How did that statement from the UC Board of Regents last month impact the ongoing "Pac-12" media rights negotiations?
Seems to punch a hole in George Kliavkoff's proclamation that his conference's 10 remaining schools are united
I think they will be along with Oregon, Stanford, and Washington. The future PAC will be Oregon St, Washington St, and MWC schools.
I think anyone with more than half a brain cell already knows any pac school would jump at a B1G invite.
"To be honest with you, I'd love to be a billionaire, but that's not happening. Therefore I refuse to make the best of my current situation and will turn down a chance to be a millionaire until I can get the billions."
That's not how the conversation is going.
"To be honest with you, I would love for Cal in the Big Ten"
If wishes were fishes, we all could eat : )
I think the point is that TV networks, while certainly not run by idiots, might be a little more reticent to commit money to the PAC if they know there are people in very high positions actively working to get PAC members out.
They're not only making phone calls behind closed doors, they are openly admitting they don't believe in the future of the PAC. I think that's the issue that distinguishes this series of events from your run of the mill speculation about what certain schools would do if presented with an opportunity.
The PAC has a big problem and part of that issue is that Cal, a school that's not terribly attractive in all this, would rather not be in the PAC. ***Edit: Usually it's only the big money makers that are looking around.
The question then has to be asked whether the Big Ten swooping in is the only realistic variable that could sink the PAC. I'm not sure it is.
That's a good question Pete. Though it probably only did what you said in your second sentence.
(01-03-2023 08:17 PM)Skyhawk Wrote: [ -> ]"To be honest with you, I would love for Cal in the Big Ten"
If wishes were fishes, we all could eat : )
Man. My ability to misread things took this sentence in a very different direction.
(01-03-2023 08:38 PM)Alanda Wrote: [ -> ]That's a good question Pete. Though it probably only did what you said in your second sentence.
How does Cal's publicly stated preference for the B1G — and no doubt the UC BoR chair spoke with UC Berkeley's president before making that proclamation — impact negotiations with ESPN and/or Amazon?
The notion that (at the very least) Cal, Oregon and U-Dub have their sights set on leaving for the B1G can't doing anything but weaken Kliavkoff's position in negotiations
(01-03-2023 07:21 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ]How did that statement from the UC Board of Regents last month impact the ongoing "Pac-12" media rights negotiations?
Seems to punch a hole in George Kliavkoff's proclamation that his conference's 10 remaining schools are united
This is what he actually said:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...899822002/
“I would love there to be harmony amongst everybody,'' said Rich Leib, chair of the UC Regents. "To be honest with you, I would love for Cal in the Big Ten. ... But that’s not where it is right now.’’
Leib said the regents explored the possibility of the Big Ten taking Cal and adding additional Pac-12 schools -- Stanford, Washington and Oregon.
"We certainly put some pressure on to see if we could,'' he said.
"In the end, the expansion was not going to be on the table for us.’’
The Big Ten is not expanding beyond 16 at this point in time. That is what Leib found out. So, the Pac-12 can do their deal and add whatever teams they are going to add and everyone can move forward.
(01-03-2023 09:05 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-03-2023 07:21 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ]How did that statement from the UC Board of Regents last month impact the ongoing "Pac-12" media rights negotiations?
Seems to punch a hole in George Kliavkoff's proclamation that his conference's 10 remaining schools are united
This is what he actually said:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...899822002/
“I would love there to be harmony amongst everybody,'' said Rich Leib, chair of the UC Regents. "To be honest with you, I would love for Cal in the Big Ten. ... But that’s not where it is right now.’’
Leib said the regents explored the possibility of the Big Ten taking Cal and adding additional Pac-12 schools -- Stanford, Washington and Oregon.
"We certainly put some pressure on to see if we could,'' he said. "In the end, the expansion was not going to be on the table for us.’’
