Jump to content
Cleopatra

USC and UCLA are leaving the Pac-12

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, shizzle787 said:

If the college football breaks off from the rest of the NCAA each sport should be run by a separate organization: 

The NCAA should run men's and women's basketball only. 
At this point, it can keep three divisions or split into 4-5 divisions. 

The USSF should run college soccer. 

USA Hockey should run college hockey. 

USA Baseball should run college baseball. 

Tennis and golf could be run by the U.S. IOC. 

This in my opinion would allow schools to pick which sports they value and leave the rest to club status. 

It would also mean that realignment moves in football have no effect on any other sport.

 

Interesting ideas.

Some questions or comments:

In reference to allowing universities to pick which sports they value, if a sport doesn't produce revenue where is the value for the university in today's world?

Should this break away happen, how will colleges be able to negotiate Title IX rules?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/5/2022 at 11:05 PM, Someone Else said:

Interesting ideas.

Some questions or comments:

In reference to allowing universities to pick which sports they value, if a sport doesn't produce revenue where is the value for the university in today's world?

Should this break away happen how will colleges be able to negotiate Title IX rules?

Education is non-profit at most universities and colleges in the US. At smaller schools, they pay the bills by getting kids to pay a significant share of tuition in order to play sports (some will get academic scholarships). Sports at these schools would continue as they are a major means of collecting revenue for the school to operate. 

At the larger schools, not everything is about money. Almost all Division 1 schools lose money on sports. Do I think that some schools would cut back some sports? Yes. However, sports provide a sense of community to a campus. There are some intangible benefits to having sports at a university. There is also status at stake by having or not having certain sports (esp. in relation to your peer schools). 

With regards to the second question: 

At a minimum, a school has to provided enough women's sports to counterbalance football. 

By doing all of this, schools could cut down on costs by playing all sports but basketball and football on a regional basis during the regular season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/4/2022 at 10:01 PM, Coog kev said:

The brief war betwixt PAC and XII is over.  B1G will reveal its great media right rights deal soon enough.  PAC already jumped the gun 2 years early and will just have to live to with what they get by January, 

XII will do its stuff on time, and no earlier than that in summer 2024 prior to Texas and Oklahoma departure and thorough, thorough assessment of the Four Newbies to XII,

At same point the PAC will dissolve and implode.  They are less than jointed at the hip so to say.  They are just playing for time waiting for the next reaction.  This will be whisper numbers re XII new TV deal two years from now, one year in advance of formality. 

Nothing screams joined at the hip like the tradition between Iowa State and Central Florida, lol.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/4/2022 at 10:39 PM, utenation said:

I trust what my AD has said. Compared to the Twitter rangers out there?  Easy decision.

Never believe or trust anything that administrators or coaches say. They only tell people what they want people to know, but most of the movements, ADs aren't involved with in many stages either. But again will go back if anyone was looking for anything more than what was said at the media days, they were going to be disapointed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/3/2022 at 1:42 PM, Cleopatra said:

reports of the Pac12 dying are exagerrated

the Pac12 looks to be staying together and will probably only lose USC and UCLA and maybe also Stanford if they join with Notre dame

That means they only need 3 replacements which would be San Diego St (lock), SMU a nd UNLV or Colorado St.

 

 

SMU - Too sml.  6k undergrad enrollment, means tiny alumni base & they don't carry their home DMA (Dallas)

UNLV - While they have Law & Medical Schools, they have yet to develop a viable Athletic Dept & are slowly morphing in to a major league sports town full of transplants.

CSU - Chks all the boxes, except recent FB success.  Hopefully w/their recent HC'g hire, los Rams will grow into to their new facilities & academic/research prowess.  The bison o' uc-boulder will go kicking & screaming on this one...

 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/5/2022 at 8:15 PM, shizzle787 said:

Education is non-profit at most universities and colleges in the US. At smaller schools, they pay the bills by getting kids to pay a significant share of tuition in order to play sports (some will get academic scholarships). Sports at these schools would continue as they are a major means of collecting revenue for the school to operate. 

