The Latest Rumors

230,426 Views | 1901 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by Bobodeluxe
Rushinbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Econ141 • 12:02p, 7/13/22
fat_slice said:
Rushinbear said:
fat_slice said:
ferCALgm2 said:
fat_slice said:
ferCALgm2 said:
philbert said:

So I should stop visiting the boards to hit refresh every 15-20 mins? Got it...


Isn't there only 30 day negotiation period for ESPN/Pac-12. Definitely not up to speed on all the happenings but I wonder if this means that whatever ESPN is offering just isn't good enough.
I thought it was a 30 day negotiation period exclusively with ESPN, after that anyone else can jump in with an offer.


That's true - I am just hoping it gets done and that way we have some clarity. I can't imagine any recruit committing if they have offers from the other power conferences.
At this point, no conference is stable. A recruit should go where he is happy and sees the support he needs. If he makes his decision on $$$, he'll get what he deserves, maybe in short order.


That is true except that you have certainty if you choose UCLA, Michigan, Wisconsin ... You have both football and education locked up. It's hardly a choice if you have an offer from these schools and Cal ... Where would you go right now even if you liked Cal's campus.
The way this is going, the B1G might last only another few seasons as the biggest players decide which schools (?) will be in or out and where they will be. Whither ILL, Purdue, Rutgers, etc.? Let alone Vandy, Mizzou, and Miss St.

If a kid loves Cal for what it is, he should go for our stability and value vs a bunch of ???
Reply Quote
3
calumnus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Econ141 • 1:17p, 7/13/22
fat_slice said:
Rushinbear said:
fat_slice said:
ferCALgm2 said:
fat_slice said:
ferCALgm2 said:
philbert said:

So I should stop visiting the boards to hit refresh every 15-20 mins? Got it...


Isn't there only 30 day negotiation period for ESPN/Pac-12. Definitely not up to speed on all the happenings but I wonder if this means that whatever ESPN is offering just isn't good enough.
I thought it was a 30 day negotiation period exclusively with ESPN, after that anyone else can jump in with an offer.


That's true - I am just hoping it gets done and that way we have some clarity. I can't imagine any recruit committing if they have offers from the other power conferences.
At this point, no conference is stable. A recruit should go where he is happy and sees the support he needs. If he makes his decision on $$$, he'll get what he deserves, maybe in short order.


That is true except that you have certainty if you choose UCLA, Michigan, Wisconsin ... You have both football and education locked up. It's hardly a choice if you have an offer from these schools and Cal ... Where would you go right now even if you liked Cal's campus.


Sadly, I agree. If you go with Cal you are taking a big risk, the only risk mitigation being the existence of the Transfer Portal, but in a very possible catastrophe it could be you and hundreds even thousands looking for a new home.
Reply Quote
1
philbert
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:57p, 7/21/22
????


Reply Quote
dimitrig
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to philbert • 11:18p, 7/21/22
philbert said:
????




I guess they are headed to the Pac-12 because there is no way the SEC would want them.
Reply Quote
1
Strykur
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to calumnus • 11:36p, 7/21/22
calumnus said:
fat_slice said:
Rushinbear said:
fat_slice said:
ferCALgm2 said:
fat_slice said:
ferCALgm2 said:
philbert said:

So I should stop visiting the boards to hit refresh every 15-20 mins? Got it...


Isn't there only 30 day negotiation period for ESPN/Pac-12. Definitely not up to speed on all the happenings but I wonder if this means that whatever ESPN is offering just isn't good enough.
I thought it was a 30 day negotiation period exclusively with ESPN, after that anyone else can jump in with an offer.


That's true - I am just hoping it gets done and that way we have some clarity. I can't imagine any recruit committing if they have offers from the other power conferences.
At this point, no conference is stable. A recruit should go where he is happy and sees the support he needs. If he makes his decision on $$$, he'll get what he deserves, maybe in short order.
That is true except that you have certainty if you choose UCLA, Michigan, Wisconsin ... You have both football and education locked up. It's hardly a choice if you have an offer from these schools and Cal ... Where would you go right now even if you liked Cal's campus.
Sadly, I agree. If you go with Cal you are taking a big risk, the only risk mitigation being the existence of the Transfer Portal, but in a very possible catastrophe it could be you and hundreds even thousands looking for a new home.
With the transfer portal, nothing is certain, a 5-star stud could go to a major program, run into academic/injury/roster issues, and is available right away in the portal not long after.
Reply Quote
calumnus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dimitrig • 6:47a, 7/22/22
dimitrig said:
philbert said:
????



