Most comprehensive article I’ve seen on the topic.
Surprised about Kliavkoff’s secret deal with the California Board of Regents:
Quote:So, the regents gave Kliavkoff a magic number. If he could guarantee the Bruins $52 million annually during the five years of the league’s next media deal, the regents promised Kliavkoff a vote heavily in favor of UCLA staying in the Pac-12.
I find this quote amusing, considering it's exactly what wound up happening,
Quote:When Kliavkoff presented the idea to the Pac-12 board, Oregon interim president Patrick Phillips vehemently shut it down. He said he would not have the Ducks in a conference where they have to take less money than UCLA, and any conversation about the possibility quickly died.
(08-16-2023 02:38 PM)Toodles1980 Wrote: [ -> ]I find this quote amusing, considering it's exactly what wound up happening, Quote:When Kliavkoff presented the idea to the Pac-12 board, Oregon interim president Patrick Phillips vehemently shut it down. He said he would not have the Ducks in a conference where they have to take less money than UCLA, and any conversation about the possibility quickly died.
That would have literally seen UCLA at $52million versus everyone else at $27million with that ESPN deal.
(08-16-2023 02:48 PM)UofMstateU Wrote: [ -> ] (08-16-2023 02:38 PM)Toodles1980 Wrote: [ -> ]I find this quote amusing, considering it's exactly what wound up happening, Quote:When Kliavkoff presented the idea to the Pac-12 board, Oregon interim president Patrick Phillips vehemently shut it down. He said he would not have the Ducks in a conference where they have to take less money than UCLA, and any conversation about the possibility quickly died.
That would have literally seen UCLA at $52million versus everyone else at $27million with that ESPN deal.
That's crazy that the UCLA Sweetheart Deal had more guaranteed money than the Apple Streaming Deal.
Mystery President sounds like Kirk Schultz to me.
fascinating and a lot of new info I have not seen before.
(08-16-2023 03:14 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote: [ -> ]
Mystery President sounds like Kirk Schultz to me.
dayam
(08-16-2023 03:14 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote: [ -> ]
Mystery President sounds like Kirk Schultz to me.
Breaking News: It was an art history professor.
Well, with the way the PAC has handled re-alignment it really wouldn't shock me.
(08-16-2023 03:14 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote: [ -> ]
Mystery President sounds like Kirk Schultz to me.
Doubt it.
The UC regents have a number of Cal and Stanford alums. CA Dem politics is run by the Bay Area elite. This whole thing smells of a Cal/Stanford deal. I would guess it’s either the Cal or Stanford President. They have a history of using political power to gain or maintain advantages. Witness the inability of the Cal States and Valley Representatives to gain the ability to offer Doctoral Degrees for applied sciences courtesy of the Bay Area power elite.
So was the $30M offer in Oct-2022 for the 10 schools still in the PAC at the time, or did it include UCLA and/or USC returning to the PAC?
If the offer was for a PAC-12 that included the return of UCLA and/or USC, then it's a little more understandable why the mystery president thought $50M was reasonable.
(08-16-2023 03:55 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]So was the $30M offer in Oct-2022 for the 10 schools still in the PAC at the time, or did it include UCLA and/or USC returning to the PAC?
If the offer was for a PAC-12 that included the return of UCLA and/or USC, then it's a little more understandable why the mystery president thought $50M was reasonable.
I dont know about that----but it does explain why the Pac12 presidents seemed so confident they could get very close to (or exceed) the Big12 deal when the negotiations reached a conclusion. They did not realize the landscape shifted when the Big12 more or less took the deal they rejected.
(08-16-2023 03:53 PM)Sactowndog Wrote: [ -> ] (08-16-2023 03:14 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote: [ -> ]
Mystery President sounds like Kirk Schultz to me.
Doubt it.
The UC regents have a number of Cal and Stanford alums. CA Dem politics is run by the Bay Area elite. This whole thing smells of a Cal/Stanford deal. I would guess it’s either the Cal or Stanford President. They have a history of using political power to gain or maintain advantages. Witness the inability of the Cal States and Valley Representatives to gain the ability to offer Doctoral Degrees for applied sciences courtesy of the Bay Area power elite.
Talking about the President who took the advice from a single professor instead of the Media Consulting firm.
The UC Regents thing is a complete different storyline. Total waste of time, in my opinion. That saga didn't end till December. So for half the year GK wasted time trying to bring back UCLA.
California. I don't know what's in the air out there, but I sure hope it never makes it to Ohio.
(08-16-2023 03:55 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]So was the $30M offer in Oct-2022 for the 10 schools still in the PAC at the time, or did it include UCLA and/or USC returning to the PAC?
If the offer was for a PAC-12 that included the return of UCLA and/or USC, then it's a little more understandable why the mystery president thought $50M was reasonable.
History has proven, it was not reasonable. ESPN ended the negotiation immediately.
(08-16-2023 03:55 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]So was the $30M offer in Oct-2022 for the 10 schools still in the PAC at the time, or did it include UCLA and/or USC returning to the PAC?
If the offer was for a PAC-12 that included the return of UCLA and/or USC, then it's a little more understandable why the mystery president thought $50M was reasonable.
USC/UCLA announced their intentions to leave in July 2022
the offer was in Oct 2022 so after USC/UCLA stated they were leaving
The big 12 deal was announced on 10/30/2022
(08-16-2023 02:52 PM)Huan Wrote: [ -> ]Good read
But it also reads like something Wilner would write. Has that excessive optimism and blames the presidents, not the conference office. Has not an inkling that Kliavcoff conspiring to keep UCLA from leaving was horribly wrong.
(08-16-2023 05:02 PM)Glenn360 Wrote: [ -> ] (08-16-2023 03:55 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]So was the $30M offer in Oct-2022 for the 10 schools still in the PAC at the time, or did it include UCLA and/or USC returning to the PAC?
If the offer was for a PAC-12 that included the return of UCLA and/or USC, then it's a little more understandable why the mystery president thought $50M was reasonable.
USC/UCLA announced their intentions to leave in July 2022
the offer was in Oct 2022 so after USC/UCLA stated they were leaving
The big 12 deal was announced on 10/30/2022
The Pac exclusive negotiating period ended October 7, 2022. The Big 12 started negotiating early in August 2022.
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/stor...ision-deal
(08-16-2023 03:53 PM)Sactowndog Wrote: [ -> ] (08-16-2023 03:14 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote: [ -> ]
Mystery President sounds like Kirk Schultz to me.
Doubt it.
The UC regents have a number of Cal and Stanford alums. CA Dem politics is run by the Bay Area elite. This whole thing smells of a Cal/Stanford deal. I would guess it’s either the Cal or Stanford President. They have a history of using political power to gain or maintain advantages. Witness the inability of the Cal States and Valley Representatives to gain the ability to offer Doctoral Degrees for applied sciences courtesy of the Bay Area power elite.
It wasn't WSU, OSU, Arizona or Colorado. I suspect it wasn't Washington or Oregon or the source would have made a negative comment about it. Probably Cal, Stanford or Arizona St.
(08-16-2023 05:13 PM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ] (08-16-2023 02:52 PM)Huan Wrote: [ -> ]Good read
But it also reads like something Wilner would write. Has that excessive optimism and blames the presidents, not the conference office. Has not an inkling that Kliavcoff conspiring to keep UCLA from leaving was horribly wrong.
We may never know the whole truth but it does suggests the presidents were partly culpable.
Amusing items:
1. The professor
2. UW didn’t want 1/2 share of what UCLA was getting to save the conference but in the end accept just that and higher travel cost to help killed the conference
3. Hubris all around