At the larger schools, not everything is about money. Almost all Division 1 schools lose money on sports. Do I think that some schools would cut back some sports? Yes. However, sports provide a sense of community to a campus. There are some intangible benefits to having sports at a university. There is also status at stake by having or not having certain sports (esp. in relation to your peer schools). 

With regards to the second question: 

At a minimum, a school has to provided enough women's sports to counterbalance football. 

By doing all of this, schools could cut down on costs by playing all sports but basketball and football on a regional basis during the regular season. 

 

I believe two of the larger "...intangible benefits to having sports at a university," you refer to are:

* PR/Advertisement, thus increased applications & enrollment

* a means to engage alumni, thus increase donations

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 3:54 PM, Half-Man is All-Tyrant said:

 

I believe two of the larger "...intangible benefits to having sports at a university," you refer to are:

* PR/Advertisement, thus increased applications & enrollment

* a means to engage alumni, thus increase donations

 

 

I think the record is mixed on both.  There is a Flutie Effect, but it has been shown to be temporary.  Also, while the quantity of applications increases, the quality doesn't.  You just get more of the same type of kids applying.  On the donations side, the increase flows solely to the athletic department.

One would think that Alabama would have Flutie-effected their asses into a top 50 USNWR ranking and a multi-billion dollar endowment, yet they far from it despite all their football success.  A football non-entity like Purdue, however, is that kind of university.

Schools that are good at academics, research, attracting highly qualified freshman classes and raising multi-billion dollar endowments do so because they invest precisely in those things...not because they dump money into football and hope for a magical Flutie Effect to take care of everything.  

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 3:57 PM, RebelAlliance said:

I think the record is mixed on both.  There is a Flutie Effect, but it has been shown to be temporary.  Also, while the quantity of applications increases, the quality doesn't.  You just get more of the same type of kids applying.  On the donations side, the increase flows solely to the athletic department.

One would think that Alabama would have Flutie-effected their asses into a top 50 USNWR ranking and a multi-billion dollar endowment, yet they far from it despite all their football success.  A football non-entity like Purdue, however, is that kind of university.

Schools that are good at academics, research, attracting highly qualified freshman classes and raising multi-billion dollar endowments do so because they invest precisely in those things...not because they dump money into football and hope for a magical Flutie Effect to take care of everything.  

In fact, successful athletics do attract more applications.  Especially the much sought after out of state applicant.  The higher that number, the more particular an admissions department can be, which theoretically results in more successful alumni in the long run.  More money in the short term via out of state tuition, and more money in the long run via alumni giving.  Yes, a natty is just a short term spike, but consistent athletic success is probably the one of the best ways to keep a university top of mind among a national audience.  That won't get you to an AAU level, but it does keep your admissions on a more competitive level.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Headbutt said:

In fact, successful athletics do attract more applications.  Especially the much sought after out of state applicant.  The higher that number, the more particular an admissions department can be, which theoretically results in more successful alumni in the long run.  More money in the short term via out of state tuition, and more money in the long run via alumni giving.  Yes, a natty is just a short term spike, but consistent athletic success is probably the one of the best ways to keep a university top of mind among a national audience.  That won't get you to an AAU level, but it does keep your admissions on a more competitive level.

So here is where I am going with the questions above...

For the big time universities, yes, a great football team and basketball team (though less so) are excellent branding for the university and certainly helps these universities get more applicants and gets them big dollar donors...   

What my question revolves around are the non-big time universities which with this realignment, NIL, & transfer portal stuff happening will become further and further removed from big time revenue.  

I might also add very few students at a school care about non-revenue sports... I mean your general student isn't going to say gee, I want to go to Long Beach St because the dirtbags (team name) are good. (I'm sure there are outliers but in general students do not care about minor sports) 

So maybe due to this changed landscape a different business model or strategy begins to take hold.    If a school president realizes they have lost the football revenue war and you pile on NIL and transfer portal stuff I can eventually see them saying we don't really need to fund athletics anymore.  Let them all be club sports and we can stop wasting all of these resources on athletics and move that money into education and grow our business that way instead of trying with football revenue which we already failed at.( jmo though)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 2:44 PM, Half-Man is All-Tyrant said:

 

SMU - Too sml.  6k undergrad enrollment, means tiny alumni base & they don't carry their home DMA (Dallas)

UNLV - While they have Law & Medical Schools, they have yet to develop a viable Athletic Dept & are slowly morphing in to a major league sports town full of transplants.

