philly1121 said:

---

If that is the case, then this whole argument about media markets isn't really that plausible is it? In other words, if we can't get $30 million annually per school or more, then our media markets don't really matter that much, since ours are arguably better.

It begs the question as to what Kliavkoff is really asking for? $35-40 million per school?

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

If that is the case, then this whole argument about media markets isn't really that plausible is it? In other words, if we can't get $30 million annually per school or more, then our media markets don't really matter that much, since ours are arguably better.

It begs the question as to what Kliavkoff is really asking for? $35-40 million per school?

---

My opinion is we are in a more sophisticated period where markets matter, but it is more than that, it is also the dynamic competition between tv networks. I suspect the B12's real value proposition is they give ESPN content during the same timeframe as the majority of Fox' B12 content. It's a blocking move which prevents Fox from dominating an entire time slot, which has implications for viewership before and after.

Many of our better markets have weak brands. But all of our markets are the only real content for that valuable timeframe. Unfortunately the B12 smartly entered the time zone with the LA schools and that hurts us because Fox doesn't have to bid for us, which means ESPN doesn't have to pay. Which takes us to streaming…we have to leverage any other provider who is willing to pay.

---

sosheezy said:

---

BearSD said:

---

sosheezy said:

---

BearSD said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

CBS & Turner are currently no longer involved in Pac-12’s media rights negotiations, sources told @ActionNetworkHQ

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) February 15, 2023

---

Might be something, but keep in mind that McMurphy is a graduate of a Big 12 school (Oklahoma State) and is motivated to spread negative intel about the Pac-12, whether or not it's significant or accurate.

---

He might have better intel on Big12 stuff, but he's been very straightforward on his reporting re: Pac 12. When the circumstances look bleak or limited, they just are, it isn't spin. He was the first to break the idea that Big 10 was possibly considering Cal as part of bigger westward expansion back when that was being discussed several months ago, when many online wouldn't even mention Cal.

---

(1) Suggesting that the Big Ten was considering further expansion is arguably meant to destabilize the Pac-12, even if he's suggesting Cal was considered.

(2) It seems like the Big Ten is, in fact, not considering further expansion at this time.

(3) So... his sources aren't worth much, or his sources were just speculating instead of providing accurate information, or he is "wishcasting", i.e. writing things that might lead to what he wants to happen.

---

I would suggest (as it was reported I think by Dennis Dodd and Pete Prisco too eventually) that the reporting merely reflected the scuttlebutt and discussion at the time, which I believe was late summer/early fall, when the previous Big Ten Commissioner seemed to be talking more aggressively about more expansion. It is true that now, it does not appear the Big Ten is considering it - that doesn't mean that some sources/decision makers weren't discussing it previously, and also clearly the Big Ten was divided on the matter, with the no votes overriding. But clearly some sources were advocating for it or at least consideration of it. The idea of these national reporters as agents of the Big 12, I just don't see it. The Pac 12 keeps stepping on a rake, that's the story, until we get a deal.

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

Yea I considered that scenario but I just figured that two west coast trips in a season would actually be a big benefit for an Oh. St team that recruits the west coast. But if you're right and it signals the winding down of inter-conference games between the two historic Rose Bowl conferences (except when they pay the PAC schools to go play out there in a record-padding win by B1G school to a mid-tier conference opponent) then that would be incredibly sad.

It would also mean that the "alliance" the conferences agreed to against SEC dominance was even more of a joke than it seemed; little more than a "paper to guarantee peace for our time" like Neville Chamberlain's

---

6956bear said:

---

SDSU and SMU are not the sort of programs that a strong league looks to add. Sorry they just aren't. Both are fine schools in their own right, but really adding them to the P12 brings "value"? I know the SoCal market. The market that USC and UCLA will still reside in and playing annual games against Michigan, tOSU, Penn St etc.

