|
Post by ay2013 on Aug 2, 2023 17:24:21 GMT -5
Pac-12 peeps, if this larger Pac-12/Big 10 merger ends up taking place and we still are in a conference with the LA schools, can we all agree to continue hating the LA schools (in particular USC) for all of this drama?
|
|
|
Post by midnightblue on Aug 2, 2023 17:26:47 GMT -5
Pac-12 peeps, if this larger Pac-12/Big 10 merger ends up taking place and we still are in a conference with the LA schools, can we all agree to continue hating the LA schools (in particular USC) for all of this drama? I hope the B1G takes all 4 schools just so I can see U$C cry their sweet tears trying to block other west coast school from joining.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Aug 2, 2023 17:32:27 GMT -5
Pac-12 peeps, if this larger Pac-12/Big 10 merger ends up taking place and we still are in a conference with the LA schools, can we all agree to continue hating the LA schools (in particular USC) for all of this drama? Oh, that is assumed. Oregon/USC is about to get SPICY
|
|
|
Post by tomclen on Aug 2, 2023 17:32:35 GMT -5
If there's one good thing to come out of all of this, it will be the end of #Pac12Refs And the PAC12 Network. I'm not qualified to comment on much of the PAC12 Football coverage, but their coverage of women's volleyball was (IMO) the worst of all the conference/regional networks. As for the PAC12 "brand," there was a time when it was probably extremely valuable. I'd think it's lost much of its luster. If UW (and Oregon) leave the PAC, I hope they go to the B1G just because of the superior B1G network coverage of volleyball. But, in some ways, I don't much care anymore. The upheaval and controversy is unsettling. College sports sure doesn't seem to have much to do with so-called "student athletes."
|
|
|
Post by manyshaped on Aug 2, 2023 17:35:19 GMT -5
Pac-12 peeps, if this larger Pac-12/Big 10 merger ends up taking place and we still are in a conference with the LA schools, can we all agree to continue hating the LA schools (in particular USC) for all of this drama?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 2, 2023 17:37:22 GMT -5
Pac-12 peeps, if this larger Pac-12/Big 10 merger ends up taking place and we still are in a conference with the LA schools, can we all agree to continue hating the LA schools (in particular USC) for all of this drama? I was fine with hating the LA schools before any of this started....
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Aug 2, 2023 17:48:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Aug 2, 2023 17:56:10 GMT -5
Pac-12 peeps, if this larger Pac-12/Big 10 merger ends up taking place and we still are in a conference with the LA schools, can we all agree to continue hating the LA schools (in particular USC) for all of this drama? I hope the B1G takes all 4 schools just so I can see U$C cry their sweet tears trying to block other west coast school from joining. It's crazy to me how important USC still thinks it is in the grand scheme of college sports. If not for the all the deep-pocket baby boomers still supporting this program, what does USC have to show for itself to warrant the kind of heavy hitter weight it thinks it should have? Since 2010, USC football has won the Pac-12 title once, 5 years of NO bowl games, and a losing record in the bowl games they actually did play. Since 2010, USC mens basketball has made the NCAA tournament only 6 times and have advanced to the sweet 16 once. Other than beach volleyball and water polo, USC has been largely irrelevant in any intercollegiate sport for over a decade. The program has experienced declining in-person attendance in the revenue-generating sports and fewer eyes watching on TV. IMO, USC is ground zero for a program that is vastly overrated in terms of value/results, and using its historic success to justify some sort of future relevancy.
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Aug 2, 2023 18:32:15 GMT -5
In this thread: people who don't understand the difference between recent on-field performance and brand value. USC is valuable. It is what it is.
Edit: also, people who don't seem to understand how contracts work.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Aug 2, 2023 18:37:31 GMT -5
In this thread: people who don't understand the difference between recent on-field performance and brand value. USC is valuable. It is what it is. Well, I understand the difference, what I'm saying is that the USC brand is overvalued. Unless they actually start having on-field performance to inspire a new generation of people willing to spend their time and money on USC sports, you'll see what I'm talking about... those deep pocket baby boomers won't be around forever. USC football had one their best seasons in the over decade+ last year and was still dwarfed in attendance and viewership by a number of other schools, despite being in the #1 media market and population center re college sports (NYC doesn't really count as it's not a big college sports area). You think that bodes well for the future value of the USC brand?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 2, 2023 19:16:52 GMT -5
In this thread: people who don't understand the difference between recent on-field performance and brand value. USC is valuable. It is what it is. I think you are not unbiased about all this. I am certainly not convinced that USC has this enormous value that you seem to attribute to it. Sure, it's not WSU, but it's not Real Madrid either. graphics.wsj.com/table/NCAA_2019This table actually looks pretty reasonable to me. 1 Texas 2 Ohio State 3 Alabama 4 Michigan 5 Notre Dame 6 Georgia 7 Oklahoma 8 Auburn 9 LSU 10 Tennessee By this reckoning, the top value PAC schools were (in 2019) Washington, Oregon, USC, and UCLA in that order, but all of them quite close together, and all of them down in the #20-25 range.
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Aug 2, 2023 19:44:42 GMT -5
I don't think this is how it work. The Mountain West would dissolve, and the schools would join the PAC with no exit fee (if that was the road taken). In general, the PAC would have way more value than the Mountain West - so all schools would be better off moving to the PAC. But if it was just those last two - I think the value would be so low it no longer would be worth salvaging the PAC. Not so sure it will dissolve. The money will be collected and probably be paid back to the network who invested millions into the league. There is no way the networks will not collect if these schools were to leave. A contract is a contract. Every school would be on the hook . It’s not like the schools have shut down their football program. They will move to another conference. It’s like you signing a contract with your employer then leaving before your contract expires and work for another from. Your former employer is entitled to collect money owed if agreed upon. No, it's not like that at all. When the Big East split up, it was because there was a clause in the bylaws that the league could be dissolved with a 2/3 vote and when some schools left for the ACC it gave the basketball-only schools a window to vote to dissolve the Big East. This is now the most popular theory on how to break the ACC television contract - if enough schools vote to dissolve the ACC, then the remainder of the TV contract with ESPN is void. Unless you have specific information to the contrary, this is the most likely path for the Mountain West schools to get to the Pac. The dissolution of the league is something that is commonly provided for in conference organization documents. Also, if the Pac can trade in their San Francisco offices for the MW headquarter in Colorado Springs they'd be saving some money so we'd have to see what assets each brings to a merger but that depends on a lot of things that are yet to happen.
|
|
|
Post by savannahbadger on Aug 2, 2023 19:45:36 GMT -5
If UW (and Oregon) leave the PAC, I hope they go to the B1G UW is already in the B1G. Washington is not.
|
|
|
Post by Huskyfan on Aug 2, 2023 20:21:23 GMT -5
If UW (and Oregon) leave the PAC, I hope they go to the B1G UW is already in the B1G. Washington is not. As this is a Pac-12 thread, UW is Washington
|
|
|
Post by redcard🏐 on Aug 2, 2023 20:26:49 GMT -5
|
|