I guess they are headed to the Pac-12 because there is no way the SEC would want them.


The SEC wants to poach from the other P5. Clemsen, Miami…further down the list ASU or Utah.

San Diego State to the PAC-12 has been widely speculated.
Reply Quote
BigDaddy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:00a, 7/22/22




“My tastes are simple; I am easily satisfied with the best.” - Winston Churchill
Reply Quote
1 edit
bipolarbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:43a, 7/22/22
This MHver3 person is generally considered to full of it. Saying anything for retweets, clicks or whatever.
Reply Quote
6
Bobodeluxe
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:48a, 7/22/22
Wilner from less than a year ago

Things have gone quite off the rails since then.
Reply Quote
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bipolarbear • 8:52a, 7/22/22
bipolarbear said:
This MHver3 person is generally considered to full of it. Saying anything for retweets, clicks or whatever.

He's a West Virginia fan with a concerted interest in talking up the Big 12. I've noticed a lot of that noise coming from B12 partisans on Twitter. Probably best to play it no mind.

IMO it makes no sense for any of the Four Corners schools to look at moving until they know what kind of deal the P12 can get. The Big 12 isn't getting them any more money with Texas and Oklahoma out.
Reply Quote
2
BigDaddy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 10:19a, 7/22/22
sycasey said:
bipolarbear said:
This MHver3 person is generally considered to full of it. Saying anything for retweets, clicks or whatever.

He's a West Virginia fan with a concerted interest in talking up the Big 12. I've noticed a lot of that noise coming from B12 partisans on Twitter. Probably best to play it no mind.

IMO it makes no sense for any of the Four Corners schools to look at moving until they know what kind of deal the P12 can get. The Big 12 isn't getting them any more money with Texas and Oklahoma out.
They probably have a good idea of what kind of deal the Pac-12 will be getting, and also aware that Oregon and Washington are now pushing for unequal revenue sharing.
“My tastes are simple; I am easily satisfied with the best.” - Winston Churchill
Reply Quote
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BigDaddy • 10:24a, 7/22/22
BigDaddy said:
sycasey said:
bipolarbear said:
This MHver3 person is generally considered to full of it. Saying anything for retweets, clicks or whatever.

He's a West Virginia fan with a concerted interest in talking up the Big 12. I've noticed a lot of that noise coming from B12 partisans on Twitter. Probably best to play it no mind.

IMO it makes no sense for any of the Four Corners schools to look at moving until they know what kind of deal the P12 can get. The Big 12 isn't getting them any more money with Texas and Oklahoma out.
They probably have a good idea of what kind of deal the Pac-12 will be getting, and also aware that Oregon and Washington are now pushing for unequal revenue sharing.
West Virginia people have a good idea of that? How do you figure?
Reply Quote
Econ141
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:31a, 7/22/22
What is the point of aiming for a $40-50mm deal which is what we are doing now? Each year we will fall behind UCLA $50-60mm - we will not be able to compete and will continue to get worse. We will also sign up to play them every year and watch them rub our faces in it each year by whooping us. What is the point?

I hope that Kliakov (sp?) and the current ADs look to do something transformative like a formal merger with the ACC that takes in at least $70-80mm and makes it clear that we are in a third super conference with a seat at the table. Anything less, then why not just shut down athletics at Cal?
Reply Quote
BigDaddy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 10:46a, 7/22/22
sycasey said:
BigDaddy said:
sycasey said:
bipolarbear said:
This MHver3 person is generally considered to full of it. Saying anything for retweets, clicks or whatever.

He's a West Virginia fan with a concerted interest in talking up the Big 12. I've noticed a lot of that noise coming from B12 partisans on Twitter. Probably best to play it no mind.

