Pac-12/Big 10/Big 12 Realignment

[Alan]

I think the focus on metros instead of fanbase/interest level is completely asinine.

Texas A&M draws more eyeballs than Houston - duh.

Isn’t the teams jumping to other conferences based on $ to schools from television revenues? Bigger markets produce more interest from major networks. So is why Houston, SJ and SF…… not completely sure about Vegas other than the glamour and parting in Vegas for a recruit or player.

[StevensTechU]

Isn’t the teams jumping to other conferences based on $ to schools from television revenues? Bigger markets produce more interest from major networks. So is why Houston, SJ and SF…… not completely sure about Vegas other than the glamour and parting in Vegas for a recruit or player.

Yes, and what I'm saying is that I don't think school location and market are strongly correlated for college sports. What are the biggest TV draws in the country?

Texas (Austin, sizeable, but the ~4th biggest city in Texas)
Notre Dame (Tiny city)
Ohio State (Columbus, a sizeable city like Austin)
Alabama (Tusca-where-the-f***?)
Penn State (State College is in literal Amish country)
Florida (Gainesville is like Eugene)
Michigan (Ann Arbor, again like Eugene)

Schools not named? Rutgers (in the shadow of NYC), Boston College, Northwestern, Houston, etc.

So if you're trying to draw the largest television audience possible, I don't think looking for metro populations is the way to go. Number of living alumni, viewership in recent years, and hell, stadium capacity, are all probably better indicators.

[Alan]

Isn’t the teams jumping to other conferences based on $ to schools from television revenues? Bigger markets produce more interest from major networks. So is why Houston, SJ and SF…… not completely sure about Vegas other than the glamour and parting in Vegas for a recruit or player.

Yes, and what I'm saying is that I don't think school location and market are strongly correlated for college sports. What are the biggest TV draws in the country?

Texas (Austin, sizeable, but the ~4th biggest city in Texas)
Notre Dame (Tiny city)
Ohio State (Columbus, a sizeable city like Austin)
Alabama (Tusca-where-the-f***?)
Penn State (State College is in literal Amish country)
Florida (Gainesville is like Eugene)
Michigan (Ann Arbor, again like Eugene)

Schools not named? Rutgers (in the shadow of NYC), Boston College, Northwestern, Houston, etc.

So if you're trying to draw the largest television audience possible, I don't think looking for metro populations is the way to go. Number of living alumni, viewership in recent years, and hell, stadium capacity, are all probably better indicators.

I understand your point and pretty much agree with it Norte Dame certainly has a huge TV following, yet they are not getting picked up by The powers who control this realignment. The rules powered by the contracts are going after school in big markets, cities. It does not make since to me either. But right now that is the rules schools are playing with. I know it means a lot of traveling but I would like the PAC 12 to pull in the major players from the ACC, Clemson, Florida St, major players from the Big 12, OK st, and…..? Not sure there are any left but I do believe SJS could compete in the PAC and recruit better as a power 5.

[squintsdd]

Conzano had a segment on his show a couple of days ago, I only scanned the last few pages to see if this has completed covered so forgive me if it was. In short he listed his top four additions to the PAC 12. He called it a no brainer, his first was San Jose St. SJS is already a mid leve pac 12 team with a huge TV revenue in the San Jose and SF.. second and third we’re Rice and SMU, brings us the Houston TV market and gives the PAC a bigger footprint in Texas recruiting. Fourth and he sounded wishy washy on this but it was UNLV. You have Vegas and surrounding area,TV and it is the glamour of Vegas bring in recruits helpin the PAC. I agree with some or a lot of it because the PAC simply needs to make a move and quit dragging ass.

If i remember correctly, his first was San Diego state. The San Francisco market isn't needed since cal and Stanford pretty much covers that

[Alan]

Conzano had a segment on his show a couple of days ago, I only scanned the last few pages to see if this has completed covered so forgive me if it was. In short he listed his top four additions to the PAC 12. He called it a no brainer, his first was San Jose St. SJS is already a mid leve pac 12 team with a huge TV revenue in the San Jose and SF.. second and third we’re Rice and SMU, brings us the Houston TV market and gives the PAC a bigger footprint in Texas recruiting. Fourth and he sounded wishy washy on this but it was UNLV. You have Vegas and surrounding area,TV and it is the glamour of Vegas bring in recruits helpin the PAC. I agree with some or a lot of it because the PAC simply needs to make a move and quit dragging ass.

If i remember correctly, his first was San Diego state. The San Francisco market isn't needed since cal and Stanford pretty much covers that

You may and probably correct, it is hard to listen and drive sometimes. I remember him saying he wasn’t including Stockton market in their numbers.

[DuckMastaFunk]

SD State to the PAC-11…
If you believe this guy:

Embedded Tweet

[nogerO]

https://mwwire.com/2023/02/18/pac-12-un ... ocess/amp/

[StevensTechU]

SDSU to the Pac is all but certain. You can't be 'the' conference of the west coast and omit SoCal altogether. It's really a shame both LA schools are ditching the conference, and your replacement options are limited.

[OregonFan4Life]

I hate to say it but adding San Diego St and SMU does nothing for the PAC-12 and the potential TV deal. I don’t know why everyone is obsessed with markets instead of brands. Take LeBron out of LA they aren’t televised near as much. Sure the San Diego and Houston markets are big, but those schools have 0 brand recognition. Adding these schools instead of doing some sort of alliance giving us matchups such as Oregon vs Clemson and Washington vs Miami is going to kill schools with potential like Oregon. What a complete cluster this is. The greatest beneficiaries of this crap will be Ohio St, Michigan, and Penn St.

[StevensTechU]

I woke up this morning pondering the idea of merging ACC & Pac-12. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense from a travel standpoint, but neither does the new Big Ten (UCLA and USC with Rutgers and Maryland).