---

sosheezy said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

With Oh. St announcing today that they're canceling their home n home with the huskies for '24/'25 people are speculating that it could be a hint that they expect to play as conference opponents in those years. I'd feel better if we were doing the same with Minny for '25/'28 but at least it might set the snowball in motion to where teams jump ship to the B12 and B1G, our leadership has no choice but to act instead of sitting mired in their own recalcitrance, and the B1G would be willing to discuss expansion even without their commissioner in place

---

I took that as they expect to play at USC or UCLA in those years and don't want to do two West Coast trips the same year. Which is sort of preposterous as UCLA and USC have to do 3-4 road conference trips of similar distance every year. This thinking though by other Big Ten schools could mean future cancellations of games with Pac 12 schools or just not scheduling the Pac 12 OOC for home and homes, as they don't know when the LA schools will be on their calendar in future years. Another cooling effect of realignment. Sucks for college football if this means fewer meaningful OOC games.

---

sosheezy said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

Yea I considered that scenario but I just figured that two west coast trips in a season would actually be a big benefit for an Oh. St team that recruits the west coast. But if you're right and it signals the winding down of inter-conference games between the two historic Rose Bowl conferences (except when they pay the PAC schools to go play out there in a record-padding win by B1G school to a mid-tier conference opponent) then that would be incredibly sad.

It would also mean that the "alliance" the conferences agreed to against SEC dominance was even more of a joke than it seemed; little more than a "paper to guarantee peace for our time" like Neville Chamberlain's

---

For the Big 10 the alliance was merely a stall tactic to delay the adoption of the 12 team playoff so that the SEC wouldn't be solely in the drivers seat when it came back around - they clearly had the LA school raid planned already. Entirely deceitful and dishonorable on their part.

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

sosheezy said:

---

Bearly Clad said:

---

With Oh. St announcing today that they're canceling their home n home with the huskies for '24/'25 people are speculating that it could be a hint that they expect to play as conference opponents in those years. I'd feel better if we were doing the same with Minny for '25/'28 but at least it might set the snowball in motion to where teams jump ship to the B12 and B1G, our leadership has no choice but to act instead of sitting mired in their own recalcitrance, and the B1G would be willing to discuss expansion even without their commissioner in place

---

I took that as they expect to play at USC or UCLA in those years and don't want to do two West Coast trips the same year. Which is sort of preposterous as UCLA and USC have to do 3-4 road conference trips of similar distance every year. This thinking though by other Big Ten schools could mean future cancellations of games with Pac 12 schools or just not scheduling the Pac 12 OOC for home and homes, as they don't know when the LA schools will be on their calendar in future years. Another cooling effect of realignment. Sucks for college football if this means fewer meaningful OOC games.

---

Part of the reasons B12 teams would have been motivated to play P12 teams was tv exposure and recruiting. They've got that now to an extent with the LA schools in conference.

---

95bears said:

---

He has a hyper-aggressive disposition relative to our commissioner

---

95bears said:

---

Listening to Canzano and Wilner interview the Big 12 commissioner is unnerving:

https://soundcloud.com/canzano-wilner

He has a hyper-aggressive disposition relative to our commissioner and seems like a sports media shark. It's clear he is going to continue to try and destabilize and carve up the Pac-12. It's also clear that academics and student-athlete experiences are not a significant part of his mandate, when Wilner asks about the higher education mission of his member schools, he spews verbal pablum for 1-2 minutes.

He really pats himself on the back for getting his market timing down relative to the belt-tightening at Disney/ESPN and across the media market. This is a major thing we're missing in the discussions on this board. We may be more valuable than the Big 12 in general, but in a down market, you're only as valuable as someone is willing to pay, and it looks like the P12 will only have one serious bidder if all the rumors are true.

---

calumnus said:

---

95bears said:

---

Listening to Canzano and Wilner interview the Big 12 commissioner is unnerving:

https://soundcloud.com/canzano-wilner

He has a hyper-aggressive disposition relative to our commissioner and seems like a sports media shark. It's clear he is going to continue to try and destabilize and carve up the Pac-12. It's also clear that academics and student-athlete experiences are not a significant part of his mandate, when Wilner asks about the higher education mission of his member schools, he spews verbal pablum for 1-2 minutes.

