(02-13-2023 12:16 PM)dave108 Wrote:  

(02-13-2023 12:03 PM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  

(02-13-2023 09:12 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  What do we have to lose by inviting OU and UW, even if they do leave? Nothing, at least that comes to mind to me.

Let's say we go ahead and invite OU and UW + 2 in the west, and then they leave when the B1G/SEC expands again once the ACC becomes open. We'll have had up to a decade of conference inclusion with genuine "P2" programs, and the schools that would replace them will still be there. AND we'll get exit fees.

If OU and UW are interested, you add them. Full stop.

Naw bro there is no reason to be takin huge home run hacks right now. Big 12 just needs a single, a swing and a miss would be greatly disappointing and potentially catastrophic.

One defection from the Pac gets the job done, Arizona is on 3rd with no outs, just need to make contact to bring them home.

yep. my concern about Oregon is that it'll be "texas lite", and just be a pain in everybody's ass. OU will be constantly looking to jump - the conference just doesn't need the drama. Pull 1 or 2 from the PAC, to de-nut it, and then just build your new schools up, to make your league as strong as it can be.

We seem to be forgetting that they have to leave a big stack of cash on the way out the door. There is no real downside.

(02-14-2023 12:22 PM)Z-Fly Wrote:  

(02-13-2023 12:16 PM)dave108 Wrote:  

(02-13-2023 12:03 PM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  

(02-13-2023 09:12 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  What do we have to lose by inviting OU and UW, even if they do leave? Nothing, at least that comes to mind to me.

Let's say we go ahead and invite OU and UW + 2 in the west, and then they leave when the B1G/SEC expands again once the ACC becomes open. We'll have had up to a decade of conference inclusion with genuine "P2" programs, and the schools that would replace them will still be there. AND we'll get exit fees.

If OU and UW are interested, you add them. Full stop.

Naw bro there is no reason to be takin huge home run hacks right now. Big 12 just needs a single, a swing and a miss would be greatly disappointing and potentially catastrophic.

One defection from the Pac gets the job done, Arizona is on 3rd with no outs, just need to make contact to bring them home.

yep. my concern about Oregon is that it'll be "texas lite", and just be a pain in everybody's ass. OU will be constantly looking to jump - the conference just doesn't need the drama. Pull 1 or 2 from the PAC, to de-nut it, and then just build your new schools up, to make your league as strong as it can be.

We seem to be forgetting that they have to leave a big stack of cash on the way out the door. There is no real downside.

"we're" not forgetting about the exit fees. the downside is if it creates a shitload of aggravation for the rest of the league. it sounds like the remaining 8 are happy to get rid of texas. will we all be ready to boot oregon in a few years? i don't know, and I really doubt if you do either.

(02-14-2023 12:22 PM)Z-Fly Wrote:  

(02-13-2023 12:16 PM)dave108 Wrote:  

(02-13-2023 12:03 PM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  

(02-13-2023 09:12 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  What do we have to lose by inviting OU and UW, even if they do leave? Nothing, at least that comes to mind to me.

Let's say we go ahead and invite OU and UW + 2 in the west, and then they leave when the B1G/SEC expands again once the ACC becomes open. We'll have had up to a decade of conference inclusion with genuine "P2" programs, and the schools that would replace them will still be there. AND we'll get exit fees.

If OU and UW are interested, you add them. Full stop.

Naw bro there is no reason to be takin huge home run hacks right now. Big 12 just needs a single, a swing and a miss would be greatly disappointing and potentially catastrophic.

One defection from the Pac gets the job done, Arizona is on 3rd with no outs, just need to make contact to bring them home.

yep. my concern about Oregon is that it'll be "texas lite", and just be a pain in everybody's ass. OU will be constantly looking to jump - the conference just doesn't need the drama. Pull 1 or 2 from the PAC, to de-nut it, and then just build your new schools up, to make your league as strong as it can be.

