Breaking: new candidate emerges for #Pac12 commissioner as the stumped presidents consider an unusual hiring model (even for this league)https://t.co/nHpG5tOgTJ

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) April 27, 2021

Summary?

91Cal said:

---

Summary?

---

The Larry Scott era was such a fiasco that fixing the media contract(s) and institutional relationships with the ADs are both absolutely the highest priority. Since the fixing of these issues takes different skill sets the thinking is that maybe they should hire co-commissioners, one that concentrates on the media contracts and one that works with the schools.

Wilner's summary was it sounds logical but how would it work in real life? The guess is, based on past P12 history, probably not well.

The name Wilner gives is:

Amy Brooks
Furd Basketball player. Chief Innovations officer for NBA

My take is we need a Football/Media person unless Merten Hanks can play that role

My two-cents: nothing in this article should give anyone confidence that the Pac-12 will get the hire right this time around.

Half the schools want to hire someone with sports business experience instead of traditional commissioner experience? That's fine in theory but it's also the strategy that led to Larry Scott in the first place.

The other half want a commissioner who understands the campuses and takes their input seriously? Cool, but when you can't agree on who to hire or even what the primary qualifications should be it seems like it'll somehow be a messier leadership situation than with Scott.

So the compromise is to do both with a confused hiring process that, in classic Pac-12 fashion, is becoming public in the most embarrassing and damning way for the conference.

Take some notes from the other power conferences. Does anyone really think SEC/B1G/ACC/B12 schools like the other teams in their conference? Hell no, they probably disagree all the time; but when it's time to make a decision they move in lockstep and they don't let (most of) the backroom issues go public. When it comes down to it they're willing to support their rivals if it's what's best for the conference and it seems like the Pac-12 will continue to be incapable of that without strong leadership.

Maybe the qualifications are wrong, maybe they should be looking for a throwback Catholic school nun who's willing to smack some wrists to get the kids (schools, presidents, ADs) in line. 12+ schools (accounting for future expansion) will always have competing interests, the point of a conference is to work together to maximize how many of those interests are adequately satisfied but instead we've slid into mediocrity and a second-tier of profitibility because of infighting. The car's off a cliff and the kids are still slapfighting in the backseat . . .

Bearly Clad said:

---

My two-cents: nothing in this article should give anyone confidence that the Pac-12 will get the hire right this time around.

Half the schools want to hire someone with sports business experience instead of traditional commissioner experience? That's fine in theory but it's also the strategy that led to Larry Scott in the first place.

The other half want a commissioner who understands the campuses and takes their input seriously? Cool, but when you can't agree on who to hire or even what the primary qualifications should be it seems like it'll somehow be a messier leadership situation than with Scott.

So the compromise is to do both with a confused hiring process that, in classic Pac-12 fashion, is becoming public in the most embarrassing and damning way for the conference.

Take some notes from the other power conferences. Does anyone really think SEC/B1G/ACC/B12 schools like the other teams in their conference? Hell no, they probably disagree all the time; but when it's time to make a decision they move in lockstep and they don't let (most of) the backroom issues go public. When it comes down to it they're willing to support their rivals if it's what's best for the conference and it seems like the Pac-12 will continue to be incapable of that without strong leadership.

Maybe the qualifications are wrong, maybe they should be looking for a throwback Catholic school nun who's willing to smack some wrists to get the kids (schools, presidents, ADs) in line. 12+ schools (accounting for future expansion) will always have competing interests, the point of a conference is to work together to maximize how many of those interests are adequately satisfied but instead we've slid into mediocrity and a second-tier of profitibility because of infighting. The car's off a cliff and the kids are still slapfighting in the backseat . . .

---

Before the PAC-12 (then 10), Larry Scott was an Ivy League guy who did something with tennis?