The Big Ten is not expanding beyond 16 at this point in time. That is what Leib found out. So, the Pac-12 can do their deal and add whatever teams they are going to add and everyone can move forward.
Wellllll - To me that sounds more like the B10 is not expanding by inviting them (Cal), or any package of schools that includes Cal...
(01-03-2023 09:05 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote: [ -> ]The Big Ten is not expanding beyond 16 at this point in time.
Curious about the expiration date for "at this point in time"
Lots of speculation here and elsewhere.
Is any of it on target??
Cal had the least muscle in all of this. They’re pretty clearly #4 on the Big 10’s wish list.
(01-03-2023 10:00 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ] (01-03-2023 09:05 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote: [ -> ]The Big Ten is not expanding beyond 16 at this point in time.
Curious about the expiration date for "at this point in time"
Lots of speculation here and elsewhere.
Is any of it on target??
Try the end of the decade. I think the Big Ten Presidents have said no on further expansion. It is clear that they want to get USC and UCLA acclimated to the Big Ten. I cannot see USC and UCLA really wanting Oregon and Washington in the Big Ten and there is not an endless supply of network revenue for additional teams.
There is always a lot of speculation out there. If the Big Ten were to add Oregon and Washington, that would hurt Cal. The UC Board of Regents have already said that they will revisit this issue in the future as needed. Oregon and Washington are always in direct competition with USC and UCLA for recruits, and neither wants to do anything that might help those two schools. I also think the Big Ten may ultimately be interested in a few ACC schools. But that is speculation.
(01-03-2023 09:05 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-03-2023 07:21 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ]How did that statement from the UC Board of Regents last month impact the ongoing "Pac-12" media rights negotiations?
Seems to punch a hole in George Kliavkoff's proclamation that his conference's 10 remaining schools are united
This is what he actually said:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...899822002/
“I would love there to be harmony amongst everybody,'' said Rich Leib, chair of the UC Regents. "To be honest with you, I would love for Cal in the Big Ten. ... But that’s not where it is right now.’’
Leib said the regents explored the possibility of the Big Ten taking Cal and adding additional Pac-12 schools -- Stanford, Washington and Oregon.
"We certainly put some pressure on to see if we could,'' he said. "In the end, the expansion was not going to be on the table for us.’’
The Big Ten is not expanding beyond 16 at this point in time. That is what Leib found out. So, the Pac-12 can do their deal and add whatever teams they are going to add and everyone can move forward.
No. Its not expanding to 20 with Cal at this point. That's all we know.
And the Pac is united. "Big 10 or bust!"
(01-03-2023 10:49 PM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ] (01-03-2023 09:05 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-03-2023 07:21 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ]How did that statement from the UC Board of Regents last month impact the ongoing "Pac-12" media rights negotiations?
Seems to punch a hole in George Kliavkoff's proclamation that his conference's 10 remaining schools are united
This is what he actually said:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/co...899822002/
“I would love there to be harmony amongst everybody,'' said Rich Leib, chair of the UC Regents. "To be honest with you, I would love for Cal in the Big Ten. ... But that’s not where it is right now.’’
Leib said the regents explored the possibility of the Big Ten taking Cal and adding additional Pac-12 schools -- Stanford, Washington and Oregon.
"We certainly put some pressure on to see if we could,'' he said. "In the end, the expansion was not going to be on the table for us.’’
The Big Ten is not expanding beyond 16 at this point in time. That is what Leib found out. So, the Pac-12 can do their deal and add whatever teams they are going to add and everyone can move forward.
No. Its not expanding to 20 with Cal at this point. That's all we know.
And the Pac is united. "Big 10 or bust!"
The Big Ten is not expanding to 18 or 20 or 22 or 24. That is what we do know. Every school in the Pac-12 would want the deal that USC and UCLA are getting, along with every school in the Big 12 and every school in the ACC.
(01-03-2023 08:50 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ]....