We seem to be forgetting that they have to leave a big stack of cash on the way out the door. There is no real downside.

there is no guarantee that Oregon and UW (and whoever else they would demand to bring with them) would sign a large exit fee.....sure the Big 12 contract for conference membership that is 99 years long is in place, but that was signed in Sept 2012 so it can be tossed out and a new one signed tomorrow if the members want that

and there are things that are more valuable than money.....while the money that NU, CU, MU, and aggy left when they left the Big 12 was somewhat meaningful the fact they all left in short order and what that did to the Big 12 for the next decade was absolutely not worth the money

and as of now the instability of the Big 12 over the last few years and the talk of teams leaving to go to the AAC (I know by morons that ignored the exit fee or that there would never be enough votes to disband the conference especially to join the AAC) was not really worth the money

and over the next 7 years with the difference in earnings between 3 conferences and the SEC SEC SEC and Big 10, the ACC being looked at as "targeted", and the PAC 12 highly unstable (no matter of the Big 12 takes NO ONE from them) is a better advantage for the Big 12 vs bringing in Oregon and UW (and at least two dumb yes men friends) and their instability into the Big 12

there would have to be at least 6 PAC 12 members to come in order to get UW and Oregon and more likely 8

they are not going to come without Stanford and Cal that will do their bidding at every turn and I see no reason they will also not want Utah, CU and probably AU and ASU

that means leaving WSU and Oregon State behind and with that you get the legislature of Oregon and Washington pressuring those schools to demand their little brothers

then you just have a soon to fail merger of the PAC 12 with a lot of dead weight carrying the freight for two programs that want out badly (well really a ton of programs that want out)

there is not a chance in hell they come without Cal and Stanford and the Big 12 should want AU and ASU so even if they are leaving CU, Utah, Oregon State and WSU behind well now you still have 4 malcontents and two others you are not sure how they will vote

not worth it at all......the Big 12 has 7 years to make a mark and prove they are better than the PAC 12 and ACC and more stable and worthy of the highest media contract and the best bowl game contracts (outside of the SEC SEC SEC and Big 10)

as of now it looks like the Big 12 is making that move in the PAC 12 to establish a better TV contract both in terms of dollars and exposure on traditional media

no reason to screw that up with 2 to 4 (or more) of the members of the PAC 12 that helped make that screw up bringing their buffoonery to the Big 12

next step with a 12 team playoff is to make sure the Big 12 can do better than Clemson and the forgotten 14 putting teams into the playoffs

(02-12-2023 12:00 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  1. you do not make long term decisions for your conference based on what might happen in 12 years from now

Dude this has to be the stupidest thing I have seen you type. How can you make long term decisions without thinking about the "long term"?

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

(02-14-2023 03:06 PM)uhmump95 Wrote:  

(02-12-2023 12:00 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  1. you do not make long term decisions for your conference based on what might happen in 12 years from now

Dude this has to be the stupidest thing I have seen you type. How can you make long term decisions without thinking about the "long term"?

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

it is only stupid to you because you do not understand what I am saying (probably from the G5 mentality of panic and just start adding teams to "save the conference")

a long term decision meaning teams that enter a conference are not going to get booted out of a conference thus any teams the Big 12 lets in they are stuck with them barring the conference falling apart (something uH fans have experience with hahaha) or those members leaving the conference for a better one (which makes the Big 12 look like crap)

so you do not make a pretty much lifetime (of the conference) decision to add teams (that you are pretty much stuck with from then on) based on the idea that 12 years from now there MIGHT be some ACC teams available for the Big 12 to ATTEMPT to add

so what I am saying is you do not go out and add UW and Oregon (they are not coming and especially are not coming without other trouble makers) so that Oregon and UW can make trouble and run down the Big 12 for the next 7 years......based on the horrible concept that if they leave the Big 12 sometime during that 7 years "well at least we had more "P2 members"" for a bit or worse yet based on the idea that in 8 years when ACC teams MIGHT become available having Oregon and UW (and then losing them) would make the Big 12 attractive to ACC teams that might get left by ACC members moving conferences)

so again you do not make a decision for the conference now that could (almost certainly would) result in very poor long term consequences for the Big 12 based on what you HOPE will happen with the ACC in about a decade

(02-14-2023 11:38 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(02-14-2023 03:06 PM)uhmump95 Wrote:  

(02-12-2023 12:00 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  1. you do not make long term decisions for your conference based on what might happen in 12 years from now

Dude this has to be the stupidest thing I have seen you type. How can you make long term decisions without thinking about the "long term"?