Saying we need someone with sports business/media experience means NFL/NBA/ESPN....Someone who understands new media and can take advantage of the fact California is the media and tech capital of the planet. The landscape is changing quickly, we need to get ahead of the curve. We need to work with the Rose Bowl to end the current SEC biased BCS. Just because we struck out with Scott doesn't mean we should swing to the opposite extreme. hiring a veteran commissioner from another conference is a recipe for likely disaster.

Unpopular choice but Sandy would likely make a pretty good conference commissioner now that she has additional P5 experience. The one thing you can say about her, she understands football and has now has a broader sense (ND, Pac-12(Cal) and B10 (Penn State) on the landscape. Plus she likely would be in a better position to navigate the truly daunting issues of $ for Players under Title IX than a male Commiss.....

The Furd worries me. It is a specialized industry. I think you really need college experience which Scott lacked. Promoting an AD honestly makes a ton of sense - though I would think THAT is the Commis and then they hire a number 2 with media savy to try to negotiate out a contract that the Commish can sell to the others.

Lomiton said:

---

91Cal said:

---

Summary?

---

The Larry Scott era was such a fiasco that fixing the media contract(s) and institutional relationships with the ADs are both absolutely the highest priority. Since the fixing of these issues takes different skill sets the thinking is that maybe they should hire co-commissioners, one that concentrates on the media contracts and one that works with the schools.

Wilner's summary was it sounds logical but how would it work in real life? The guess is, based on past P12 history, probably not well.

---

Well stated.

Lomiton said:

---

91Cal said:

---

Summary?

---

The Larry Scott era was such a fiasco that fixing the media contract(s) and institutional relationships with the ADs are both absolutely the highest priority. Since the fixing of these issues takes different skill sets the thinking is that maybe they should hire co-commissioners, one that concentrates on the media contracts and one that works with the schools.

Wilner's summary was it sounds logical but how would it work in real life? The guess is, based on past P12 history, probably not well.

---

I'm surprised football performance is not a priority (or maybe relationships with ADs means that). Especially since the Cal and Utah CEOs were publicly said to be focused on that objective. I understand the division of labor, but your last paragraph says it all.

calumnus said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

My two-cents: nothing in this article should give anyone confidence that the Pac-12 will get the hire right this time around.

Half the schools want to hire someone with sports business experience instead of traditional commissioner experience? That's fine in theory but it's also the strategy that led to Larry Scott in the first place.

The other half want a commissioner who understands the campuses and takes their input seriously? Cool, but when you can't agree on who to hire or even what the primary qualifications should be it seems like it'll somehow be a messier leadership situation than with Scott.

So the compromise is to do both with a confused hiring process that, in classic Pac-12 fashion, is becoming public in the most embarrassing and damning way for the conference.

Take some notes from the other power conferences. Does anyone really think SEC/B1G/ACC/B12 schools like the other teams in their conference? Hell no, they probably disagree all the time; but when it's time to make a decision they move in lockstep and they don't let (most of) the backroom issues go public. When it comes down to it they're willing to support their rivals if it's what's best for the conference and it seems like the Pac-12 will continue to be incapable of that without strong leadership.

Maybe the qualifications are wrong, maybe they should be looking for a throwback Catholic school nun who's willing to smack some wrists to get the kids (schools, presidents, ADs) in line. 12+ schools (accounting for future expansion) will always have competing interests, the point of a conference is to work together to maximize how many of those interests are adequately satisfied but instead we've slid into mediocrity and a second-tier of profitibility because of infighting. The car's off a cliff and the kids are still slapfighting in the backseat . . .

---

Before the PAC-12 (then 10), Larry Scott was an Ivy League guy who did something with tennis?

Saying we need someone with sports business/media experience means NFL/NBA/ESPN....Someone who understands new media and can take advantage of the fact California is the media and tech capital of the planet. The landscape is changing quickly, we need to get ahead of the curve. We need to work with the Rose Bowl to end the current SEC biased BCS. Just because we struck out with Scott doesn't mean we should swing to the opposite extreme. hiring a veteran commissioner from another conference is a recipe for likely disaster.

