Anyone know what time the court hearing is?

https://sports.yahoo.com/who-will-contro...06253.html

Good read. Note about how the PAC2 reached out to the Sun Belt about a scheduling alliance

(11-14-2023 10:47 AM)solohawks Wrote:  Anyone know what time the court hearing is?

2 p.m. PT

(11-14-2023 10:58 AM)solohawks Wrote:  https://sports.yahoo.com/who-will-contro...06253.html

Good read. Note about how the PAC2 reached out to the Sun Belt about a scheduling alliance

Yep. And there was this too.

Oregon State and Washington State, clearly still toying with the idea of rebuilding the conference, have been in discussion with the Mountain West over a scheduling alliance to complete a 12-game slate in the short term. But that comes with strings. The Mountain West wants a more long-term commitment and financial incentives as part of any alliance.

Several folks on this board including myself have previously posted that the MWC would be foolish to grant OSU and WSU a scheduling alliance without receiving some commitment to a long-term relationship, e.g. a merger or reverse-merger, in return. Otherwise the conference would be opening the door to OSU and WSU potentially cherry-picking a subset of MWC members to rebuild the Pac after the alliance ended.

Apparently Nevarez and a majority of the MWC presidents are thinking along the same lines. They don’t want to get suckered into a deal as a group that could result in some of them later being left behind individually.

(11-14-2023 12:49 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 10:58 AM)solohawks Wrote:  https://sports.yahoo.com/who-will-contro...06253.html

Good read. Note about how the PAC2 reached out to the Sun Belt about a scheduling alliance

Yep. And there was this too.

Oregon State and Washington State, clearly still toying with the idea of rebuilding the conference, have been in discussion with the Mountain West over a scheduling alliance to complete a 12-game slate in the short term. But that comes with strings. The Mountain West wants a more long-term commitment and financial incentives as part of any alliance.

Several folks on this board including myself have previously posted that the MWC would be foolish to grant OSU and WSU a scheduling alliance without receiving some commitment to a long-term relationship, e.g. a merger or reverse-merger, in return. Otherwise the conference would be opening the door to OSU and WSU potentially cherry-picking a subset of MWC members to rebuild the Pac after the alliance ended.

Apparently Nevarez and a majority of the MWC presidents are thinking along the same lines. They don’t want to get suckered into a deal as a group that could result in some of them later being left behind individually.

Everyone says she's the great Commissioner in the world, so this will be a good test.

(11-14-2023 12:49 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 10:58 AM)solohawks Wrote:  https://sports.yahoo.com/who-will-contro...06253.html

Good read. Note about how the PAC2 reached out to the Sun Belt about a scheduling alliance

Yep. And there was this too.

Oregon State and Washington State, clearly still toying with the idea of rebuilding the conference, have been in discussion with the Mountain West over a scheduling alliance to complete a 12-game slate in the short term. But that comes with strings. The Mountain West wants a more long-term commitment and financial incentives as part of any alliance.

Several folks on this board including myself have previously posted that the MWC would be foolish to grant OSU and WSU a scheduling alliance without receiving some commitment to a long-term relationship, e.g. a merger or reverse-merger, in return. Otherwise the conference would be opening the door to OSU and WSU potentially cherry-picking a subset of MWC members to rebuild the Pac after the alliance ended.

Apparently Nevarez and a majority of the MWC presidents are thinking along the same lines. They don’t want to get suckered into a deal as a group that could result in some of them later being left behind individually.

My gut is the PAC 2 still wanna try to put together a best of the rest conference. I just don't see anyone but them being interested in that.

(11-14-2023 01:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 12:49 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 10:58 AM)solohawks Wrote:  https://sports.yahoo.com/who-will-contro...06253.html

Good read. Note about how the PAC2 reached out to the Sun Belt about a scheduling alliance

Yep. And there was this too.

