Wasn’t Scheer the one who first had the numbers espn offered the Pac? Other journalists have seemed to confirm that they heard the same.

(08-04-2022 08:50 AM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 09:29 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 09:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 08:54 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  The situation remains fluid.

I've forgotten. Was that quote from the Dude of WV or Chip Brown?!

Dude in WV it seems a lot.

Reports are saying that Colorado, Arizona State and Utah wants to stay and keep the PAC 12 together, but you have Big 12 people trolling those schools trying to cause issues.

"Big 12 people", the people trolling CU are former athletes and boosters who would like to see the program be relevant again. I've said it before, in Colorado the move to the PAC by CU is largely seen as a huge failure. The glory days are long gone, and they will never come back. Most see the PAC eventually becoming a G5 league

LOL. And Glory days would appear in the Little 12?

If the Pac-10 is a G5 league, what does that make the Little 12? FCS?

(08-04-2022 08:58 AM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 08:50 AM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 09:29 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 09:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 08:54 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  The situation remains fluid.

I've forgotten. Was that quote from the Dude of WV or Chip Brown?!

Dude in WV it seems a lot.

Reports are saying that Colorado, Arizona State and Utah wants to stay and keep the PAC 12 together, but you have Big 12 people trolling those schools trying to cause issues.

"Big 12 people", the people trolling CU are former athletes and boosters who would like to see the program be relevant again. I've said it before, in Colorado the move to the PAC by CU is largely seen as a huge failure. The glory days are long gone, and they will never come back. Most see the PAC eventually becoming a G5 league

With UCLA and USC leaving, they’re almost there. And there are people out there that think adding G5 schools to the PAC will somehow make it more attractive as a power conference, as if that would attract prospective B12 schools thinking about joining the PAC.

The Little 12 that just added a bunch of G5 schools? Little 12! Now with 33% G5, 50% should be G5, and a couple of good schools.

(08-04-2022 01:17 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  Wasn’t Scheer the one who first had the numbers espn offered the Pac? Other journalists have seemed to confirm that they heard the same.

Scheer gets fed whatever information the UA AD wants to get out. The numbers were ESPN's exclusive rights opening bid, which was always going to be low.

(08-04-2022 01:24 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:17 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  Wasn’t Scheer the one who first had the numbers espn offered the Pac? Other journalists have seemed to confirm that they heard the same.

Scheer gets fed whatever information the UA AD wants to get out. The numbers were ESPN's exclusive rights opening bid, which was always going to be low.

So what? Was his info accurate or not?

(08-04-2022 01:26 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:24 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:17 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  Wasn’t Scheer the one who first had the numbers espn offered the Pac? Other journalists have seemed to confirm that they heard the same.

Scheer gets fed whatever information the UA AD wants to get out. The numbers were ESPN's exclusive rights opening bid, which was always going to be low.

So what? Was his info accurate or not?

UA got the information the same time as all other Pac 10 schools. Scheer was fed the information. Was it accurate? Yes. Could other AD's have fed a favored buddy to "Break the Story"? Sure. Does it make him reliable on anything else?

Nope. He is reporting what UA wants him to report. So not a journalist, but basically a PR guy for UA.

(08-04-2022 01:33 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:26 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:24 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:17 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  Wasn’t Scheer the one who first had the numbers espn offered the Pac? Other journalists have seemed to confirm that they heard the same.

Scheer gets fed whatever information the UA AD wants to get out. The numbers were ESPN's exclusive rights opening bid, which was always going to be low.

So what? Was his info accurate or not?

UA got the information the same time as all other Pac 10 schools. Scheer was fed the information. Was it accurate? Yes. Could other AD's have fed a favored buddy to "Break the Story"? Sure. Does it make him reliable on anything else?

Nope. He is reporting what UA wants him to report. So not a journalist, but basically a PR guy for UA.

I’m glad we agree that he seemingly had accurate info

(08-04-2022 01:33 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:26 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:24 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:17 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  Wasn’t Scheer the one who first had the numbers espn offered the Pac? Other journalists have seemed to confirm that they heard the same.

Scheer gets fed whatever information the UA AD wants to get out. The numbers were ESPN's exclusive rights opening bid, which was always going to be low.

