Pac-12 commish George Kliavkoff visiiting SMU

115,860 Views | 1094 Replies | Last: 3 mo ago by calumnus
philly1121
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 berserkeley • 9:28a, 7/31/23
The reasons are many for USC not wanting to deal with any P12 school. And the biggest reason is - the P12 itself. I have family members that went to USC and a friend who works in Administration at SC. The main reason they cite is that USC Admin and alumni felt that the media deal negotiated under Larry Scott, and historically speaking, did not account for SC's contribution to the value and prestige of the P12. They had always felt that they had "carried" the conference and brought the most value to the conference out of all the member schools.

I think recruiting and Oregon are also factors but I think they are less so with respect to USC not earning the dollar value they always thought they deserved from the P12.
Reply Quote
1
wc22
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 philly1121 • 9:42a, 7/31/23
Well now they make the same as Iowa and Rutgers. Sure it is a lot more, but they are not getting anything special from the B1G.
Reply Quote
1
golden sloth
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 philly1121 • 9:55a, 7/31/23
philly1121 said:
The reasons are many for USC not wanting to deal with any P12 school. And the biggest reason is - the P12 itself. I have family members that went to USC and a friend who works in Administration at SC. The main reason they cite is that USC Admin and alumni felt that the media deal negotiated under Larry Scott, and historically speaking, did not account for SC's contribution to the value and prestige of the P12. They had always felt that they had "carried" the conference and brought the most value to the conference out of all the member schools.

I think recruiting and Oregon are also factors but I think they are less so with respect to USC not earning the dollar value they always thought they deserved from the P12.


So USC complains about being the top dog and carrying the conference, and wanting special treatment because of that status, and then when someone challenges that status they cry and leave the conference?

Sounds like USC.
Reply Quote
4
Big Dog
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 philly1121 • 11:25a, 7/31/23
philly1121 said:
The reasons are many for USC not wanting to deal with any P12 school. And the biggest reason is - the P12 itself. I have family members that went to USC and a friend who works in Administration at SC. The main reason they cite is that USC Admin and alumni felt that the media deal negotiated under Larry Scott, and historically speaking, did not account for SC's contribution to the value and prestige of the P12. They had always felt that they had "carried" the conference and brought the most value to the conference out of all the member schools.

I think recruiting and Oregon are also factors but I think they are less so with respect to USC not earning the dollar value they always thought they deserved from the P12.
Yeah, we all know that 'SC wanted a bigger piece of the Pac12 pie. They have been requesting a larger than pro-rata share way before Larry Scott's time.

So, bcos they were outvoted when the topic of equal shares came up time and again, they are spiteful? And that spite means that they will require their non-Rev teams to travel east for half of their conf games? Sorry, but that makes little sense to their own teams.

OTOH, if USC believes that the Pac is doomed to relegation to G5/6, then they would offer only 1 of 2 options for a recruit designing the now P4 experience (and P4 NIL)
Reply Quote
1
3 edits
berserkeley
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 philly1121 • 11:53a, 7/31/23
philly1121 said:
The reasons are many for USC not wanting to deal with any P12 school. And the biggest reason is - the P12 itself. I have family members that went to USC and a friend who works in Administration at SC. The main reason they cite is that USC Admin and alumni felt that the media deal negotiated under Larry Scott, and historically speaking, did not account for SC's contribution to the value and prestige of the P12. They had always felt that they had "carried" the conference and brought the most value to the conference out of all the member schools.

I think recruiting and Oregon are also factors but I think they are less so with respect to USC not earning the dollar value they always thought they deserved from the P12.


Things I hear SC doesn't like:

Pac-12 voted against CFP expansion. So did the B1G.

SC carried the Pac-12 and didn't get their cut. B1G does equal revenue sharing for full members.

Larry Scott. SC is largely responsible for Larry Scott and almost solely responsible for the Pac-12's inability to look forward.

Oregon.

Not a single one of those is a reason to not want Cal, Stanford, and Washington in the B1G conference. SC will travel to 2-3 times zones every other week for every sport. Travel to Seattle and SF is far easier. Those schools also carry the academic prestige SC wants to be affiliated with.

I don't know that the B1G wants any more schools, but I'm still not seeing a reason SC would oppose a select few more schools. After all, Penn State thought travel was too onerous.
Reply Quote
4
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 berserkeley • 5:08p, 8/1/23
berserkeley said:
philly1121 said:
The reasons are many for USC not wanting to deal with any P12 school. And the biggest reason is - the P12 itself. I have family members that went to USC and a friend who works in Administration at SC. The main reason they cite is that USC Admin and alumni felt that the media deal negotiated under Larry Scott, and historically speaking, did not account for SC's contribution to the value and prestige of the P12. They had always felt that they had "carried" the conference and brought the most value to the conference out of all the member schools.

I think recruiting and Oregon are also factors but I think they are less so with respect to USC not earning the dollar value they always thought they deserved from the P12.


Things I hear SC doesn't like:

Pac-12 voted against CFP expansion. So did the B1G.

SC carried the Pac-12 and didn't get their cut. B1G does equal revenue sharing for full members.

Larry Scott. SC is largely responsible for Larry Scott and almost solely responsible for the Pac-12's inability to look forward.

Oregon.

Not a single one of those is a reason to not want Cal, Stanford, and Washington in the B1G conference. SC will travel to 2-3 times zones every other week for every sport. Travel to Seattle and SF is far easier. Those schools also carry the academic prestige SC wants to be affiliated with.

I don't know that the B1G wants any more schools, but I'm still not seeing a reason SC would oppose a select few more schools. After all, Penn State thought travel was too onerous.


Agreed. The best path into the B1G is working with the other California schools to make it happen. These are long standing traditional rivalries and histories that everyone would like to maintain while also getting paid B1G money, just not in lieu of getting paid B1G money.
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
Bearly Clad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:21p, 8/1/23
Does anyone else find it hilarious that the reports are that Southern Cal is so opposed to nikeU joining them in the B1G because of their recruiting tactics. I feel like the attitude down there is basically "Hey! What do you think you're doing? We're the only ones allowed to cheat around here!"
Reply Quote
4
Anarchistbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:26p, 8/1/23
SC should have waited and joined the SEC which could stretch from Florida through Texas and Oklahoma to Southern California. Of course they would be another mediocre member.
Reply Quote
1
philly1121
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 Bearly Clad • 7:41p, 8/1/23
I dunno Bearly. If we "defended" our brand and promoted it more, I think we might be as zealous as SC is with theirs.
Reply Quote
1
calumnus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:24p, 12/25/23
I don't know why this thread popped up on my phone this morning but it is interesting history.

Huge changes coming. Looking forward to a very exciting and eventful 2024. May we all be blessed!
Reply Quote
2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.