IMO it makes no sense for any of the Four Corners schools to look at moving until they know what kind of deal the P12 can get. The Big 12 isn't getting them any more money with Texas and Oklahoma out.
They probably have a good idea of what kind of deal the Pac-12 will be getting, and also aware that Oregon and Washington are now pushing for unequal revenue sharing.
West Virginia people have a good idea of that? How do you figure?
I was referring to the Four Corners schools.
“My tastes are simple; I am easily satisfied with the best.” - Winston Churchill
Reply Quote
calumnus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Econ141 • 2:34a, 7/24/22
fat_slice said:
What is the point of aiming for a $40-50mm deal which is what we are doing now? Each year we will fall behind UCLA $50-60mm - we will not be able to compete and will continue to get worse. We will also sign up to play them every year and watch them rub our faces in it each year by whooping us. What is the point?

I hope that Kliakov (sp?) and the current ADs look to do something transformative like a formal merger with the ACC that takes in at least $70-80mm and makes it clear that we are in a third super conference with a seat at the table. Anything less, then why not just shut down athletics at Cal?


As long as the money is not going to pay players, it won't necessarily make them better, it just pays the bills. However, if UCLA and USC boosters and LA media get the players better NIL deals, then yeah.

The bad news is their AD is light years ahead of ours. We really need Wilcox to start winning, starting this Fall. Musgrave needs to do something to change my opinion of him.

Reply Quote
3
2 edits
Econ141
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to calumnus • 8:53a, 7/24/22
calumnus said:
fat_slice said:
What is the point of aiming for a $40-50mm deal which is what we are doing now? Each year we will fall behind UCLA $50-60mm - we will not be able to compete and will continue to get worse. We will also sign up to play them every year and watch them rub our faces in it each year by whooping us. What is the point?

I hope that Kliakov (sp?) and the current ADs look to do something transformative like a formal merger with the ACC that takes in at least $70-80mm and makes it clear that we are in a third super conference with a seat at the table. Anything less, then why not just shut down athletics at Cal?


As long as the money is not going to pay players, it won't necessarily make them better, it just pays the bills. However, if UCLA and USC boosters and LA media get the players better NIL deals, then yeah.

The bad news is their AD is light years ahead of ours. We really need Wilcox to start winning, starting this Fall. Musgrave needs to do something to change my opinion of him.



100mm won't just pay the bills, it will do that plus build better facilities, figure out solutions for travel, and help with brand and marketing - all giving a competitive advantage in recruiting.

Putting that aside, your second point is most important. We hire morons to keep a sinking ship from falling apart. They hired someone who is aggressively trying to make them better. I have given up hope primarily because of our lack of leadership.
Reply Quote
1
Bobodeluxe
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:06p, 7/24/22
And increased laundry sales!
Reply Quote
movielover
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Econ141 • 3:06p, 7/24/22
Probably ties into NIL funding / issues, which I am *not* up on.

If, say, UCLA offers a full ride, and $50,000 a year tonstudent athletes for NIL to most FB, MBB, WBB, WVB and swimming (Title IX), what percentage of those recruits does UCLA win if Cal offers, say, $5,000 per year? That's $250,000 over 5 years.
Reply Quote
1 edit
calumnus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to movielover • 5:24p, 7/24/22
movielover said:
Probably ties into NIL funding / issues, which I am *not* up on.

If, say, UCLA offers a full ride, and $50,000 a year tonstudent athletes for NIL to most FB, MBB, WBB, WVB and swimming (Title IX), what percentage of those recruits does UCLA win if Cal offers, say, $5,000 per year? That's $250,000 over 5 years.


Currently, universities are not allowed to pay student athletes directly. Athletes are entitled to receive payment from third parties for use of their "name, image and likeness" but it is impossible to distinguish NIL payments from booster payments for signing/playing on the team. Once players are paid, it is tough to distinguish what they are being paid for. However, booster collectives have formed and do not even try to hide that they are paying players to sign with and play fit their team.

Thus, currently the TV revenues only go to the university and cannot go to the players.

However, that could easily change soon. Players want a piece of the huge TV contracts. Players may be ruled to be university employees, in which case the universities can and will pay them. It would be illegal to limit how much they can be paid. Then yes, the arms race is on and the top schools will make the most money and pay the most for the best players, which will bring in the most money…

Pro football with no salary caps and separate TV contracts. It will get lopsided ugly fast.
Reply Quote
1
Bobodeluxe
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:59p, 7/24/22
It will? Oh, you mean "even more so".
Reply Quote
2
Econ141
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:36a, 7/25/22
I don't know what's real anymore but this is the rumor thread so...:





Reply Quote
1 edit
calumnus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Econ141 • 3:03a, 7/25/22
fat_slice said:
I don't know what's real anymore but this is the rumor thread so...:







Would the idea be that the B12 could get out of their current TV contract if they expanded?