East:
Clemson
Florida State
North Carolina
Virginia/Tech (probably not both)
Duke
Miami
Louisville or Syracuse (not both)
Notre Dame (non-football)

West:
Oregon
Washington
Cal
Stanford
ASU
Arizona
Utah
SDSU or Colorado (not both)

[buckmarkduck]

I woke up this morning pondering the idea of merging ACC & Pac-12. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense from a travel standpoint, but neither does the new Big Ten (UCLA and USC with Rutgers and Maryland).

East:
Clemson
Florida State
North Carolina
Virginia/Tech (probably not both)
Duke
Miami
Louisville or Syracuse (not both)
Notre Dame (non-football)

West:
Oregon
Washington
Cal
Stanford
ASU
Arizona
Utah
SDSU or Colorado (not both)

SDSU should get zero invites anywhere.

[squintsdd]

I woke up this morning pondering the idea of merging ACC & Pac-12. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense from a travel standpoint, but neither does the new Big Ten (UCLA and USC with Rutgers and Maryland).

East:
Clemson
Florida State
North Carolina
Virginia/Tech (probably not both)
Duke
Miami
Louisville or Syracuse (not both)
Notre Dame (non-football)

West:
Oregon
Washington
Cal
Stanford
ASU
Arizona
Utah
SDSU or Colorado (not both)

SDSU should get zero invites anywhere.

SDSU at least had a little credibility when it comes to basketball and football (not sure about other sports), but SMU is a head scratcher, even with the TV market they're in

[pezsez1]

I'm selfishly looking forward to SDSU joining the Pac.

San Diego is an awesome visit at any time of year. Also, my company is based there (although we're now completely virtual), but I'm excited by the thought of going down there once every couple years, catching the game, and hanging with coworkers.

Re: the argument of households vs brands, I do agree that branding SHOULD be the top consideration, but clearly we still have a lot of old guys running the show who are still obsessed with counting households within territorial footprints.

I hope the upcoming media deal leans as heavily into streaming as possible. Cable is a dinosaur, soon to be extinct. Can't happen fast enough.

Oh, and re: SMU, probably wouldn't make that trip too often but I'd love the chance to feast on Texas bbq for a few days. Otherwise, SMU gets a big "meh" from me.

[ncduck]

I'm selfishly looking forward to SDSU joining the Pac.

San Diego is an awesome visit at any time of year. Also, my company is based there (although we're now completely virtual), but I'm excited by the thought of going down there once every couple years, catching the game, and hanging with coworkers.

Re: the argument of households vs brands, I do agree that branding SHOULD be the top consideration, but clearly we still have a lot of old guys running the show who are still obsessed with counting households within territorial footprints.

I hope the upcoming media deal leans as heavily into streaming as possible. Cable is a dinosaur, soon to be extinct. Can't happen fast enough.

Oh, and re: SMU, probably wouldn't make that trip too often but I'd love the chance to feast on Texas bbq for a few days. Otherwise, SMU gets a big "meh" from me.

I disagree with the take on ott as a better platform than cable for sports. There are no instances of having a greater level of viewership on a streaming platform than cable. Hell, even the NFL disappeared on Amazon as it’s peak of 10 million viewers was only two thirds of what it averaged on FOX. Something with substantially less national relevance, like whatever this conference will end up with is going to completely disappear. Nobody will see, nobody will talk about it, and it’s going to damage recruiting for every school involved. The only possible upside is a decent license fee increase, but that won’t cure the new conference irrelevance.

If you’re curious about my credentials, I do content acquisitions for FOX Sports. When NBC dropped their national cable network NBCSN and tried pushing events onto Peacock, everyone waited out their deals and then called me begging for linear coverage. The lack of national coverage and awareness was affecting leagues at the ticket office. It was destroying their businesses.

The big leagues with power all are maxing out their linear options and then taking what’s left to streamers for an easy paycheck. Cable has at least another decade of relevance because that’s how long our deals are with the most lucrative leagues.

Based on my experience, if the conference goes streaming only, then Oregon should run for the hills.

[Duck07]

I disagree with the take on ott as a better platform than cable for sports. There are no instances of having a greater level of viewership on a streaming platform than cable. Hell, even the NFL disappeared on Amazon as it’s peak of 10 million viewers was only two thirds of what it averaged on FOX. Something with substantially less national relevance, like whatever this conference will end up with is going to completely disappear. Nobody will see, nobody will talk about it, and it’s going to damage recruiting for every school involved. The only possible upside is a decent license fee increase, but that won’t cure the new conference irrelevance.

If you’re curious about my credentials, I do content acquisitions for FOX Sports. When NBC dropped their national cable network NBCSN and tried pushing events onto Peacock, everyone waited out their deals and then called me begging for linear coverage. The lack of national coverage and awareness was affecting leagues at the ticket office. It was destroying their businesses.

The big leagues with power all are maxing out their linear options and then taking what’s left to streamers for an easy paycheck. Cable has at least another decade of relevance because that’s how long our deals are with the most lucrative leagues.

Based on my experience, if the conference goes streaming only, then Oregon should run for the hills.

I always appreciate when you chime in regarding the technical details.

I know long-term the sports commissioners are concerned about the lack of interest in sports from young kids but like you talked about, these are still not going to effect the line for another decade+. I've already grasped that some day a League of Legends type event will be more watched than a big football game.

Ultimately I think the Pac is dead and that we're just waiting around until a bigger conference scoops us up. I thought Kliavakoff was supposed to have come in with a plan in place that would have given USC pause about leaving rather than him getting the job and THEN trying to figure out the plan for the TV deal. I wonder how much blame you'd put on him for losing LA vs putting that on USC?