---

The BCS ended after the 2013 season. It was replaced by the CFP. The CFP will be expanding once the current contract expires (or maybe sooner). Anyone who thinks the Rose Bowl will bow out of the CFP missed watching the good ship S.S Rose Bowl sail over the horizon in 2014.

wifeisafurd said:

---

Lomiton said:

---

91Cal said:

---

Summary?

---

The Larry Scott era was such a fiasco that fixing the media contract(s) and institutional relationships with the ADs are both absolutely the highest priority. Since the fixing of these issues takes different skill sets the thinking is that maybe they should hire co-commissioners, one that concentrates on the media contracts and one that works with the schools.

Wilner's summary was it sounds logical but how would it work in real life? The guess is, based on past P12 history, probably not well.

---

Well stated.

---

Except some of the tension (a lot of it?) with the ADs COMES from the TV contracts - the shifting schedules, the Thursday games, the announcement of times 8 days out which causes grief for the schools.

THus you hire an Commish who understands the schools and can navigate the conflicting priorities/cultures and then a strong #2 who understands media. They can negotiate great deals but since the Commish has to sell it he can act as a check so that the $ and contract don't totally wag the dog.

John Canzano of the Oregonian weighs in on the brewing potential disaster of a hire(s). Can someone forward this to Chancellor Christ (and the other schools' heads)?

Canzano: Have Pac-12 presidents not learned from the Larry Scott debacle?

85Bear said:

---

John Canzano of the Oregonian weighs in on the brewing potential disaster of a hire(s). Can someone forward this to Chancellor Christ (and the other schools' heads)?

Canzano: Have Pac-12 presidents not learned from the Larry Scott debacle?

---

Decent piece though he totally wiffs on understanding the competitiveness of admissions to Cal or UCLA and buys the myth about Furd.

(Honestly the Farm has some of the best f;ing PR people on the planet for the myth making they have been able to create around a school that lets you drop a class AFTER the final.....)

It may be a terrible idea, but it's definitely a terrible article. In addition to buying the big Furd lie as townie points out he basically acknowledges that splitting the duties has proven to be highly successful in other conferences, opining only that consultants are somehow always better than employees (apparently because he thinks they're always cheaper, which they most certainly are not). The article would have more credibility if he broke down the financial aspects of the existing consultant deals and compared that comp to projected salaries for the same functions. Instead it's superficial and cursory. As it is the only obvious inherent advantage of consultants is they're arguably easier to replace from a PR perspective because it's not a "firing." Maybe that's enough to be the deciding factor, maybe not.

If anything copying what other conferences have done demonstrates they were paying attention and have learned. The problem with Scott wasn't that he was an employee. It was that he was an incompetent employee. He could just as easily have been an incompetent consultant.

And I promise I'm not saying all this just because they're stealing my idea, but it is nice to know they read my stuff and take it under advisement haha.

socaltownie said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Lomiton said:

---

91Cal said:

---

Summary?

---

The Larry Scott era was such a fiasco that fixing the media contract(s) and institutional relationships with the ADs are both absolutely the highest priority. Since the fixing of these issues takes different skill sets the thinking is that maybe they should hire co-commissioners, one that concentrates on the media contracts and one that works with the schools.

Wilner's summary was it sounds logical but how would it work in real life? The guess is, based on past P12 history, probably not well.

---

Well stated.

---

Except some of the tension (a lot of it?) with the ADs COMES from the TV contracts - the shifting schedules, the Thursday games, the announcement of times 8 days out which causes grief for the schools.

THus you hire an Commish who understands the schools and can navigate the conflicting priorities/cultures and then a strong #2 who understands media. They can negotiate great deals but since the Commish has to sell it he can act as a check so that the $ and contract don't totally wag the dog.

---

I can just see the two CEO's arm wrestling over football starting times.