He really pats himself on the back for getting his market timing down relative to the belt-tightening at Disney/ESPN and across the media market. This is a major thing we're missing in the discussions on this board. We may be more valuable than the Big 12 in general, but in a down market, you're only as valuable as someone is willing to pay, and it looks like the P12 will only have one serious bidder if all the rumors are true.

---

Given that it is a down market, you normally wouldn't want to lock in for the long term. Maybe just a one year contract, but Kliavkoff needs the PAC-10 teams to sign away long-term GORs, which they may not do if the number is too low….

I still think Kliavkoff needs to be negotiating terms of surrender with the Big 10.

---

calumnus said:

---

95bears said:

---

Listening to Canzano and Wilner interview the Big 12 commissioner is unnerving:

https://soundcloud.com/canzano-wilner

He has a hyper-aggressive disposition relative to our commissioner and seems like a sports media shark. It's clear he is going to continue to try and destabilize and carve up the Pac-12. It's also clear that academics and student-athlete experiences are not a significant part of his mandate, when Wilner asks about the higher education mission of his member schools, he spews verbal pablum for 1-2 minutes.

He really pats himself on the back for getting his market timing down relative to the belt-tightening at Disney/ESPN and across the media market. This is a major thing we're missing in the discussions on this board. We may be more valuable than the Big 12 in general, but in a down market, you're only as valuable as someone is willing to pay, and it looks like the P12 will only have one serious bidder if all the rumors are true.

---

Given that it is a down market, you normally wouldn't want to lock in for the long term. Maybe just a one year contract, but Kliavkoff needs the PAC-10 teams to sign away long-term GORs, which they may not do if the number is too low….

I still think Kliavkoff needs to be negotiating terms of surrender with the Big 10.

---

movielover said:

---

B12 talking to Fresno State.

---

6956bear said:

---

movielover said:

---

B12 talking to Fresno State.

---

Of course they are. They likely have talked with SDSU as well. You want to get into a P5 conference if you can. The expanded CFP will be adding additional money to conference coffers. Could be a significant number by 2026. And NCAA hoops units as well. Big 12 is very strong in hoops and will get a lot of members in the tourney.

The P12 may need to add Fresno St, SDSU, UNLV and SMU just as a defensive measure. They bring little in the way of additional TV revenues, but having both the B1G and Big12 with teams in the SoCal and central valley/Las Vegas markets is not good for the P12. Prime recruiting markets in the west.

---

southseasbear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

95bears said:

---

Listening to Canzano and Wilner interview the Big 12 commissioner is unnerving:

https://soundcloud.com/canzano-wilner

He has a hyper-aggressive disposition relative to our commissioner and seems like a sports media shark. It's clear he is going to continue to try and destabilize and carve up the Pac-12. It's also clear that academics and student-athlete experiences are not a significant part of his mandate, when Wilner asks about the higher education mission of his member schools, he spews verbal pablum for 1-2 minutes.

He really pats himself on the back for getting his market timing down relative to the belt-tightening at Disney/ESPN and across the media market. This is a major thing we're missing in the discussions on this board. We may be more valuable than the Big 12 in general, but in a down market, you're only as valuable as someone is willing to pay, and it looks like the P12 will only have one serious bidder if all the rumors are true.

---

Given that it is a down market, you normally wouldn't want to lock in for the long term. Maybe just a one year contract, but Kliavkoff needs the PAC-10 teams to sign away long-term GORs, which they may not do if the number is too low….

I still think Kliavkoff needs to be negotiating terms of surrender with the Big 10.

---

Pipe dream. Even if the B1G wanted to expand further (which at this time they do not) there would be no interest in Oregon State, Washington State, or us.