Oregon State and Washington State, clearly still toying with the idea of rebuilding the conference, have been in discussion with the Mountain West over a scheduling alliance to complete a 12-game slate in the short term. But that comes with strings. The Mountain West wants a more long-term commitment and financial incentives as part of any alliance.

Several folks on this board including myself have previously posted that the MWC would be foolish to grant OSU and WSU a scheduling alliance without receiving some commitment to a long-term relationship, e.g. a merger or reverse-merger, in return. Otherwise the conference would be opening the door to OSU and WSU potentially cherry-picking a subset of MWC members to rebuild the Pac after the alliance ended.

Apparently Nevarez and a majority of the MWC presidents are thinking along the same lines. They don’t want to get suckered into a deal as a group that could result in some of them later being left behind individually.

My gut is the PAC 2 still wanna try to put together a best of the rest conference. I just don't see anyone but them being interested in that.

Can’t blame ‘em. If I was in their shoes that would be my objective too. It really comes down to whether they can gain enough leverage to shatter the MWC’s solidarity. It’s doable, but it will take cash… a lot of cash.

(11-14-2023 01:26 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 01:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 12:49 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 10:58 AM)solohawks Wrote:  https://sports.yahoo.com/who-will-contro...06253.html

Good read. Note about how the PAC2 reached out to the Sun Belt about a scheduling alliance

Yep. And there was this too.

Oregon State and Washington State, clearly still toying with the idea of rebuilding the conference, have been in discussion with the Mountain West over a scheduling alliance to complete a 12-game slate in the short term. But that comes with strings. The Mountain West wants a more long-term commitment and financial incentives as part of any alliance.

Several folks on this board including myself have previously posted that the MWC would be foolish to grant OSU and WSU a scheduling alliance without receiving some commitment to a long-term relationship, e.g. a merger or reverse-merger, in return. Otherwise the conference would be opening the door to OSU and WSU potentially cherry-picking a subset of MWC members to rebuild the Pac after the alliance ended.

Apparently Nevarez and a majority of the MWC presidents are thinking along the same lines. They don’t want to get suckered into a deal as a group that could result in some of them later being left behind individually.

My gut is the PAC 2 still wanna try to put together a best of the rest conference. I just don't see anyone but them being interested in that.

Can’t blame ‘em. If I was in their shoes that would be my objective too. It really comes down to whether they can gain enough leverage to shatter the MWC’s solidarity. It’s doable, but it will take cash… a lot of cash.

Just seems so expensive to drop 2 to 3 teams. Plus do you really think you will get Memphis and the Texas schools from the AAC to get a true best of rest? So much is going against them to try and rebuild outside of absorbing all the MWC

https://x.com/RossDellenger/status/17244...36644?s=20

from Dellenger:
"Later Tuesday, in a Washington county courthouse, a judge’s ruling could.. set in motion another round of realignment, preserve the Pac-12 brand and deliver to Oregon State & Washington State control of more than $500 million."

This is what I've been hearing. between 4-6 MW schools and another 4 AAC schools. A conference of 10 to 12 depending on the numbers. 10 is supposedly favored because the thinking is the media deal will be better per school.

(11-14-2023 02:32 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 01:26 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 01:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 12:49 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 10:58 AM)solohawks Wrote:  https://sports.yahoo.com/who-will-contro...06253.html

Good read. Note about how the PAC2 reached out to the Sun Belt about a scheduling alliance

Yep. And there was this too.

Oregon State and Washington State, clearly still toying with the idea of rebuilding the conference, have been in discussion with the Mountain West over a scheduling alliance to complete a 12-game slate in the short term. But that comes with strings. The Mountain West wants a more long-term commitment and financial incentives as part of any alliance.

Several folks on this board including myself have previously posted that the MWC would be foolish to grant OSU and WSU a scheduling alliance without receiving some commitment to a long-term relationship, e.g. a merger or reverse-merger, in return. Otherwise the conference would be opening the door to OSU and WSU potentially cherry-picking a subset of MWC members to rebuild the Pac after the alliance ended.