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

it is only stupid to you because you do not understand what I am saying (probably from the G5 mentality of panic and just start adding teams to "save the conference")

a long term decision meaning teams that enter a conference are not going to get booted out of a conference thus any teams the Big 12 lets in they are stuck with them barring the conference falling apart (something uH fans have experience with hahaha) or those members leaving the conference for a better one (which makes the Big 12 look like crap)

so you do not make a pretty much lifetime (of the conference) decision to add teams (that you are pretty much stuck with from then on) based on the idea that 12 years from now there MIGHT be some ACC teams available for the Big 12 to ATTEMPT to add

so what I am saying is you do not go out and add UW and Oregon (they are not coming and especially are not coming without other trouble makers) so that Oregon and UW can make trouble and run down the Big 12 for the next 7 years......based on the horrible concept that if they leave the Big 12 sometime during that 7 years "well at least we had more "P2 members"" for a bit or worse yet based on the idea that in 8 years when ACC teams MIGHT become available having Oregon and UW (and then losing them) would make the Big 12 attractive to ACC teams that might get left by ACC members moving conferences)

so again you do not make a decision for the conference now that could (almost certainly would) result in very poor long term consequences for the Big 12 based on what you HOPE will happen with the ACC in about a decade

Todge- what college did you go to? Be a man and tell everyone who you root for

(02-11-2023 04:48 AM)doss2 Wrote:  The timing of the Army/Navy game is why the will never be in the same conference.

It's going to be tough for them to keep that exclusive weekend with the expanded playoffs trying to find the best TV time slots around the NFL in December. Army-Navy keeping that weekend all to themselves would require:

A) Cutting a week out of the regular season and moving everything up a week (never gonna happen--there's no way conferences or networks are giving up Rivalry Week on Thanksgiving weekend).

B) Getting rid of CCGs (also, never gonna happen--too much money).

C) playing weeknight playoff games, or

D) moving the start of the season to Week 0.

(02-14-2023 12:43 PM)dave108 Wrote:  

(02-14-2023 12:22 PM)Z-Fly Wrote:  

(02-13-2023 12:16 PM)dave108 Wrote:  

(02-13-2023 12:03 PM)hiphopfroggy Wrote:  

(02-13-2023 09:12 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  What do we have to lose by inviting OU and UW, even if they do leave? Nothing, at least that comes to mind to me.

Let's say we go ahead and invite OU and UW + 2 in the west, and then they leave when the B1G/SEC expands again once the ACC becomes open. We'll have had up to a decade of conference inclusion with genuine "P2" programs, and the schools that would replace them will still be there. AND we'll get exit fees.

If OU and UW are interested, you add them. Full stop.

Naw bro there is no reason to be takin huge home run hacks right now. Big 12 just needs a single, a swing and a miss would be greatly disappointing and potentially catastrophic.

One defection from the Pac gets the job done, Arizona is on 3rd with no outs, just need to make contact to bring them home.

yep. my concern about Oregon is that it'll be "texas lite", and just be a pain in everybody's ass. OU will be constantly looking to jump - the conference just doesn't need the drama. Pull 1 or 2 from the PAC, to de-nut it, and then just build your new schools up, to make your league as strong as it can be.

We seem to be forgetting that they have to leave a big stack of cash on the way out the door. There is no real downside.

"we're" not forgetting about the exit fees. the downside is if it creates a shitload of aggravation for the rest of the league. it sounds like the remaining 8 are happy to get rid of texas. will we all be ready to boot oregon in a few years? i don't know, and I really doubt if you do either.

There is no worse aggravation that can be had, at least that comes to mind, than what the Big 12 has experienced already, so far, with the loss of Texas and Oklahoma. Losing Oregon and Washington eventually will not only be a cakewalk compared to that, it will be expected. Why not monetize the inevitable and live with a few years of two brands that apparently are important to warrant inclusion into the so-called P2? And what happens if they aren't included? Then we've lost nothing, and gained additional years with a foundational brand.

Literally a no-lose scenario.

You have been through 2 difficult divorces and folks are thinking something might be wrong with you. Let’s enter another relationship that you expect will also end in a divorce?
Wouldn’t it be better to break the pattern?