---

BearSD said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

CBS & Turner are currently no longer involved in Pac-12’s media rights negotiations, sources told @ActionNetworkHQ

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) February 15, 2023

---

Might be something, but keep in mind that McMurphy is a graduate of a Big 12 school (Oklahoma State) and is motivated to spread negative intel about the Pac-12, whether or not it's significant or accurate.

---

Quote:

---

I saw multiple media reports this week that announced CBS and Turner were "no longer involved" in Pac-12 media rights negotiations. I had to stop and check whether I'd missed something. It was strange to see the CBS/Turner development reported as if it were breaking news. I've been told for months that neither network was ever seriously involved. I expect ESPN/Amazon to end up with the Pac-12's media rights.

One high-level industry source said: "I don't know that CBS and Turner were ever actually in."

Telemundo, PBS and HGTV are also not involved, in case anyone is wondering.

---

6956bear said:

---

movielover said:

---

B12 talking to Fresno State.

---

Of course they are. They likely have talked with SDSU as well. You want to get into a P5 conference if you can. The expanded CFP will be adding additional money to conference coffers. Could be a significant number by 2026. And NCAA hoops units as well. Big 12 is very strong in hoops and will get a lot of members in the tourney.

The P12 may need to add Fresno St, SDSU, UNLV and SMU just as a defensive measure. They bring little in the way of additional TV revenues, but having both the B1G and Big12 with teams in the SoCal and central valley/Las Vegas markets is not good for the P12. Prime recruiting markets in the west.

---

BearSD said:

---

BearSD said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

CBS & Turner are currently no longer involved in Pac-12’s media rights negotiations, sources told @ActionNetworkHQ

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) February 15, 2023

---

Might be something, but keep in mind that McMurphy is a graduate of a Big 12 school (Oklahoma State) and is motivated to spread negative intel about the Pac-12, whether or not it's significant or accurate.

---

Like I said...

https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-big-12-talks-with-fresno

Quote:

---

I saw multiple media reports this week that announced CBS and Turner were "no longer involved" in Pac-12 media rights negotiations. I had to stop and check whether I'd missed something. It was strange to see the CBS/Turner development reported as if it were breaking news. I've been told for months that neither network was ever seriously involved. I expect ESPN/Amazon to end up with the Pac-12's media rights.

One high-level industry source said: "I don't know that CBS and Turner were ever actually in."

Telemundo, PBS and HGTV are also not involved, in case anyone is wondering.

---

---

6956bear said:

---

movielover said:

---

B12 talking to Fresno State.

---

Of course they are.

---

southseasbear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

95bears said:

---

Listening to Canzano and Wilner interview the Big 12 commissioner is unnerving:

https://soundcloud.com/canzano-wilner

He has a hyper-aggressive disposition relative to our commissioner and seems like a sports media shark. It's clear he is going to continue to try and destabilize and carve up the Pac-12. It's also clear that academics and student-athlete experiences are not a significant part of his mandate, when Wilner asks about the higher education mission of his member schools, he spews verbal pablum for 1-2 minutes.

He really pats himself on the back for getting his market timing down relative to the belt-tightening at Disney/ESPN and across the media market. This is a major thing we're missing in the discussions on this board. We may be more valuable than the Big 12 in general, but in a down market, you're only as valuable as someone is willing to pay, and it looks like the P12 will only have one serious bidder if all the rumors are true.

---

Given that it is a down market, you normally wouldn't want to lock in for the long term. Maybe just a one year contract, but Kliavkoff needs the PAC-10 teams to sign away long-term GORs, which they may not do if the number is too low….

I still think Kliavkoff needs to be negotiating terms of surrender with the Big 10.

---

Pipe dream. Even if the B1G wanted to expand further (which at this time they do not) there would be no interest in Oregon State, Washington State, or us.

---

calumnus said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

95bears said:

---

Listening to Canzano and Wilner interview the Big 12 commissioner is unnerving:

https://soundcloud.com/canzano-wilner

He has a hyper-aggressive disposition relative to our commissioner and seems like a sports media shark. It's clear he is going to continue to try and destabilize and carve up the Pac-12. It's also clear that academics and student-athlete experiences are not a significant part of his mandate, when Wilner asks about the higher education mission of his member schools, he spews verbal pablum for 1-2 minutes.