Apparently Nevarez and a majority of the MWC presidents are thinking along the same lines. They don’t want to get suckered into a deal as a group that could result in some of them later being left behind individually.

My gut is the PAC 2 still wanna try to put together a best of the rest conference. I just don't see anyone but them being interested in that.

Can’t blame ‘em. If I was in their shoes that would be my objective too. It really comes down to whether they can gain enough leverage to shatter the MWC’s solidarity. It’s doable, but it will take cash… a lot of cash.

Just seems so expensive to drop 2 to 3 teams. Plus do you really think you will get Memphis and the Texas schools from the AAC to get a true best of rest? So much is going against them to try and rebuild outside of absorbing all the MWC

Project the earnings into the future for the current MW and AAC, vs a best of the rest with the top MW and AAC schools + the PAC2. Those future earnings are what is driving this at all or the PAC2 would've already started more formal negotiations with the MW considering they need a solution by 2024.

I hope that three things result from the court maneuvering:

1) WS and OS are not allowed to deprive the "departing 10" of their full media payouts (sans any reductions for debt repayment) for this final year.

2) WS and OS otherwise gain control of all assets that remain with the conference as of August 1, 2024. The D10 are not allowed to divide up future hoops credits or anything else.

3) WS and OS are not able to poach schools from the MW and/or AAC, they have to rebuild by taking the MW in its entirety.

These would be "just" outcomes, IMO.

(11-14-2023 02:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I hope that three things result from the court maneuvering:

1) WS and OS are not allowed to deprive the "departing 10" of their full media payouts (sans any reductions for debt repayment) for this final year.

2) WS and OS otherwise gain control of all assets that remain with the conference as of August 1, 2024. The D10 are not allowed to divide up future hoops credits or anything else.

3) WS and OS are not able to poach schools from the MW and/or AAC, they have to rebuild by taking the MW in its entirety.

These would be "just" outcomes, IMO.

The modern history of CFB is one marked significantly by realignment. Like the upward mobility that our country used to stand for...the idea that it will not continue seems unlikely, but anything is possible.

(11-14-2023 02:53 PM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 02:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I hope that three things result from the court maneuvering:

1) WS and OS are not allowed to deprive the "departing 10" of their full media payouts (sans any reductions for debt repayment) for this final year.

2) WS and OS otherwise gain control of all assets that remain with the conference as of August 1, 2024. The D10 are not allowed to divide up future hoops credits or anything else.

3) WS and OS are not able to poach schools from the MW and/or AAC, they have to rebuild by taking the MW in its entirety.

These would be "just" outcomes, IMO.

The modern history of CFB is one marked significantly by realignment. Like the upward mobility that our country used to stand for...the idea that it will not continue seems unlikely, but anything is possible.

Oh I do think realignment will continue. I just hope that in this case, the realignment takes the form of a merger between the PAC2 and the entire MW.

(11-14-2023 02:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I hope that three things result from the court maneuvering:

1) WS and OS are not allowed to deprive the "departing 10" of their full media payouts (sans any reductions for debt repayment) for this final year.

2) WS and OS otherwise gain control of all assets that remain with the conference as of August 1, 2024. The D10 are not allowed to divide up future hoops credits or anything else.

3) WS and OS are not able to poach schools from the MW and/or AAC, they have to rebuild by taking the MW in its entirety.

These would be "just" outcomes, IMO.

A conference should maintain a reserve to handle contingencies such as 10 teams leaving. They should retain some of the 23-24 media money.

Are there any Pac-12 network facilities at the 10 leavers? Sell them to the schools.

(11-14-2023 01:26 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 01:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 12:49 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 10:58 AM)solohawks Wrote:  https://sports.yahoo.com/who-will-contro...06253.html

Good read. Note about how the PAC2 reached out to the Sun Belt about a scheduling alliance

Yep. And there was this too.