(02-17-2023 04:28 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  There is no worse aggravation that can be had, at least that comes to mind, than what the Big 12 has experienced already, so far, with the loss of Texas and Oklahoma. Losing Oregon and Washington eventually will not only be a cakewalk compared to that, it will be expected. Why not monetize the inevitable and live with a few years of two brands that apparently are important to warrant inclusion into the so-called P2? And what happens if they aren't included? Then we've lost nothing, and gained additional years with a foundational brand.

Literally a no-lose scenario.

you do not seem to understand what is going on here

this is not about trying to be the leader of the G5s or the one that can claim the P6 helmet stickers......this is about a LONG TERM future for a conference to make a statement of some stability and some place (preferably the most stable) of the P5 that are not the Big 10 or the SEC SEC SEC

you and many others seem dead set on the idea that UW and Oregon are destined for the Big 10 in spite of all comments from the Big 10 and all actions from the Big 10

you also seem to have the foolish idea that being the next great "move up to the "P2" conference is somehow desirable or there is benefits to being a stepping stone that is walked on and dedicated on by teams you toss a lifeline to while they wait to get into the Big 10 or SEC SEC SEC or elsewhere

you seem to think there is some selling point for the Big 12 with "hey we all used to get looked down on by Texas and OU.....and Oregon and UW.....and NU,CU, MU, and aggy!!!!

you seem to think that the AAC or the MWc or the former Big East somehow benefited from all the teams leaving their conference and they have gained strength from that.....when we can see from the latest AAC media deal incarnation they are now a two tier league in terms of payments for the next 11 or 12 years (because their crappy 12 year deal was extended 2 years with the addition of "market" trash and a could of good programs)

you are missing out on the FACT that members of the PAC 12 including UW and Oregon are DESPERATE right now and they are getting torn to shreds

you also miss out on the fact that the ACC is now talking about uneven revenue distribution (remember what everyone said killed the Big 12 the first time even though all those that left were in favor of uneven revenue sharing especially Nebraska and aggy that were the most vocal and butt hurt when they left)

there is zero to suggest that ESPN and Fox would give all members of the Big 12 MORE MONEY for letting in Oregon and UW and common sense says they would just pay an equal share (which would actually result in a slight reduction in total payout for Big 12 members)

changes are coming to college football and college sports in general between the media companies struggling to continue to pay massively more, changes in content delivery and carriage, the NIL, massive unsustainable academic side subsidies for a lot of programs, and probably several other issues

now is not the time to be tossing a life line to two programs like Oregon and UW that will take that and crap on you the entire time just like they have been looking down on the Big 12 (and others) for a decade or more thinking that geography and academic snobbery and their relationship with the Big 10 and Rose Bowl made them something special and untouchable

well the Big 10 reached out and took a massive dump on the PAC 12 and thy seem content to let Oregon and UW wave in the wind and go it alone as the "big boys" in the PAC 12 and every major media company but ESPN has said they are not really interested in paying a lot for that

and now streaming companies seem to be saying they only want a small taste of that for a "meh" price

now id the time to trim fat now is not the time to become "The Big Security Blanket Conference" where all stragglers, whiners, complainers, back stabbers, and fools are welcome with open arms to most of the conference can get crapped on and destabilized over and over again

now is the time to use the association with BYU to get some big ass Tongan linemen recruited, go into California and recruit hard with Cal and Stanford falling apart and to let Oregon and UW sit at the end of the P5 kiddy table for a while and whatever happens with them happens.....and none of it does anything to harm the Big 12 and then most likely falling down a notch most likely helps the Big 12 tremendously in the long term

(02-17-2023 07:11 PM)Huan Wrote:  You have been through 2 difficult divorces and folks are thinking something might be wrong with you. Let’s enter another relationship that you expect will also end in a divorce?
Wouldn’t it be better to break the pattern?

yea no doubt.....all the worse of an idea when the Big 12 is doing just fine in the "dating department" with plenty of potential candidates (NONE THAT THE BIG 12 NEEDS TO MARRY ANYTIME SOON) and 6 years of a decent media deal that is as good or better than the ACC and looks to be a lot better than the PAC 12

but hey lets toss a little bit of stability and a "win" in terms of perception and media deals aside and go put a ring on two crazy crying and complaining ******* that bring nest to nothing that you already do not have plenty of and that will slash your car tires, key your car, and set your cloths on fire in the driveway on the way out the door and try and blame you for it

Media contract will not pay the b12 more for Cal, Stanford, Oregon or Washington as opposed to Arizona or even Washington State so why bother with the primadonnas?