He really pats himself on the back for getting his market timing down relative to the belt-tightening at Disney/ESPN and across the media market. This is a major thing we're missing in the discussions on this board. We may be more valuable than the Big 12 in general, but in a down market, you're only as valuable as someone is willing to pay, and it looks like the P12 will only have one serious bidder if all the rumors are true.

---

Given that it is a down market, you normally wouldn't want to lock in for the long term. Maybe just a one year contract, but Kliavkoff needs the PAC-10 teams to sign away long-term GORs, which they may not do if the number is too low….

I still think Kliavkoff needs to be negotiating terms of surrender with the Big 10.

---

Pipe dream. Even if the B1G wanted to expand further (which at this time they do not) there would be no interest in Oregon State, Washington State, or us.

---

Well, if we had a smart, visionary AD at Cal, we would be working with UCLA, USC, Stanford, UW and Oregon to defect and form the Big 10s West Coast pod (albeit at a lower payout for the new members). But we have Knowlton so we have to put our hopes in Kliavkoff.

A quasi merger with the Big 10, forming a football only super conference but the Big 10 and PAC-12 for other sports, is the best option for Kliavkoff and the PAC-10 as a whole. It would solve the other sports problem for USC and UCLA (and the Big 10).

Second-best is a similar deal with the ACC, especially if it includes Notre Dame (who is pledged to the ACC). That would have East Coast teams playing on the West Coast in their evenings, giving them a reason to watch and greatly increasing the value of those slots. ACC and PAC-10 could have more basketball matchups throughout the season. The schools are a good match academically. Importantly, the Big -12 would be the P5 conference left out, directly competing with the SEC in their best markets. It might also force the Big 10s hand, with the PAC-10, ACC (with another Dame) and Big 10 forming a football only super conference to outflank the SEC.

---

calumnus said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

95bears said:

---

Listening to Canzano and Wilner interview the Big 12 commissioner is unnerving:

https://soundcloud.com/canzano-wilner

He has a hyper-aggressive disposition relative to our commissioner and seems like a sports media shark. It's clear he is going to continue to try and destabilize and carve up the Pac-12. It's also clear that academics and student-athlete experiences are not a significant part of his mandate, when Wilner asks about the higher education mission of his member schools, he spews verbal pablum for 1-2 minutes.

He really pats himself on the back for getting his market timing down relative to the belt-tightening at Disney/ESPN and across the media market. This is a major thing we're missing in the discussions on this board. We may be more valuable than the Big 12 in general, but in a down market, you're only as valuable as someone is willing to pay, and it looks like the P12 will only have one serious bidder if all the rumors are true.

---

Given that it is a down market, you normally wouldn't want to lock in for the long term. Maybe just a one year contract, but Kliavkoff needs the PAC-10 teams to sign away long-term GORs, which they may not do if the number is too low….

I still think Kliavkoff needs to be negotiating terms of surrender with the Big 10.

---

Pipe dream. Even if the B1G wanted to expand further (which at this time they do not) there would be no interest in Oregon State, Washington State, or us.

---

Well, if we had a smart, visionary AD at Cal, we would be working with UCLA, USC, Stanford, UW and Oregon to defect and form the Big 10s West Coast pod (albeit at a lower payout for the new members). But we have Knowlton so we have to put our hopes in Kliavkoff.

A quasi merger with the Big 10, forming a football only super conference but the Big 10 and PAC-12 for other sports, is the best option for Kliavkoff and the PAC-10 as a whole. It would solve the other sports problem for USC and UCLA (and the Big 10).