The notion that (at the very least) Cal, Oregon and U-Dub have their sights set on leaving for the B1G can't doing anything but weaken Kliavkoff's position in negotiations
On the contrary: In some ways the UC leak helps.
Media reps just got a timely reminder that
conference stability is something that has to be paid for. Guess who has to pay for that feature if they want it as part of the package?
A Cal wanting Northwestern money doesn't need to go anywhere if PAC membership does the job.
(01-03-2023 08:37 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]....
. ***Edit: Usually it's only the big money makers that are looking around.
....
No, usually it's
everybody looking around. When the big money makers start looking, so does everyone else.
Warren said that when UCLA and Southern Cal announced their switch, he was contacted by
every P5 school not in his league or the SEC.
Everyone looks around. No one here may be talking up Oregon State or Texas Tech or Louisville as B1G prospects, but someone at each school rang Warren's phone when the LA expansion news broke.
How was the ACC able to bulk up and partner with ND? Every football school in the Big East was looking around. The ACC was getting calls.
This recent glimpse of UC regents at work is exactly that: a glimpse of the process. For weeks, most comments on this board assumed the state governor and UC regents were determined to 'block' UCLA's move. Not so. They just wanted to take care of Cal, too.
(01-03-2023 07:21 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ]How did that statement from the UC Board of Regents last month impact the ongoing "Pac-12" media rights negotiations?
Seems to punch a hole in George Kliavkoff's proclamation that his conference's 10 remaining schools are united
The chancellor of Berkeley does not want to go to the B1G. There is no evidence that Stanford wants to go to the B1G. Both schools value their academic prowess. They have large athletics programs (Cal sponsors 30 sports, and sneered at the UCLA chancellor for only having 25).
The phrase "to be honest with you" does not mean that he was being forthright or that if he did not use the predicate that he was not being honest. He could have just as easily said, "if I had my druthers" or "if I were king".
He has a B.A. from UCSB, a M.A. from Claremont, and J.D. from Loyola Marymount.
(01-04-2023 03:26 AM)jimrtex Wrote: [ -> ] (01-03-2023 07:21 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ]How did that statement from the UC Board of Regents last month impact the ongoing "Pac-12" media rights negotiations?
Seems to punch a hole in George Kliavkoff's proclamation that his conference's 10 remaining schools are united
The chancellor of Berkeley does not want to go to the B1G. There is no evidence that Stanford wants to go to the B1G. Both schools value their academic prowess. They have large athletics programs (Cal sponsors 30 sports, and sneered at the UCLA chancellor for only having 25).
The phrase "to be honest with you" does not mean that he was being forthright or that if he did not use the predicate that he was not being honest. He could have just as easily said, "if I had my druthers" or "if I were king".
He has a B.A. from UCSB, a M.A. from Claremont, and J.D. from Loyola Marymount.
Whenever someone says "to be honest with you"...I immediately wonder if everything else they just told me was a lie. And if the subsequent statement is a lie too.
(01-03-2023 07:57 PM)ccbfan Wrote: [ -> ]I think anyone with more than half a brain cell already knows any pac school would jump at a B1G invite.
Yes.
I think these situations call for cognitive dissonance in a number of ways. For example, if you are Cal, you know you would instantly jump on a B1G invite, but as long as the invite isn't actually in your mail box, it makes sense to profess "unity" with your current conference.
It's kind of like coaches now with the transfer portal. Going in to the off-season, you have two QBs, one of whom is your clear-cut #1 guy, but you have a #2 guy who is good and is valuable as the backup. When it comes to the QB job next season, you have to dance around that - you have to say some things about "every guy will have the chance to compete" for the starting job, because you don't want the #2 guy to think he's locked out lest he dive into that portal, but you also have to say some things about the #1 guy "being our guy" so as to reassure him so he won't dive in the portal. Inevitably, you have to say more of the latter, but not so harshly that you edge the second guy over that portal edge. It's a tough line to hew.
That's CFB today, and really, it's kind of always been that way.