I can only speak from the Arizona POV.

The fan base desperately wants out. UCLA, Oregon, and USC were the basketball games worth getting up for (and ASU obv). Two of those teams are gone. The other one is obviously a ticking bomb just waiting to bounce for the Big10. The moment the news about UCLA/USC broke, it's been full on abandon ship mode and nothing has changed since then. I cannot stress enough how much the fans want to play against multiple elite basketball programs every year compared to what the new Pac12 will be.

Everything that has come out recently has zona fans in a panic. The recent leaks about negotiations being bad were expected and confirmed. The minimum that teams are willing to accept is $40 million per school. Big12's schools are receiving $31.67 million (unless I'm out of date on that number). Amazon is not going to match that number. This is abandon ship territory.

Amazon only wants the Tier 1 games and nothing else. All streaming. ESPN has offered a low ball amount for Tier 2 and a very low ball amount for Tier 3. Dear god, no.

Kliavkoff quoted the order in which everything needs to happen: Sign media rights deal -> Grant-of-Rights (binds schools together) -> Expansion decison (SDSU/SMU). Also keep in mind that all of these steps requires an 8 out of 10 vote. (I think most ppl here know all of this, just informing for the few that might not)

Let's be generous to Kliavkoff and assume that EVERYTHING went right between Amazon/ESPN; the Pac12 receives $31.67 million per school. Let's also assume that Pac12 schools are willing to go down to that number from $40 million, the original asking price.

If your an Arizona fan, do you want most of your basketball conference games on a streaming app that nobody uses outside TNF? No. Do you want to play Stanford/OSU/WSU/CU on stations/times nobody will be tuning into? No. Does inviting SMU move the needle for you? Not at all. Everything I just asked is the doomsday scenario. It's very easy to imagine yourself quickly fading from the national stage.

OR: Would you prefer a guaranteed $31.67 million from a pro-rata clause media deal with games being televised on ESPN/FOX, while also not paying exit fees? Yes. Would you give up the one last relevant basketball matchup you care about with Oregon to have yearly home and road games with a handful of the best schools in the sport, including Kansas? Yes. Do you like the possibility of Gonzaga, the last top tier basketball program from the west, also joining? Yes. Do you want most of your PST time games to be swapped with EST/CST times and increase viewership/exposure? Absolutely, yes.

Arizona also has a large number of alumni that live in Texas.

UA would be losing out on the Socal market for recruiting, which is definitely a big deal. No way to deny that, it's a gut punch. However, that could easily be solved if UCLA/USC were interested in OOC home and home series (god, that still feels weird to think about). SDSU/Fresno could also be on the table. It's a fixable problem. Losing the conference tournament in Vegas would also be a blow. Despite being a 7-8 hour drive, it's nicknamed McKale Center 2.0. This is worth giving up without a moments hesitation, though.

The one thing Arizona would want from the Big12 up front is to also invite Arizona State. We hate each other but we're also in this together. I think the Big12, as well as the fans, seem down with this too. As far as Colorado and Utah, I think it'd be cool if they came along but would defer to what the Big12 wants. Could live with or without them. ASU would be the only hard ask.

PLEASE let us in. We've accepted the Pac as it is coming to an end. The Big12 has EVERYTHING we want in a conference. It's a layup for Arizona and we're scared that this hasn't happened yet.

(02-18-2023 12:33 AM)MeepMeep Wrote:  I can only speak from the Arizona POV.

The fan base desperately wants out. UCLA, Oregon, and USC were the basketball games worth getting up for (and ASU obv). Two of those teams are gone. The other one is obviously a ticking bomb just waiting to bounce for the Big10. The moment the news about UCLA/USC broke, it's been full on abandon ship mode and nothing has changed since then. I cannot stress enough how much the fans want to play against multiple elite basketball programs every year compared to what the new Pac12 will be.

