Jump to content
bsu_alum9

PAC 12 new Commissioner - MGM's George Kliavkoff

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Someone said:

 

if this was to happen there is not a chance in hell that one of the Arizona schools would be left out in exchange for Houston.....as big as the subsidies are that the AZ schools run UH runs 4X that amount and new conference money would not prevent them from still having to run a massive subsidy......no conference is going to trade a better option to get that

there is very little chance that Baylor would be left out either and again especially not for UH......if the Big 12 schools listed were looking to dump a program specifically in Texas they are not going to dump an existing Big 12 member in Texas only to add another.......especially the likes of UH and their horrible budget and the horrible attitude of their administration

Colorado would be left out before either of the AZ schools and they would be left out before Baylor for that matter....they have major budget issues, facilities issues, and they have taken an attitude of "In PAC 12 don't care lets take some bong rips and throw things at the opposing teams and their fans" as far as athletics goes

if you are looking at the budget numbers when you take out subsidies AU, Cal, Utah, and Colorado are all in the same place basically.....and when you look at the deficits run for that particular year they are all in the same worse place

if you are saying that the other California schools would never leave Cal behind well then they make the cut......UTAH has a better budget than AU or Cu there is no reason for them to not make the cut

AU has the lower budget than Colorado and a higher deficit, but they have invested much more in facilities recently and they are better in basketball and they play baseball and their fans care more

they are also one of only 3 public universities in the state and they get a lot of out of state students to pump their overall university budget with where The State of Colorado has too many public schools and the CU budget is under constant stress and they are not luring near the same number of out of state students nor is their enrollment near what AU is to spread that subsidy over many more students for a lower overall per student cost

hands down the better choice

and Baylor vs UH.....Baylor better in mens and womens BB, better in baseball, and about even in football and their budget is much larger (in the $100 million range) and their facilities are much better and will get even better with a new basketball arena......and for all the issues they have no one wants to deal with the administration of UH and their "we are here to save you and we are here to dredge up the past from 20+ ago"....they can save the AAC

So the Cal schools stick together and always have.  Denver is a big market and Colorado is a historical rival to the Big Eight schools.   Colorado is also AAU.   Colorado would for sure be in.

Whichever AZ school got invited would have as much say in the matter as New Mexico had when UTEP was left behind or SDSU when Fresno was left behind.   

Let’s just say Utah has the blue print for how this model is done and has done it before.   The conference is complete, no time for negotiation or political pressure.   

Houston versus Baylor is a fair debate.  I think Baylor has a number of issues.  I think this conference would want to be in Houston over WACO but I could be convinced otherwise.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

you can look at the UH budget.....factor out any AAC money they would no longer get, ignore the relatively large payment to leave the AAC, pretend that they would get an immediate full share, and pretend that they would bring enough money to the table to cover a full share like every other member......and when you take out their massive $48 million dollar academic side subsidy you realize there is not a chance in hell a conference would want to add that type of budget to the conference.....and even if you pretended that half of that subsidy ($24 million) is long term sustainable (it is not) you still end up with a team that would be at the very lowest levels of P5 budgets

that is highly unattractive and should be especially unattractive to any Big 12 member and it should be equally unattractive to any PAC 12 member that has left WSU and Oregon State behind because of their budget issues......it should be all the more unattractive to a PAC 12 that up to a few years ago had very low academic side subsidies and was doing well holding the line on coaches pay and other issues.....now many of them have large debt loads, large annual deficits (even with large academic subsidies) and their academic side subsidies have exploded

adding more of that only drags a conference further down especially if you are trying to compete with the SEC and Big 10 and not just trying to tread water with the ACC or trying to get a small bump over what the Big 12 gets (which is meaningfully more than the PAC 12 or ACC currently gets)

if you are dropping teams, merging a large number of teams together, reworking schedules ect you are not doing so in order to "take a chance" on a program selling more tickets because "their fans" will show up to see BETTER OPPONENTS, or "our donors will show up if you just let us in" and you are especially not looking for "we can keep this massive academic side subsidy in place forever".....all the more so when the Big 12 has a conference wide effort to reduce debt and get zero academic side subsidies sooner than later and the PAC 12 is up in arms about where they have let theirs get to

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2021 at 7:16 PM, Someone said:

you can look at the UH budget.....factor out any AAC money they would no longer get, ignore the relatively large payment to leave the AAC, pretend that they would get an immediate full share, and pretend that they would bring enough money to the table to cover a full share like every other member......and when you take out their massive $48 million dollar academic side subsidy you realize there is not a chance in hell a conference would want to add that type of budget to the conference.....and even if you pretended that half of that subsidy ($24 million) is long term sustainable (it is not) you still end up with a team that would be at the very lowest levels of P5 budgets

that is highly unattractive and should be especially unattractive to any Big 12 member and it should be equally unattractive to any PAC 12 member that has left WSU and Oregon State behind because of their budget issues......it should be all the more unattractive to a PAC 12 that up to a few years ago had very low academic side subsidies and was doing well holding the line on coaches pay and other issues.....now many of them have large debt loads, large annual deficits (even with large academic subsidies) and their academic side subsidies have exploded

adding more of that only drags a conference further down especially if you are trying to compete with the SEC and Big 10 and not just trying to tread water with the ACC or trying to get a small bump over what the Big 12 gets (which is meaningfully more than the PAC 12 or ACC currently gets)

if you are dropping teams, merging a large number of teams together, reworking schedules ect you are not doing so in order to "take a chance" on a program selling more tickets because "their fans" will show up to see BETTER OPPONENTS, or "our donors will show up if you just let us in" and you are especially not looking for "we can keep this massive academic side subsidy in place forever".....all the more so when the Big 12 has a conference wide effort to reduce debt and get zero academic side subsidies sooner than later and the PAC 12 is up in arms about where they have let theirs get to

I don't mean to be rude, but may I offer a new word for your expansive vocabulary?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/brevity

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2021 at 2:21 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

LMAO.  The only reason the AAC rumors include SDSU is because Boise needs a +1.  You would once again be our tag along, riding the coattails of a real program.

It's very coincidental that SDSU is in every single "move" conversation, isn't it? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Koji Vu said:

It's very coincidental that SDSU is in every single "move" conversation, isn't it? 

 

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.  

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 post
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 post
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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
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 post
Share on other sites

This won’t happen. If it did Utah would just start bitching again about the conference tournament being in Vegas and UNLV having home court advantage.

  • Facepalm 1
Link to post
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 post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, RebelRobert said:

The correct answer is None of the Above.

  • Haha 1
  • Angry 1
Link to post
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.

  • Cheers 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
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 post
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. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
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 post
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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...