So what? Was his info accurate or not?

UA got the information the same time as all other Pac 10 schools. Scheer was fed the information. Was it accurate? Yes. Could other AD's have fed a favored buddy to "Break the Story"? Sure. Does it make him reliable on anything else?

Nope. He is reporting what UA wants him to report. So not a journalist, but basically a PR guy for UA.

in debate this is considered ad hominem, attacking the messenger rather than the message

"Journalist
A journalist is an individual that collects/gathers information in form of text, audio or pictures, processes them to a news-worthy form and disseminates it to the public. "

the assumption made is that he was fed the information to propagate rather than he sought the information himself.

(08-04-2022 01:07 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  First, (Canzano) is one of the top sports journalists in the country. He is a 12-time Associated Press Sports Editors (APSE) award winner. He's won APSE awards in four different writing categories (column, investigative reporting, enterprise and projects). Secondly, if you want to believe that it is a "propaganda piece" then you are not going to believe anything he says. He was at the Pac-12 Media Day last Friday and had multiple interviews with Pac-12 officials on the record, including Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff.

Canzano could've been roasting marshmallows with Kliavkoff in Montana when the bombshell dropped that UCLA and USC were leaving for a big pay raise.

Just because a source is high-ranking doesn't mean he or she knows (or will reveal) what's going on with realignment.

(08-04-2022 02:32 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:07 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  First, (Canzano) is one of the top sports journalists in the country. He is a 12-time Associated Press Sports Editors (APSE) award winner. He's won APSE awards in four different writing categories (column, investigative reporting, enterprise and projects). Secondly, if you want to believe that it is a "propaganda piece" then you are not going to believe anything he says. He was at the Pac-12 Media Day last Friday and had multiple interviews with Pac-12 officials on the record, including Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff.

Canzano could've been roasting marshmallows with Kliavkoff in Montana when the bombshell dropped that UCLA and USC were leaving for a big pay raise.

Just because a source is high-ranking doesn't mean he or she knows (or will reveal) what's going on with realignment.

It makes it more likely. A guy who talks to Kliavkoff is more likely to have useful information than a guy who talks to the SID at Arizona. (No disrespect to the Arizona guy, he had the goods on the ESPN initial offer to the PAC).

The only people who have real information on TV contract values work for Fox, ESPN, NBC Universal Comcast, PAramount Global CBS, Amazon Video, HBO Max Turner Sports, and they don't really talk to journalists.

(08-04-2022 01:41 PM)Huan Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:33 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:26 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:24 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:17 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  Wasn’t Scheer the one who first had the numbers espn offered the Pac? Other journalists have seemed to confirm that they heard the same.

Scheer gets fed whatever information the UA AD wants to get out. The numbers were ESPN's exclusive rights opening bid, which was always going to be low.

So what? Was his info accurate or not?

UA got the information the same time as all other Pac 10 schools. Scheer was fed the information. Was it accurate? Yes. Could other AD's have fed a favored buddy to "Break the Story"? Sure. Does it make him reliable on anything else?

Nope. He is reporting what UA wants him to report. So not a journalist, but basically a PR guy for UA.

in debate this is considered ad hominem, attacking the messenger rather than the message

"Journalist
A journalist is an individual that collects/gathers information in form of text, audio or pictures, processes them to a news-worthy form and disseminates it to the public. "

the assumption made is that he was fed the information to propagate rather than he sought the information himself.

Oh, he was fed. As always with him

(08-04-2022 01:07 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  First, the guy is one of the top sports journalists in the country. He is a 12-time Associated Press Sports Editors (APSE) award winner. He's won APSE awards in four different writing categories (column, investigative reporting, enterprise and projects). Secondly, if you want to believe that it is a "propaganda piece" then you are not going to believe anything he says. He was at the Pac-12 Media Day last Friday and had multiple interviews with Pac-12 officials on the record, including Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff.

He should stick to writing his columns and stay off social media. He's getting roasted.

I really enjoyed Conzano's in-depth, multi-part series last year that revealed a bunch of the PAC 12's issues....the issues he identified show why USC and UCLA are moving to Big Ten.

