Quote:Except that Scott isn’t paid $4.8 million per year, reportedly the highest of any conference commissioner, to win beach volleyball titles.

He’s paid to maximize broadcast revenues, which is the uncomfortable, inconvenient reality of modern collegiate sports as much as our antiquated, romantic, “Chariots of Fire” vision of amateurism wants us to believe it’s not. Even Scott identified himself as a “media executive” this week in a federal trial about whether NCAA athletes should be paid.

And he better hope the judge sides with the NCAA and doesn’t lift restrictions on payments, because the Pac-12, more than any other power conference, won’t be able to afford it.

Quote:It can be a vicious cycle, too, with the Pac-12’s national TV contracts expiring in 2024 (and negotiations likely beginning a year earlier). The worse you are in football and men’s basketball, the lower your broadcast value. And the less money you have to feed the football and men’s basketball arms race, and more resources you have to commit to non-revenue sports, the worse you get.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spor...story.html

They are dead last in revenues and face an uphill battle in keeping up with the other power 5 conferences in terms of facilities, attendance and enthusiasm for the money sports. If TV contract negotiations begin this year, I suspect the PAC will be full lots of late night time slots as well as Friday night games to maximize their payout. Balsa, well all see the bottom line for the next round of tv contracts.

(09-23-2018 10:14 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

Quote:Except that Scott isn’t paid $4.8 million per year, reportedly the highest of any conference commissioner, to win beach volleyball titles.

He’s paid to maximize broadcast revenues, which is the uncomfortable, inconvenient reality of modern collegiate sports as much as our antiquated, romantic, “Chariots of Fire” vision of amateurism wants us to believe it’s not. Even Scott identified himself as a “media executive” this week in a federal trial about whether NCAA athletes should be paid.

And he better hope the judge sides with the NCAA and doesn’t lift restrictions on payments, because the Pac-12, more than any other power conference, won’t be able to afford it.

Quote:It can be a vicious cycle, too, with the Pac-12’s national TV contracts expiring in 2024 (and negotiations likely beginning a year earlier). The worse you are in football and men’s basketball, the lower your broadcast value. And the less money you have to feed the football and men’s basketball arms race, and more resources you have to commit to non-revenue sports, the worse you get.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spor...story.html

They are dead last in revenues and face an uphill battle in keeping up with the other power 5 conferences in terms of facilities, attendance and enthusiasm for the money sports. If TV contract negotiations begin this year, I suspect the PAC will be full lots of late night time slots as well as Friday night games to maximize their payout. Balsa, well all see the bottom line for the next round of tv contracts.

The left coast is never going to acquiesce to football. It's not a progressive's sport. They'll hang onto water polo so they can admire the male physique in a speedo.

(09-23-2018 10:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-23-2018 10:14 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

Quote:Except that Scott isn’t paid $4.8 million per year, reportedly the highest of any conference commissioner, to win beach volleyball titles.

He’s paid to maximize broadcast revenues, which is the uncomfortable, inconvenient reality of modern collegiate sports as much as our antiquated, romantic, “Chariots of Fire” vision of amateurism wants us to believe it’s not. Even Scott identified himself as a “media executive” this week in a federal trial about whether NCAA athletes should be paid.

And he better hope the judge sides with the NCAA and doesn’t lift restrictions on payments, because the Pac-12, more than any other power conference, won’t be able to afford it.

Quote:It can be a vicious cycle, too, with the Pac-12’s national TV contracts expiring in 2024 (and negotiations likely beginning a year earlier). The worse you are in football and men’s basketball, the lower your broadcast value. And the less money you have to feed the football and men’s basketball arms race, and more resources you have to commit to non-revenue sports, the worse you get.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spor...story.html

They are dead last in revenues and face an uphill battle in keeping up with the other power 5 conferences in terms of facilities, attendance and enthusiasm for the money sports. If TV contract negotiations begin this year, I suspect the PAC will be full lots of late night time slots as well as Friday night games to maximize their payout. Balsa, well all see the bottom line for the next round of tv contracts.

The left coast is never going to acquiesce to football. It's not a progressive's sport. They'll hang onto water polo so they can admire the male physique in a speedo.

The northeast also supports a plethora of sports. Not as homosexually as you describe the left coast, but you are still correct in assuming these pockets of population are not quite as hardcore for college football as some of the other pockets of population in this country.