Everything that has come out recently has zona fans in a panic. The recent leaks about negotiations being bad were expected and confirmed. The minimum that teams are willing to accept is $40 million per school. Big12's schools are receiving $31.67 million (unless I'm out of date on that number). Amazon is not going to match that number. This is abandon ship territory.

Amazon only wants the Tier 1 games and nothing else. All streaming. ESPN has offered a low ball amount for Tier 2 and a very low ball amount for Tier 3. Dear god, no.

Kliavkoff quoted the order in which everything needs to happen: Sign media rights deal -> Grant-of-Rights (binds schools together) -> Expansion decison (SDSU/SMU). Also keep in mind that all of these steps requires an 8 out of 10 vote. (I think most ppl here know all of this, just informing for the few that might not)

Let's be generous to Kliavkoff and assume that EVERYTHING went right between Amazon/ESPN; the Pac12 receives $31.67 million per school. Let's also assume that Pac12 schools are willing to go down to that number from $40 million, the original asking price.

If your an Arizona fan, do you want most of your basketball conference games on a streaming app that nobody uses outside TNF? No. Do you want to play Stanford/OSU/WSU/CU on stations/times nobody will be tuning into? No. Does inviting SMU move the needle for you? Not at all. Everything I just asked is the doomsday scenario. It's very easy to imagine yourself quickly fading from the national stage.

OR: Would you prefer a guaranteed $31.67 million from a pro-rata clause media deal with games being televised on ESPN/FOX, while also not paying exit fees? Yes. Would you give up the one last relevant basketball matchup you care about with Oregon to have yearly home and road games with a handful of the best schools in the sport, including Kansas? Yes. Do you like the possibility of Gonzaga, the last top tier basketball program from the west, also joining? Yes. Do you want most of your PST time games to be swapped with EST/CST times and increase viewership/exposure? Absolutely, yes.

Arizona also has a large number of alumni that live in Texas.

UA would be losing out on the Socal market for recruiting, which is definitely a big deal. No way to deny that, it's a gut punch. However, that could easily be solved if UCLA/USC were interested in OOC home and home series (god, that still feels weird to think about). SDSU/Fresno could also be on the table. It's a fixable problem. Losing the conference tournament in Vegas would also be a blow. Despite being a 7-8 hour drive, it's nicknamed McKale Center 2.0. This is worth giving up without a moments hesitation, though.

The one thing Arizona would want from the Big12 up front is to also invite Arizona State. We hate each other but we're also in this together. I think the Big12, as well as the fans, seem down with this too. As far as Colorado and Utah, I think it'd be cool if they came along but would defer to what the Big12 wants. Could live with or without them. ASU would be the only hard ask.

PLEASE let us in. We've accepted the Pac as it is coming to an end. The Big12 has EVERYTHING we want in a conference. It's a layup for Arizona and we're scared that this hasn't happened yet.

When all this is said and done, the four corner schools seem like the obvious, no brainer move. Contiguous, like minded, major but non blue blood programs with history.

I think Arizona fans don't have to worry. Every scenario I've realistically seen always includes Arizona, it's Utah / ASU / Colorado that are on the chopping block.

(02-18-2023 06:35 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(02-18-2023 12:33 AM)MeepMeep Wrote:  I can only speak from the Arizona POV.

The fan base desperately wants out. UCLA, Oregon, and USC were the basketball games worth getting up for (and ASU obv). Two of those teams are gone. The other one is obviously a ticking bomb just waiting to bounce for the Big10. The moment the news about UCLA/USC broke, it's been full on abandon ship mode and nothing has changed since then. I cannot stress enough how much the fans want to play against multiple elite basketball programs every year compared to what the new Pac12 will be.

Everything that has come out recently has zona fans in a panic. The recent leaks about negotiations being bad were expected and confirmed. The minimum that teams are willing to accept is $40 million per school. Big12's schools are receiving $31.67 million (unless I'm out of date on that number). Amazon is not going to match that number. This is abandon ship territory.

Amazon only wants the Tier 1 games and nothing else. All streaming. ESPN has offered a low ball amount for Tier 2 and a very low ball amount for Tier 3. Dear god, no.