The ability to play in off-hours is already an option for the PAC-10. I am glad others see that as valuable. Why bring that value to the B-12 to share with all their schools?

I am betting on Kliavkoff over ex-Furd AD Bowlsley

Reply Quote
2 edits
LTbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to calumnus • 5:21a, 7/25/22
calumnus said:
fat_slice said:
I don't know what's real anymore but this is the rumor thread so...:







Would the idea be that the B12 could get out of their current TV contract if they expanded?

The ability to play in off-hours is already an option for the PAC-10. I am glad others see that as valuable. Why bring that value to the B-12 to share with all their schools?

I am betting on Kliavkoff over ex-Furd AD Bowlsley

Yormark
Reply Quote
calumnus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LTbear • 5:35a, 7/25/22
LTbear said:
calumnus said:
fat_slice said:
I don't know what's real anymore but this is the rumor thread so...:







Would the idea be that the B12 could get out of their current TV contract if they expanded?

The ability to play in off-hours is already an option for the PAC-10. I am glad others see that as valuable. Why bring that value to the B-12 to share with all their schools?

I am betting on Kliavkoff over ex-Furd AD Bowlsley

Yormark


Ok, thanks, I see they upgraded too.
Reply Quote
Bobodeluxe
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:41a, 7/25/22
If it happens, this would be great news for the person who wants all night games, mostly weekdays!
Reply Quote
3
Bobodeluxe
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:18a, 7/25/22
Wilner opines

Who knows he says.
Reply Quote
recal
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to calumnus • 10:34a, 7/25/22
calumnus said:
fat_slice said:
I don't know what's real anymore but this is the rumor thread so...:







Would the idea be that the B12 could get out of their current TV contract if they expanded?

The ability to play in off-hours is already an option for the PAC-10. I am glad others see that as valuable. Why bring that value to the B-12 to share with all their schools?

I am betting on Kliavkoff over ex-Furd AD Bowlsley

Judging from the desperation for revenue and the latest chatter about the value of late night games, I sadly assume that the next TV deal will keep or increase the number of night games. I was hoping that some of those issues would be improved in the next deal so I can attend more games in person.

Hopefully SC and UCLA get stuck with mostly home night games once they go to B1G.
Reply Quote
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to recal • 10:41a, 7/25/22
recal said:
calumnus said:
fat_slice said:
I don't know what's real anymore but this is the rumor thread so...:







Would the idea be that the B12 could get out of their current TV contract if they expanded?

The ability to play in off-hours is already an option for the PAC-10. I am glad others see that as valuable. Why bring that value to the B-12 to share with all their schools?

I am betting on Kliavkoff over ex-Furd AD Bowlsley

Judging from the desperation for revenue and the latest chatter about the value of late night games, I sadly assume that the next TV deal will keep or increase the number of night games. I was hoping that some of those issues would be improved in the next deal so I can attend more games in person.

Hopefully SC and UCLA get stuck with mostly home night games once they go to B1G.
On night games, I think the thing they are trying to get in the next deal is not eliminating them (they are still valuable TV inventory), but giving fans more advance notice about start times so you can plan for it.
Reply Quote
59bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to calumnus • 10:53a, 7/25/22
calumnus said:
movielover said:
Probably ties into NIL funding / issues, which I am *not* up on.

If, say, UCLA offers a full ride, and $50,000 a year tonstudent athletes for NIL to most FB, MBB, WBB, WVB and swimming (Title IX), what percentage of those recruits does UCLA win if Cal offers, say, $5,000 per year? That's $250,000 over 5 years.


Currently, universities are not allowed to pay student athletes directly. Athletes are entitled to receive payment from third parties for use of their "name, image and likeness" but it is impossible to distinguish NIL payments from booster payments for signing/playing on the team. Once players are paid, it is tough to distinguish what they are being paid for. However, booster collectives have formed and do not even try to hide that they are paying players to sign with and play fit their team.

Thus, currently the TV revenues only go to the university and cannot go to the players.

