socaliganbear said:
I have never seen a thread with more people so confidently proclaiming things they have no actual knowledge of. Even for sport forums, this thread is truly a work of art.
Great job everyone.
This is so true. No one knows anything. The ADs know nothing. The only person who truly knows what is going on is Klavikoff, and possibly some of the presidents. All of whom have said nothing until this week or last week.
On the other side - everyone is talking - because they all have an ax to grind. The Media, because no one is talking. ESPN - because they are on the other side negotiating. Fox, because they have the Big 12 and the Big 10. The Big 12 media consultant, because, well, that's their job.
But I will take a shot at it anyway!
During the last two PAC 12 negotiations, I was surprised at the amount that the PAC 12 got from their media partners. I thought that this year, based on reading some stuff - the PAC 12 could have gotten as close as 50 million. So that was 600 Million per year, per some early pre-exit articles. But the PAC 12 has some advantages, basically the west coast, so I assumed that could happen.
Well, nothing has changed, except that the PAC 12 lost about 300 million in TV revenue because of the loss of the two LA schools. I find it interesting that they left, and still - they did not get what they deserved. A 300 million dollar media deal move - and the Big 10 is paying them 130 million of it. They got the rest of the Big 10 170 million...meaning about 14 million each of Indiana, Nebraska, etc. Once again - level revenue sharing is screwing USC and UCLA....in their new conference. Lets see how that plays out. Of course, Michigan and Ohio State and Penn State have had that for decades, since they are about 300 million in their own right.
Those rights numbers mean that the rest of the PAC 12 is worth about 300 million. That seems right to me - about 30 million each. Early days, the Fox guy who was quoted by Wilner and Canzano said that the rights for Oregon and UW were about 30 million each, and Cal and Furd were about 45 million each (for a total of 15 million of the 300 million) and the other 6 were about 25 million each.
The numbers seem to be consistent - Bay area at about a third of the So Cal market. Northwest about a fifth.
Since then, absolutely nothing has changed - except that the PAC 12 had the best football season it has had in decades, with 6 top 20 teams. I think we will come in above the 30 million each, but we will see. And once that is done, it is done for the next 5 years or so.
Positioning the PAC 12 for the future means making moves now. Adding San Diego State and SMU could drive more than an average of 30 million in revenue if they are additive to the mix, just for markets, and depending on what people think is the market for SDS. For SMU, and for SDS, I am sure the access to the Academics coordination of the UC and the rest of the PAC 12 schools is more enticing that the sports access. And I am sure that the PAC 12 will not give them a full share. But this does build a future where it gives UCLA a chance to come back in 5 or 6 years. If builds a brand in San Diego, and UCLA sees that it can become the sole PAC 12 representative in LA - it may be an opportunity to bring them back in and possibly give them a financial advantage to the rest of the PAC 12 by keeping them whole with the Big 10 revenue. When the next media deal comes in, perhaps TCU and UCLA and Houston want to come to the PAC 12, with maybe Kansas. PAC 12 gets to 16 teams, and we add significant markets in So Cal and Texas. Two 8 team divisions.
The Big 12 would most likely go after the remaining top Mountain West Schools - Nevada's, Boise, Fresno, Colorado State, San Jose State. That would get them to 16 as well.