Kliavkoff quoted the order in which everything needs to happen: Sign media rights deal -> Grant-of-Rights (binds schools together) -> Expansion decison (SDSU/SMU). Also keep in mind that all of these steps requires an 8 out of 10 vote. (I think most ppl here know all of this, just informing for the few that might not)

Let's be generous to Kliavkoff and assume that EVERYTHING went right between Amazon/ESPN; the Pac12 receives $31.67 million per school. Let's also assume that Pac12 schools are willing to go down to that number from $40 million, the original asking price.

If your an Arizona fan, do you want most of your basketball conference games on a streaming app that nobody uses outside TNF? No. Do you want to play Stanford/OSU/WSU/CU on stations/times nobody will be tuning into? No. Does inviting SMU move the needle for you? Not at all. Everything I just asked is the doomsday scenario. It's very easy to imagine yourself quickly fading from the national stage.

OR: Would you prefer a guaranteed $31.67 million from a pro-rata clause media deal with games being televised on ESPN/FOX, while also not paying exit fees? Yes. Would you give up the one last relevant basketball matchup you care about with Oregon to have yearly home and road games with a handful of the best schools in the sport, including Kansas? Yes. Do you like the possibility of Gonzaga, the last top tier basketball program from the west, also joining? Yes. Do you want most of your PST time games to be swapped with EST/CST times and increase viewership/exposure? Absolutely, yes.

Arizona also has a large number of alumni that live in Texas.

UA would be losing out on the Socal market for recruiting, which is definitely a big deal. No way to deny that, it's a gut punch. However, that could easily be solved if UCLA/USC were interested in OOC home and home series (god, that still feels weird to think about). SDSU/Fresno could also be on the table. It's a fixable problem. Losing the conference tournament in Vegas would also be a blow. Despite being a 7-8 hour drive, it's nicknamed McKale Center 2.0. This is worth giving up without a moments hesitation, though.

The one thing Arizona would want from the Big12 up front is to also invite Arizona State. We hate each other but we're also in this together. I think the Big12, as well as the fans, seem down with this too. As far as Colorado and Utah, I think it'd be cool if they came along but would defer to what the Big12 wants. Could live with or without them. ASU would be the only hard ask.

PLEASE let us in. We've accepted the Pac as it is coming to an end. The Big12 has EVERYTHING we want in a conference. It's a layup for Arizona and we're scared that this hasn't happened yet.

When all this is said and done, the four corner schools seem like the obvious, no brainer move. Contiguous, like minded, major but non blue blood programs with history.

I think Arizona fans don't have to worry. Every scenario I've realistically seen always includes Arizona, it's Utah / ASU / Colorado that are on the chopping block.

Arizona fans who want them to move do have to worry. The door is open for them in B12, but that doesn't mean the President will walk through it.

(02-10-2023 09:44 AM)CYOWA Wrote:  I lost sleep last night trying to figure out what Yormark's strategy is. You don't pass on Oregon & Washington if they're interested- and I doubt they are.

What the hell is this obsession with Gonzaga? Perhaps Brett believes we should play to our strength which is basketball? I guess you could expand further with football-only schools like the military academies.

Air Force - football only
Navy - football only
Army - football only
[Memphis - all sports]
Gonzaga - Olympic sports (no football)
Villanova - Olympic sports (no football)
UConn - Olympic sports (football independent)

That's a helluva basketball league. The football additions aren't that sexy, but the Army-Navy game would be a ratings monster.

If you're trying to raid the Pac 12, I think the coastal schools (Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford) would straight up refuse an invite. San Diego State is still alluring just to get into California then. Hell- even Fresno State if nothing else. Do you take both Arizona schools? Does Prime really put Colorado back on the map? Do we want another Utah school?

To get to 16 teams my vote is just two teams from the PAC (Arizona and ASU), San Diego State (for southern California market) and Memphis to provide good football and basketball also to give the east side of the conference a boost. Net, Big 12 in all four time zones, third best football conference and number one basketball conference.
This provides for a 3 - 6 scheduling model in football.

(02-17-2023 07:11 PM)Huan Wrote:  You have been through 2 difficult divorces and folks are thinking something might be wrong with you. Let’s enter another relationship that you expect will also end in a divorce?
Wouldn’t it be better to break the pattern?

After 2 divorces, you expect all relationships to end in divorce.