Oregon State and Washington State, clearly still toying with the idea of rebuilding the conference, have been in discussion with the Mountain West over a scheduling alliance to complete a 12-game slate in the short term. But that comes with strings. The Mountain West wants a more long-term commitment and financial incentives as part of any alliance.

Several folks on this board including myself have previously posted that the MWC would be foolish to grant OSU and WSU a scheduling alliance without receiving some commitment to a long-term relationship, e.g. a merger or reverse-merger, in return. Otherwise the conference would be opening the door to OSU and WSU potentially cherry-picking a subset of MWC members to rebuild the Pac after the alliance ended.

Apparently Nevarez and a majority of the MWC presidents are thinking along the same lines. They don’t want to get suckered into a deal as a group that could result in some of them later being left behind individually.

My gut is the PAC 2 still wanna try to put together a best of the rest conference. I just don't see anyone but them being interested in that.

Can’t blame ‘em. If I was in their shoes that would be my objective too. It really comes down to whether they can gain enough leverage to shatter the MWC’s solidarity. It’s doable, but it will take cash… a lot of cash.

Same. And any reasonable person would conclude that the PAC as a name would still hold a lot of value. Now that's just my opinion since the past sixteen months or so have shown that it's not as valuable as, say, the Big XII or the ACC.

(11-14-2023 01:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 12:49 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 10:58 AM)solohawks Wrote:  https://sports.yahoo.com/who-will-contro...06253.html

Good read. Note about how the PAC2 reached out to the Sun Belt about a scheduling alliance

Yep. And there was this too.

Oregon State and Washington State, clearly still toying with the idea of rebuilding the conference, have been in discussion with the Mountain West over a scheduling alliance to complete a 12-game slate in the short term. But that comes with strings. The Mountain West wants a more long-term commitment and financial incentives as part of any alliance.

Several folks on this board including myself have previously posted that the MWC would be foolish to grant OSU and WSU a scheduling alliance without receiving some commitment to a long-term relationship, e.g. a merger or reverse-merger, in return. Otherwise the conference would be opening the door to OSU and WSU potentially cherry-picking a subset of MWC members to rebuild the Pac after the alliance ended.

Apparently Nevarez and a majority of the MWC presidents are thinking along the same lines. They don’t want to get suckered into a deal as a group that could result in some of them later being left behind individually.

My gut is the PAC 2 still wanna try to put together a best of the rest conference. I just don't see anyone but them being interested in that.

I'm not sure WSU and OSU belong in a best of the rest conference.

(11-14-2023 03:04 PM)jimrtex Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 02:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I hope that three things result from the court maneuvering:

1) WS and OS are not allowed to deprive the "departing 10" of their full media payouts (sans any reductions for debt repayment) for this final year.

2) WS and OS otherwise gain control of all assets that remain with the conference as of August 1, 2024. The D10 are not allowed to divide up future hoops credits or anything else.

3) WS and OS are not able to poach schools from the MW and/or AAC, they have to rebuild by taking the MW in its entirety.

These would be "just" outcomes, IMO.

A conference should maintain a reserve to handle contingencies such as 10 teams leaving. They should retain some of the 23-24 media money.

Are there any Pac-12 network facilities at the 10 leavers? Sell them to the schools.

There are some undetermined liabilities from lawsuits-Holiday Bowl and Athlete lawsuit are known issues. Comcast is probably known by now.

(11-14-2023 12:49 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 10:58 AM)solohawks Wrote:  https://sports.yahoo.com/who-will-contro...06253.html

Good read. Note about how the PAC2 reached out to the Sun Belt about a scheduling alliance

Yep. And there was this too.

Oregon State and Washington State, clearly still toying with the idea of rebuilding the conference, have been in discussion with the Mountain West over a scheduling alliance to complete a 12-game slate in the short term. But that comes with strings. The Mountain West wants a more long-term commitment and financial incentives as part of any alliance.