(08-04-2022 02:35 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  It makes it more likely. A guy who talks to Kliavkoff is more likely to have useful information than a guy who talks to the SID at Arizona.

It would seem that way, but we're in strange times as it pertains to realignment.

It's quite possible folks in the "inner circles" at Oregon, Stanford Washington — whether the president, an AD or a megabooster — have a better sense of where their school sits with the B1G than the Pac-12 commissioner.

And there's no reason to just assume those insiders are being completely forthcoming with Kliavkoff, either. How would it even benefit them to do so when the commissioner's No. 1 concern is keeping his conference intact as opposed to looking out for the (disparate) best interests of each Pac-12 institution?

Scheer's been covering Arizona for a while. It's not out of the realm of possibility that he speaks with someone who knows what's going on — or at least as best one can at this particular juncture.

(08-04-2022 02:51 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 02:35 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  It makes it more likely. A guy who talks to Kliavkoff is more likely to have useful information than a guy who talks to the SID at Arizona.

It would seem that way, but we're in strange times as it pertains to realignment.

It's quite possible folks in the "inner circles" at Oregon, Stanford Washington — whether the president, an AD or a megabooster — have a better sense of where their school sits with the B1G than the Pac-12 commissioner.

Maybe. OR maybe those guys are prone to go rogue. Remember the BOT president at Florida State?

Quote:And there's no reason to just assume those insiders are being completely forthcoming with Kliavkoff, either. How would it even benefit them to do so when the commissioner's No. 1 concern is keeping his conference intact as opposed to looking out for the (disparate) best interests of each Pac-12 institution?

Scheer's been covering Arizona for a while. It's not out of the realm of possibility that he speaks with someone who knows what's going on — or at least as best one can at this particular juncture.

It also all depends on what you mean by "what's going on."

Nobody at Arizona (or PAC headquarters) knows what's going on with who the Big Ten might or might not invite. Arizona people would know about the status of the TV contract, which the commissioner woudl share with the schools. Arizona people would know A LOT about how likely Arizona is to jump to the Big 12. (which the PAC headquarters would not know either)

(08-04-2022 01:17 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  Wasn’t Scheer the one who first had the numbers espn offered the Pac? Other journalists have seemed to confirm that they heard the same.

Big 12 reporters confirmed it, but the PAC 12 writers had different numbers between $30 million to $35 million per school a year for Pac 12. Oregon, Washington, Utah, Arizona State and Stanford are still the hot products left in PAC 12. Big 10 only got two of the weaker schools from the PAC 12.

Scheer is the one who is the joke of a reporter spewing lies in favor of Arizona going to the Big 12. The other PAC 12 reporters from Arizona State, Colorado and Utah are basically calling Scheer full of sh*t.

(08-04-2022 02:39 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:41 PM)Huan Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:33 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:26 PM)Charlie Broadway Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:24 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Scheer gets fed whatever information the UA AD wants to get out. The numbers were ESPN's exclusive rights opening bid, which was always going to be low.

So what? Was his info accurate or not?

UA got the information the same time as all other Pac 10 schools. Scheer was fed the information. Was it accurate? Yes. Could other AD's have fed a favored buddy to "Break the Story"? Sure. Does it make him reliable on anything else?

Nope. He is reporting what UA wants him to report. So not a journalist, but basically a PR guy for UA.

in debate this is considered ad hominem, attacking the messenger rather than the message

"Journalist
A journalist is an individual that collects/gathers information in form of text, audio or pictures, processes them to a news-worthy form and disseminates it to the public. "

the assumption made is that he was fed the information to propagate rather than he sought the information himself.

Oh, he was fed. As always with him

He is fed as much as any of the PAC triplets are.

(08-04-2022 01:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 04:26 PM)ColKurtz Wrote:  “After the anxiety caused last week regarding further Big Ten expansion, industry sources have indicated the Big Ten is no longer as interested in adding California, Oregon, Stanford and Washington. Rightsholders were balking at paying the same amount for those schools as the 16 Big Ten schools going forward ($80 million-$100 million).”

"No one has ever gone in and gutted a conference," Benson added [OP note: I guess he doesn’t remember the Big East] "If the Big Ten gutted a conference and took Washington and Oregon, if I was Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff, I might pursue antitrust action there."