However, that could easily change soon. Players want a piece of the huge TV contracts. Players may be ruled to be university employees, in which case the universities can and will pay them. It would be illegal to limit how much they can be paid. Then yes, the arms race is on and the top schools will make the most money and pay the most for the best players, which will bring in the most money…

Pro football with no salary caps and separate TV contracts. It will get lopsided ugly fast.
It's been lopsided and ugly (for most not named Alabama) for at least a decade but it can, probably will, get worse for the have-nots. I stand by my prediction that the day players become employees of the institutions is the day many drop the sport or put it on "club" status, in either case eliminating scholarships for players. Another victory for the top of the pyramid, another loss for the rest.
Reply Quote
2
Golden One
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Econ141 • 11:04a, 7/25/22
fat_slice said:
I don't know what's real anymore but this is the rumor thread so...:





Ugh! Ii hope this doesn't come to pass. Mostly night games on Thursday and Friday really sucks!
Reply Quote
6
Big C
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Golden One • 2:04p, 7/25/22
Golden One said:
fat_slice said:
I don't know what's real anymore but this is the rumor thread so...:





Ugh! Ii hope this doesn't come to pass. Mostly night games on Thursday and Friday really sucks!

Yeah. I mean, I was thinking it was somebody trying to be funny...

Seems like, not too long ago, we were advocating for games that appealed to our "Cal fan" base (students, alums and friends and relatives of said). Now, suddenly faced with what could even be elimination of our known status quo, we're willing to sacrifice almost anything, in order to preserve the hope of remaining "big time".

I see a metaphor for life in here, somewhere.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
dimitrig
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Big C • 2:07p, 7/25/22
Big C said:
Golden One said:
fat_slice said:
I don't know what's real anymore but this is the rumor thread so...:





Ugh! Ii hope this doesn't come to pass. Mostly night games on Thursday and Friday really sucks!

Yeah. I mean, I was thinking it was somebody trying to be funny...

Seems like, not too long ago, we were advocating for games that appealed to our "Cal fan" base (students, alums and friends and relatives of said). Now, suddenly faced with what could even be elimination of our known status quo, we're willing to sacrifice almost anything, in order to preserve the hope of remaining "big time".

I see a metaphor for life in here, somewhere.

If it isn't good for the students, athletes, and alumni then we shouldn't do it regardless of what the pay day is.

Reply Quote
4
Cal_79
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Golden One • 2:08p, 7/25/22
Golden One said:
fat_slice said:
I don't know what's real anymore but this is the rumor thread so...:





Ugh! Ii hope this doesn't come to pass. Mostly night games on Thursday and Friday really sucks!

Mostly night games on Thursdays and Fridays will be the end of being season ticket holders for us.
Reply Quote
4
calumnus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:35p, 7/25/22

The conference only needs to offer ONE 3:30 Saturday start, ONE 6:30 Saturday start and ONE Friday 6:30 start per week for national telecast. For 12 weeks. That is 36 games among 10 or 12 teams. That is 3 games hosted per team on average. However the Arizona teams already play their games at night, so lean on them for the night games. Utah early season is better at night too. Maybe we add San Diego State or even Hawaii who can also play the late slot? Finally, I think the PAC-10 or 12 should schedule some neutral games in LA on Saturday nights which of course would be televised.

Bottom line, I think It would be possible that Cal would just play 2 or 3 late afternoon games at home (which are great, IMO), with no night games at Memorial
Reply Quote
1
BigDaddy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:43p, 7/25/22


BREAKING:@jasonscheer joined @SicEm365Radio on Monday and said that from what he has heard, ESPN's offer to the PAC 12 schools was "brutal."

"The number I heard from a few people last week was 24 and a half (million), which is brutal. It's not even close to being good enough."

"I would say if the PAC-12 wants to keep schools involved it's gotta be closer to lower 30's as a starting point."

"Now, again it could be a situation where ESPN did that on purpose, that could be the offer; we don't really know."

"It could be a low offer, and then the PAC-12 asks, you know, other sources to raise that amount, which I think is probably the most likely situation."

"But the initial ESPN offer that I've heard is 24.5 and that absolutely won't come close to keeping the conference alive."
“My tastes are simple; I am easily satisfied with the best.” - Winston Churchill
Reply Quote
1 edit
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.