Second-best is a similar deal with the ACC, especially if it includes Notre Dame (who is pledged to the ACC). That would have East Coast teams playing on the West Coast in their evenings, giving them a reason to watch and greatly increasing the value of those slots. ACC and PAC-10 could have more basketball matchups throughout the season. The schools are a good match academically. Importantly, the Big -12 would be the P5 conference left out, directly competing with the SEC in their best markets. It might also force the Big 10s hand, with the PAC-10, ACC (with another Dame) and Big 10 forming a football only super conference to outflank the SEC.

---

Econ141 said:

---

Some pac12 AD at the start of all this said "George is kicking ass" .

---

philly1121 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

95bears said:

---

Listening to Canzano and Wilner interview the Big 12 commissioner is unnerving:

https://soundcloud.com/canzano-wilner

He has a hyper-aggressive disposition relative to our commissioner and seems like a sports media shark. It's clear he is going to continue to try and destabilize and carve up the Pac-12. It's also clear that academics and student-athlete experiences are not a significant part of his mandate, when Wilner asks about the higher education mission of his member schools, he spews verbal pablum for 1-2 minutes.

He really pats himself on the back for getting his market timing down relative to the belt-tightening at Disney/ESPN and across the media market. This is a major thing we're missing in the discussions on this board. We may be more valuable than the Big 12 in general, but in a down market, you're only as valuable as someone is willing to pay, and it looks like the P12 will only have one serious bidder if all the rumors are true.

---

Given that it is a down market, you normally wouldn't want to lock in for the long term. Maybe just a one year contract, but Kliavkoff needs the PAC-10 teams to sign away long-term GORs, which they may not do if the number is too low….

I still think Kliavkoff needs to be negotiating terms of surrender with the Big 10.

---

Pipe dream. Even if the B1G wanted to expand further (which at this time they do not) there would be no interest in Oregon State, Washington State, or us.

---

Well, if we had a smart, visionary AD at Cal, we would be working with UCLA, USC, Stanford, UW and Oregon to defect and form the Big 10s West Coast pod (albeit at a lower payout for the new members). But we have Knowlton so we have to put our hopes in Kliavkoff.

A quasi merger with the Big 10, forming a football only super conference but the Big 10 and PAC-12 for other sports, is the best option for Kliavkoff and the PAC-10 as a whole. It would solve the other sports problem for USC and UCLA (and the Big 10).

Second-best is a similar deal with the ACC, especially if it includes Notre Dame (who is pledged to the ACC). That would have East Coast teams playing on the West Coast in their evenings, giving them a reason to watch and greatly increasing the value of those slots. ACC and PAC-10 could have more basketball matchups throughout the season. The schools are a good match academically. Importantly, the Big -12 would be the P5 conference left out, directly competing with the SEC in their best markets. It might also force the Big 10s hand, with the PAC-10, ACC (with another Dame) and Big 10 forming a football only super conference to outflank the SEC.

---

That's not going to happen. It would upend the new rights deal that the B1G has. It would also call into question the deal the B1G made with USC and UCLA. Not full partners anymore? No full share. There would be no way USC would accept anything from the P12 unless they got more in the media deal from the P12 for the remaining sports. That would never fly.

To be fair and blunt - the P12 media deal now hinges on the "best of the rest". All of the power teams are now spoken for with the exception of Oregon, UW and Utah. There's really no teams left that have that "pop" that would add significant value to either the B1G or the B12. To me, the greater and imminent threat is the B12. They are absolutely in "best of the rest" mode and are undoubtedly inquiring about AZ, ASU, CU, Utah, and SDSU. To a lesser extent, probably Fresno State and UNLV.

I would argue that this "best of the rest" argument of expansion has less to do with media market and more to do with trying to hold off the B1G and SEC. Conferences need to grab what they can in order to preserve the conferences. So its basically, what team can we get that has the best record over the past 10 years; are the teams marquee enough to add value and get people to watch, geographic location (not media market) for recruiting, then media market..

Its really about survival now. As far as the length of any new media deal for the P10 or 12, schools would be foolish to go beyond 5 years. But media partners are likely going to want at least 4 I would think. Otherwise what's the point?

---