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...oned-well/

There's a better article out there which aptly points out that the liability would be in collusion, not antitrust. If the B1G moved in concert with 4 more PAC schools it could look like the 5 entities conspired to end the PAC. So they'll back off, let things simmer down, and move piecemeal.

Good point JRsec. I also think the slow roll could be a tip of the cap to Notre Dame. Had the BIG grabbed 6-7 PAC schools at once, ND would have been under a lot of scrutiny to act quickly. They now have the time they deserve to decide what to do without it seeming like they were forced into anything. If we should have learned anything it is that Notre Dame will not be forced into a conference. Maybe this is the BIG’s way of giving ND some cover while negotiations continue.

BTW…I am not convinced Notre Dame gives up independence. I’m simply stating the BIG may be courting with this approach…

(08-04-2022 04:32 PM)NotoriousOne Wrote:  I am not convinced Notre Dame gives up independence.

Are you convinced Notre Dame keeps independence (like many here seem to be)?

(08-04-2022 04:32 PM)NotoriousOne Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 01:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 04:26 PM)ColKurtz Wrote:  “After the anxiety caused last week regarding further Big Ten expansion, industry sources have indicated the Big Ten is no longer as interested in adding California, Oregon, Stanford and Washington. Rightsholders were balking at paying the same amount for those schools as the 16 Big Ten schools going forward ($80 million-$100 million).”

"No one has ever gone in and gutted a conference," Benson added [OP note: I guess he doesn’t remember the Big East] "If the Big Ten gutted a conference and took Washington and Oregon, if I was Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff, I might pursue antitrust action there."

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...oned-well/

There's a better article out there which aptly points out that the liability would be in collusion, not antitrust. If the B1G moved in concert with 4 more PAC schools it could look like the 5 entities conspired to end the PAC. So they'll back off, let things simmer down, and move piecemeal.

Good point JRsec. I also think the slow roll could be a tip of the cap to Notre Dame. Had the BIG grabbed 6-7 PAC schools at once, ND would have been under a lot of scrutiny to act quickly. They now have the time they deserve to decide what to do without it seeming like they were forced into anything. If we should have learned anything it is that Notre Dame will not be forced into a conference. Maybe this is the BIG’s way of giving ND some cover while negotiations continue.

BTW…I am not convinced Notre Dame gives up independence. I’m simply stating the BIG may be courting with this approach…

That's possible. What if Notre Dame is simply waiting on the ACC's disposition to be determined? Then if something happens which permits movement they are out for free. Money is money. And should N.D. shake loose, they could join the Big 10 or do something which fans don't anticipate at all, like become a partial in both the SEC and B1G, keep a form of independence and draw half a check from each and use whichever at large slot to the playoffs is available splitting the shares with the conference whose slot was utilized. This would make the upper tier breakaway a 49 member organization.

As to Stanford, Oregon, Washington and California, 1 year of waiting means no contract, no GOR, no exit fees, and no risk.

(08-04-2022 01:20 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(08-04-2022 08:50 AM)jacksfan29! Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 09:29 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 09:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-03-2022 08:54 PM)Big Frog II Wrote:  The situation remains fluid.

I've forgotten. Was that quote from the Dude of WV or Chip Brown?!

Dude in WV it seems a lot.

Reports are saying that Colorado, Arizona State and Utah wants to stay and keep the PAC 12 together, but you have Big 12 people trolling those schools trying to cause issues.

"Big 12 people", the people trolling CU are former athletes and boosters who would like to see the program be relevant again. I've said it before, in Colorado the move to the PAC by CU is largely seen as a huge failure. The glory days are long gone, and they will never come back. Most see the PAC eventually becoming a G5 league

LOL. And Glory days would appear in the Little 12?

If the Pac-10 is a G5 league, what does that make the Little 12? FCS?

"Most see the PAC eventually becoming a G5 league"... Must not teach reading comprehension at Northern Arizona.

If WA, Oregon and Stanford, or two of the three get poached, yes, it becomes MWC west. And yes, much of the pressure being put on CU from inside the state, is coming from those who want CU to get out of the PAC before it CU is on the same level as CSU.