CSU - Chks all the boxes, except recent FB success.  Hopefully w/their recent HC'g hire, los Rams will grow into to their new facilities & academic/research prowess.  The bison o' uc-boulder will go kicking & screaming on this one...

 

CSU is a redundant market and your brand is mediocre so I don't think CSU does check all the boxes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 5:16 PM, Headbutt said:

In fact, successful athletics do attract more applications.  Especially the much sought after out of state applicant.  The higher that number, the more particular an admissions department can be, which theoretically results in more successful alumni in the long run.  More money in the short term via out of state tuition, and more money in the long run via alumni giving.  Yes, a natty is just a short term spike, but consistent athletic success is probably the one of the best ways to keep a university top of mind among a national audience.  That won't get you to an AAU level, but it does keep your admissions on a more competitive level.

Why isn't Boise the best academic school in the MWC?  Why isn't Alabama the equal of even the lower tier B1G schools?  Why do UC campuses like San Diego, Irvine and Davis blow Oklahoma out of the water academically?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/5/2022 at 8:38 AM, RebelAlliance said:

While the B12 fans have already started sucking each others' dicks, let's not lose sight of why they're stable.  They're stable for precisely one reason.  Not because they're going to get a good media deal.  Not because they have a bunch of national brands.  Not because they have a bunch of playoff caliber football programs.  They are stable for precisely the reason that there is not a single school in the entire conference that anyone else wants.  The PAC and ACC have a degree of instability precisely because each has several schools that the B1G or SEC would take.  That's a cross that the B12 doesn't and will never bear.

 

I agree with some of what your saying----the Big12 is clearly bereft of any big name brands---but thats not to say they dont have a wealth of solid football programs.  Top-to-bottom---the Big12 is a pretty decent football league.  Lets just look at last years final top 25.  

 

#4)  Cincy (made the playoff)

#5) Baylor

#7) Oklahoma St

#17) Houston

#19)  BYU

 Thats not a bad football league.   Meanwhile, the Pac12 finished out of the playoff (again), had no teams in the top 10, and only had 2 top 25 teams (#12 Utah and #22 Oregon).   Frankly, I think the Pac12 will survive---but I dont see them landing a deal thats any better than the Big12.  When you consider that the Big12 has a very competitive and deep quality football league---and may arguably have the best college basketball league in the nation---they are going to land a pretty decent TV deal.  I mean---I certainly dont see them taking a pay cut from where they are now nearing the end of a deal negotiated a decade+ ago.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 4:16 PM, CaffeinatedCoog said:

 

I agree with some of what your saying----the Big12 is clearly bereft of any big name brands---but thats not to say they dont have a wealth of solid football programs.  Top-to-bottom---the Big12 is a pretty decent football league.  Lets just look at last years final top 25.  

 

#4)  Cincy (made the playoff)

#5) Baylor

#7) Oklahoma St

#17) Houston

#19)  BYU

 Thats not a bad football league.   Meanwhile, the Pac12 finished out of the playoff (again), had no teams in the top 10, and only had 2 top 25 teams (#12 Utah and #22 Oregon).   Frankly, I think the Pac12 will survive---but I dont see them landing a deal thats any better than the Big12.  When you consider that the Big12 has a very competitive and deep quality football league---and may arguably have the best college basketball league in the nation---they are going to land a pretty decent TV deal.  I mean---I certainly dont see them taking a pay cut from where they are now nearing the end of a deal negotiated a decade+ ago.  

Pac10 will be the top mid major conference.  They can not be considered a Power conference.   Nobody of high value wants to remain and geographically they are limited.  Big 12 actually has a shot to remain in the upper echelon if a few things fall their way over the next few months. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 4:51 PM, RebelAlliance said:

Why isn't Boise the best academic school in the MWC?  Why isn't Alabama the equal of even the lower tier B1G schools?  Why do UC campuses like San Diego, Irvine and Davis blow Oklahoma out of the water academically?