While the Canzano article is better written, a starting point on why the TOSU and Alabama ADs don't want the job is that they don't want a pay for a job where the Pac CEO's are your boss. Just look at the way the CEOs handled the 2020 football season. They could have had the same number of games as the Big 10, but they allowed 1 college President to gum up the works with his concern over the optics of allowing players on campus when students were not allowed on campus. One school held everyone else hostage on the most critical decision the conference made last year for two critical weeks.

wifeisafurd said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Lomiton said:

---

91Cal said:

---

Summary?

---

The Larry Scott era was such a fiasco that fixing the media contract(s) and institutional relationships with the ADs are both absolutely the highest priority. Since the fixing of these issues takes different skill sets the thinking is that maybe they should hire co-commissioners, one that concentrates on the media contracts and one that works with the schools.

Wilner's summary was it sounds logical but how would it work in real life? The guess is, based on past P12 history, probably not well.

---

Well stated.

---

Except some of the tension (a lot of it?) with the ADs COMES from the TV contracts - the shifting schedules, the Thursday games, the announcement of times 8 days out which causes grief for the schools.

THus you hire an Commish who understands the schools and can navigate the conflicting priorities/cultures and then a strong #2 who understands media. They can negotiate great deals but since the Commish has to sell it he can act as a check so that the $ and contract don't totally wag the dog.

---

I can just see the two CEO's arm wrestling over football starting times.

While the Canzano article is better written, a starting point on why the TOSU and Alabama ADs don't want the job is that they don't want a pay for a job where the Pac CEO's are your boss. Just look at the way the CEOs handled the 2020 football season. They could have had the same number of games as the Big 10, but they allowed 1 college President to gum up the works with his concern over the optics of allowing players on campus when students were not allowed on campus. One school held everyone else hostage on the most critical decision the conference made last year for two critical weeks.

---

Wife which school was that?

#NBA senior exec Amy Brooks tells SBJ that she is not a candidate to replace Larry Scott as Pac-12 Commissioner, joining a growing list of candidates who have withdrawn from the conference’s search (@sbjlombardo, @SmittySBJ).

Free to read: https://t.co/F536vUAd5F pic.twitter.com/kuLysUzTpH

— Sports Business Journal (@sbjsbd) April 29, 2021

Goobear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Lomiton said:

---

91Cal said:

---

Summary?

---

The Larry Scott era was such a fiasco that fixing the media contract(s) and institutional relationships with the ADs are both absolutely the highest priority. Since the fixing of these issues takes different skill sets the thinking is that maybe they should hire co-commissioners, one that concentrates on the media contracts and one that works with the schools.

Wilner's summary was it sounds logical but how would it work in real life? The guess is, based on past P12 history, probably not well.

---

Well stated.

---

Except some of the tension (a lot of it?) with the ADs COMES from the TV contracts - the shifting schedules, the Thursday games, the announcement of times 8 days out which causes grief for the schools.

THus you hire an Commish who understands the schools and can navigate the conflicting priorities/cultures and then a strong #2 who understands media. They can negotiate great deals but since the Commish has to sell it he can act as a check so that the $ and contract don't totally wag the dog.

---

I can just see the two CEO's arm wrestling over football starting times.

While the Canzano article is better written, a starting point on why the TOSU and Alabama ADs don't want the job is that they don't want a pay for a job where the Pac CEO's are your boss. Just look at the way the CEOs handled the 2020 football season. They could have had the same number of games as the Big 10, but they allowed 1 college President to gum up the works with his concern over the optics of allowing players on campus when students were not allowed on campus. One school held everyone else hostage on the most critical decision the conference made last year for two critical weeks.

---

Wife which school was that?

---

He can correct me if I'm wrong but iirc at the time he said it was Stanford bc they feared it would assist the movement to allow players to get paid by highlighting that they're treated differently than regular students. I'm pretty sure he's said that's a total nonstarter for them and they would disband or drop down if it happens but I'm just going on recollection here.

Wait, the same leland stanford junior university that paid for football and basketball players to spend the summer in an expensive Palo Alto hotel while they were cutting sports on campus?

Very cool, very classy move by the robber barons

Again I'm just going by memory so WIAF may come tell us I'm wrong but yeah