(11-15-2023 02:16 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 02:05 PM)Aztecgolfer Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 01:35 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 12:32 PM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 12:20 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  My first instinct would be that WOSU are both marginal for a "best of the rest", but they've gotten a LOT of free press this year, and they have a fantastic Brand in the Pac to use. Plus, you know, control of a whole lot of money, too. I no longer think that their ABILITY to attract the best of the g5 is in question, but I actually wonder if it would be worth it to them to build it. How much will they get per year if they just invite the entire MWC into the Pac?

How much more will they get if they only invite certain schools from the MWC and AAC, and would those schools be worth the additional travel + likely large price needed to entice them to join? I THINK that the answer is yes, but I'm far from certain, I'm about 60/40 on it. Ultimately, it could be determined that the long term impact of building a best of the rest would be relatively revenue-neutral, but that it would have added clout and it would just have the nice side benefit of sticking it to the departing 12 Pac members by withholding some of their expected '24 revenue to rebuild the Conference into a best of the rest.

If the money can smooth the edges of the exit fees, I think joining a reconstituted PAC will be enticing to a number of institutions. The MWC, but the AAC especially, are not what the were 10-15 years ago. The deadweight has been piling up in both as they try to recover from P5 poaching. Not unlike the Big 12 in many ways. Being able to shift off that deadweight and build yourself out might be very agreeable for some institutions.

I think if this is going to be successful, then they will need to neuter the AAC and MWC both to give their PAC the spacing to thrive. But they can't do that and still maintain and academic clout landing pad for Stanford and Cal. I think WSU/OSU move on and build with the best available to them.

Assuming they build out to 16 to match their other larger peers:

PAC 2.0

WSU
Oregon State
Boise State
Utah State

Fresno State
San Diego State
UNLV
(Hawaii FB Only/Gonzaga Pairing)

Air Force
Colorado State
New Mexico
Wyoming

UTSA
Rice
Tulane
Memphis

This alignment keeps you in all of your media markets and territories with groupings that aren't individually stretched. You add a presence in Texas, Louisiana, and Tennessee. You can discuss the value of Hawaii, but it gives you extra games and timeslots which could increase revenue for everyone. You might be able to switch out someone for North Texas. For the rest, this alignment neuters the AAC and the MWC without the need of fully going east-to-west coast. There is no question that the PAC 2.0 would be the superior to either of those two conferences in their current alignments.

SJSU and Nevada would be homeless, but the WAC and Big Sky provides some options if they want to reconstitute the MWC.

It’s difficult to see how this makes sense when you could avoid paying a combined $170 million in exit fees to SJSU and Nevada (at minimum, as this assumes the other ten MWC members don’t jump ship until 2025) by just going to 18 instead of 16 and including SJSU and Nevada.

Generally speaking there’s some problematic math with the BOR option.

If you go the big BOR conference route with 12-16 members, including 6-10 sourced from the MWC in 2025, it will cost between $140 million and $210 million in combined exit fees paid to the MWC and AAC. That’s a helluva big price tag.

If you go the small BOR conference route with 8-10 members, including 4-6 sourced from the MWC in 2025, it will cost “only” $110 million to $140 million in exit fees. However a conference that small will have trouble making the case that it’s really a BOR conference — you can’t “neuter” both the MWC and AAC by taking only 6-8 of their combined 26 members, especially given how much football and basketball parity there is in the MWC — and therefore will be hard-pressed to land a TV deal that pays substantially more than what a Pac2 + MWC conference could earn.
Maybe some TV network out there is eager to pay $10-15 million per school per year to show games headlined by OSU, WSU, Boise State, San Diego State, Memphis, UTSA and Tulane, but it seems unlikely.

I know some folks like to claim that the MWC exit fee won’t stand up in court and no departing school will ever have to pay $17 million to get out. I disagree — I think the fee is based on a logical formula tied directly and reasonably to actual conference payouts, and the current conference members adopted it via a fair and undisputed process — but let’s assume I’m wrong about that. Reduce the combined exit fee numbers above by 30-40 percent (which would be the approximate impact of the MWC exit fee dropping to $10 million per school, the same as I assumed for the AAC schools) and they’re still big damn numbers.

Sorry, if you use the AAC's (which has a bigger TV contract) exit fee as a basis then the MWC exit would be about $6-7M. Even the MWC commissioner has said that exit fees are negotiable. You can put things in contracts that will not be enforced if challenged in court.

Interesting. I don’t recall Nevarez budging an inch last summer when SDSU gave its aborted departure notice to the MWC. The response was that SDSU owed the full $17 million exit fee and the conference moved immediately to withhold all distributions from SDSU.

But maybe she’s softened her position since then. Can you share a link to a quote where Nevarez says the MWC exit fee is “negotiable”?

Its negotiable. If Nevarez believes differently, she can find out in court.

(11-15-2023 03:25 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The Pac-12 is in fact a California company, and that it can be dissolved by a majority vote of stakeholders, not board members. The ten schools leaving can, and if WSU and OSU attempt to mess with the 2023-24 distributions will vote to dissolve the conference. And they threaten to do so.

This is a messy divorce with each party attempting not only to secure their rightful share but also take a huge chunk from their former partners share.

Common sense says the 2023-24 distributions should be made normally, as there is no exit penalty in the current contract. But future distributions and remaining assets should remain with those staying. Why this is hard to split this way says more about how poorly these schools get along. Knives are out.

In the end I expect a common sense settlement along those lines. But if the ten are correct that they can dissolve the conference, then they have the leverage.

Agree. its really logical that current media and other revenues get split among the 12. The name and future BB credits go to the 2. Probably the Pac 12 Network and the miscellaneous assets go to the 2. Various liabilities get split among the 12. Any reserve fund goes first against the various liabilities. Any leftover reserve fund is really the only thing to question where it goes. Its all really logical.

As a Memphis fan, I would be pleased to see the school affiliated with a "best of" league in which every member is nationally recognized in football and/or men's basketball and/or academics. However, the AAC as currently constituted makes much more sense geographically for Memphis. The addition of Army is strong. And the AAC has schools located in "basketball-esque cities."

(11-15-2023 03:26 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-15-2023 03:21 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Will the pac2 take the money and BUY their way (like SMU) into the Big12? They could refuse conference revenue for Many, many years.

ESPN and Fox don't want them in the Big 12. ESPN wasn't interested in the Pac 10 at the end and didn't even try to match Apple's $23 million when UW and Oregon were still in. So how are the 2Pac going to get a good media deal?

Who is buying?

I agree. In the 90's the MWC split from the WAC to try and make run at becoming a BCS conference. Quanity of quality and inventory wasn't as much of a factor when most conferences were in the 8-10 membership range.

The next MWC TV deal is going to be 7 million per school at a 14 team conference. At 8 schools *maybe* they fetch 8-9 million but it won't make up for increased travel costs. It just won't be worth it for Olympic sports.

This is like the MAC taking its Top 8 programs with the argument of getting more money essentially.

WSO
OSU
BSU

FSU
SDSU
UNLV

CSU
AFA
UTSA

TUL
MEM
UL

GSU
USF
NAVY

UCONN
ARMY
ECU

You heard it here first. Dont playa hate.

Let the B12 and SEC have Texas.

(11-15-2023 09:07 PM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  WSO
OSU
BSU

FSU
SDSU
UNLV

CSU
AFA
UTSA

TUL
MEM
UL

GSU
USF
NAVY

UCONN
ARMY
ECU

You heard it here first. Dont playa hate.

When the ACC dies and the best members leave for the SEC/B10/B12 this will be then 4th best conf.