Well, we're looking at two different metrics.  You're looking for the academic value of successful athletics, I'm looking at the overall monetary benefits.  Athletics are the front porch of the university.  You generate better funding with a pretty front porch.  As far as the academic angle, it certainly isn't quite as direct a relationship, but there's no denying that Boise has improved considerably after hitting the national stage with football.  A lot of that has to do with them making a conscious effort to leverage that status and force it to have an impact.

A national championship will not get you on track for AAU, but it can contribute to a healthier university.  You're looking for the Flutie effect, I'm looking at the front porch effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 5:54 PM, slappy said:

Pac10 will be the top mid major conference.  They can not be considered a Power conference.   Nobody of high value wants to remain and geographically they are limited.  Big 12 actually has a shot to remain in the upper echelon if a few things fall their way over the next few months. 

I agree, but I think it'll take more than a few.  It'll depend a lot on what vision the power brokers behind all this craziness have for the future of CFB.  PAC 12?  They're going nowhere and will remain a viable conference IMO, but I agree that they're out of the big boy lottery.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 7:13 PM, Headbutt said:

Well, we're looking at two different metrics.  You're looking for the academic value of successful athletics, I'm looking at the overall monetary benefits.  Athletics are the front porch of the university.  You generate better funding with a pretty front porch.  As far as the academic angle, it certainly isn't quite as direct a relationship, but there's no denying that Boise has improved considerably after hitting the national stage with football.  A lot of that has to do with them making a conscious effort to leverage that status and force it to have an impact.

A national championship will not get you on track for AAU, but it can contribute to a healthier university.  You're looking for the Flutie effect, I'm looking at the front porch effect.

Alabama's had one of the prettiest front porches in the country since the 1920's.  The walkway leads up to this...

dilapidated-old-trailer-golden-meadow-lo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 5:16 PM, CaffeinatedCoog said:

 

I agree with some of what your saying----the Big12 is clearly bereft of any big name brands---but thats not to say they dont have a wealth of solid football programs.  Top-to-bottom---the Big12 is a pretty decent football league.  Lets just look at last years final top 25.  

 

#4)  Cincy (made the playoff)

#5) Baylor

#7) Oklahoma St

#17) Houston

#19)  BYU

 Thats not a bad football league.   Meanwhile, the Pac12 finished out of the playoff (again), had no teams in the top 10, and only had 2 top 25 teams (#12 Utah and #22 Oregon).   Frankly, I think the Pac12 will survive---but I dont see them landing a deal thats any better than the Big12.  When you consider that the Big12 has a very competitive and deep quality football league---and may arguably have the best college basketball league in the nation---they are going to land a pretty decent TV deal.  I mean---I certainly dont see them taking a pay cut from where they are now nearing the end of a deal negotiated a decade+ ago.  

Pretty good for LAST YEAR.  Historically, there's not a lot of difference between the two leagues from a quality standpoint.  I think losing TX and OU hurts the B12 more than the loss of USC/UCLA to the B1G.  Mostly because I think the fill in by the B12 are a bunch of Johnny Come Lately's that do not improve the profile of the conference.  Both conferences have fallen to upper mid-major status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 6:25 PM, RebelAlliance said:

Alabama's had one of the prettiest front porches in the country since the 1920's.  The walkway leads up to this...

dilapidated-old-trailer-golden-meadow-lo

Well, they've managed to stay way ahead of UNLV.  I doubt their national athletic exposure has hindered that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 1:44 PM, Half-Man is All-Tyrant said:

 

SMU - Too sml.  6k undergrad enrollment, means tiny alumni base & they don't carry their home DMA (Dallas)

UNLV - While they have Law & Medical Schools, they have yet to develop a viable Athletic Dept & are slowly morphing in to a major league sports town full of transplants.

CSU - Chks all the boxes, except recent FB success.  Hopefully w/their recent HC'g hire, los Rams will grow into to their new facilities & academic/research prowess.  The bison o' uc-boulder will go kicking & screaming on this one...

 

For CSU add, the PAC will not add CSU unless U of Colorado leaves.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
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...