lower expenses (thanks to P12N) and fewer mouths to feed for the Big 12.  Plus the Big 12 numbers dont include Tier 3.

""Conference revenue for FY20: Big Ten: $768.9 million…SEC: $728.9 million….Pac-12: $533.8 million….ACC: $496.7 million….Big 12: $409.2 million,” Berkowitz tweeted.""

Pac 12: 534/12 = $44.5
Big 12: 410/10 = $41

For some reason I had thought the disparity was greater and in favor of the Big 12.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Koji Vu said:

""Conference revenue for FY20: Big Ten: $768.9 million…SEC: $728.9 million….Pac-12: $533.8 million….ACC: $496.7 million….Big 12: $409.2 million,” Berkowitz tweeted.""

Pac 12: 534/12 = $44.5
Big 12: 410/10 = $41

For some reason I had thought the disparity was greater and in favor of the Big 12.

You still have to subtract P12N expenses and add in B12 Tier 3 revenue (which varies greatly).

In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...