Several folks on this board including myself have previously posted that the MWC would be foolish to grant OSU and WSU a scheduling alliance without receiving some commitment to a long-term relationship, e.g. a merger or reverse-merger, in return. Otherwise the conference would be opening the door to OSU and WSU potentially cherry-picking a subset of MWC members to rebuild the Pac after the alliance ended.

Apparently Nevarez and a majority of the MWC presidents are thinking along the same lines. They don’t want to get suckered into a deal as a group that could result in some of them later being left behind individually.

I don't know, it seems highly likely that many or even most of the MWC would be welcome in the Pac, it's just a question of whether it's worth the expense of dealing with buyouts/etc instead of simply merging everyone together. And it all could just be the 2Pac doing their due diligence before they arrive at the "full merger with MWC" option as their best choice.

(11-14-2023 02:39 PM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 02:32 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 01:26 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 01:23 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 12:49 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  Yep. And there was this too.

Oregon State and Washington State, clearly still toying with the idea of rebuilding the conference, have been in discussion with the Mountain West over a scheduling alliance to complete a 12-game slate in the short term. But that comes with strings. The Mountain West wants a more long-term commitment and financial incentives as part of any alliance.

Several folks on this board including myself have previously posted that the MWC would be foolish to grant OSU and WSU a scheduling alliance without receiving some commitment to a long-term relationship, e.g. a merger or reverse-merger, in return. Otherwise the conference would be opening the door to OSU and WSU potentially cherry-picking a subset of MWC members to rebuild the Pac after the alliance ended.

Apparently Nevarez and a majority of the MWC presidents are thinking along the same lines. They don’t want to get suckered into a deal as a group that could result in some of them later being left behind individually.

My gut is the PAC 2 still wanna try to put together a best of the rest conference. I just don't see anyone but them being interested in that.

Can’t blame ‘em. If I was in their shoes that would be my objective too. It really comes down to whether they can gain enough leverage to shatter the MWC’s solidarity. It’s doable, but it will take cash… a lot of cash.

Just seems so expensive to drop 2 to 3 teams. Plus do you really think you will get Memphis and the Texas schools from the AAC to get a true best of rest? So much is going against them to try and rebuild outside of absorbing all the MWC

Project the earnings into the future for the current MW and AAC, vs a best of the rest with the top MW and AAC schools + the PAC2. Those future earnings are what is driving this at all or the PAC2 would've already started more formal negotiations with the MW considering they need a solution by 2024.

Are there any decent-sized brands other than Boise St between the 2Pac/MWC/AAC though? AFA is nice, OSU is having a good season, potentially very good, Tulane is on the rise and again has the inside slot at a NY6 bowl, but the only thing that will move the needle for the networks is Boise St. I don't think it matters much if they have 8, 10, or 12 schools, though it would certainly help if both Tulane and OSU play in NY6 bowls this year.

(11-14-2023 02:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 02:53 PM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  

(11-14-2023 02:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I hope that three things result from the court maneuvering:

1) WS and OS are not allowed to deprive the "departing 10" of their full media payouts (sans any reductions for debt repayment) for this final year.

2) WS and OS otherwise gain control of all assets that remain with the conference as of August 1, 2024. The D10 are not allowed to divide up future hoops credits or anything else.

3) WS and OS are not able to poach schools from the MW and/or AAC, they have to rebuild by taking the MW in its entirety.

These would be "just" outcomes, IMO.

The modern history of CFB is one marked significantly by realignment. Like the upward mobility that our country used to stand for...the idea that it will not continue seems unlikely, but anything is possible.

Oh I do think realignment will continue. I just hope that in this case, the realignment takes the form of a merger between the PAC2 and the entire MW.

Yes. I don't want the G5 to become a G6. Or for San Jose and Nevada to have to join CUSA. The G5 really should become a G4 and quit adding FCS schools.