(09-24-2018 01:25 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(09-23-2018 10:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-23-2018 10:14 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

Quote:Except that Scott isn’t paid $4.8 million per year, reportedly the highest of any conference commissioner, to win beach volleyball titles.

He’s paid to maximize broadcast revenues, which is the uncomfortable, inconvenient reality of modern collegiate sports as much as our antiquated, romantic, “Chariots of Fire” vision of amateurism wants us to believe it’s not. Even Scott identified himself as a “media executive” this week in a federal trial about whether NCAA athletes should be paid.

And he better hope the judge sides with the NCAA and doesn’t lift restrictions on payments, because the Pac-12, more than any other power conference, won’t be able to afford it.

Quote:It can be a vicious cycle, too, with the Pac-12’s national TV contracts expiring in 2024 (and negotiations likely beginning a year earlier). The worse you are in football and men’s basketball, the lower your broadcast value. And the less money you have to feed the football and men’s basketball arms race, and more resources you have to commit to non-revenue sports, the worse you get.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spor...story.html

They are dead last in revenues and face an uphill battle in keeping up with the other power 5 conferences in terms of facilities, attendance and enthusiasm for the money sports. If TV contract negotiations begin this year, I suspect the PAC will be full lots of late night time slots as well as Friday night games to maximize their payout. Balsa, well all see the bottom line for the next round of tv contracts.

The left coast is never going to acquiesce to football. It's not a progressive's sport. They'll hang onto water polo so they can admire the male physique in a speedo.

The northeast also supports a plethora of sports. Not as homosexually as you describe the left coast, but you are still correct in assuming these pockets of population are not quite as hardcore for college football as some of the other pockets of population in this country.

I was being sarcastic. But yes I realize in full that football (a male combat sport) isn't as popular out there.

Don't think politics has anything to do with it. There's just so much more to do out west, particularly in California, and populations are way more transient and fanbases less entrenched.

Also, in California, all four Pac 12 schools are elite institutions with few people likely to have a direct association with. Quite a bit difference than states like South Carolina or Alabama where everyone has a dozen family members that attended one school or the other.

(09-24-2018 02:19 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Don't think politics has anything to do with it. There's just so much more to do out west, particularly in California, and populations are way more transient and fanbases less entrenched.

Also, in California, all four Pac 12 schools are elite institutions with few people likely to have a direct association with. Quite a bit difference than states like South Carolina or Alabama where everyone has a dozen family members that attended one school or the other.

In all fairness Gamecock it is very much about politics. Remember the PAC calling for a boycott of scheduling teams from states that would not back transgendered access to the opposite sex's bathrooms. That ban is still in effect.

The nonsense coming from the West is deserved, earned, and proven by actual legislation.

That aside they are culturally different with regard to their entertainment preferences. If college sports are dependent upon content value or market participation then the PAC has a major uphill climb. It is why they are likely to be the least paid moving forward (when the ACCN kicks in).

(09-24-2018 02:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-24-2018 02:19 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Don't think politics has anything to do with it. There's just so much more to do out west, particularly in California, and populations are way more transient and fanbases less entrenched.

Also, in California, all four Pac 12 schools are elite institutions with few people likely to have a direct association with. Quite a bit difference than states like South Carolina or Alabama where everyone has a dozen family members that attended one school or the other.

In all fairness Gamecock it is very much about politics. Remember the PAC calling for a boycott of scheduling teams from states that would not back transgendered access to the opposite sex's bathrooms. That ban is still in effect.

The nonsense coming from the West is deserved, earned, and proven by actual legislation.

That aside they are culturally different with regard to their entertainment preferences. If college sports are dependent upon content value or market participation then the PAC has a major uphill climb. It is why they are likely to be the least paid moving forward (when the ACCN kicks in).

JR, I have to speak up. I've lived and worked in California - the general population are NOT what you are describing here. University Presidents - SURE - but not the fans. The issue with fans is what Gamecock was saying: there's tons to do (68% of Californians live in counties that border the ocean - think about THAT!), and pretty much all of the big cities have pro teams which soak up most of the fan loyalty.

So criticize the administrations of Pac-12 schools if you wish, but please don't stereotype the fans - they're mostly ordinary joes who happen to live near the beach and with a pro team across town. No wonder they have wandering eyes for college football...

(09-25-2018 11:10 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(09-24-2018 02:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-24-2018 02:19 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Don't think politics has anything to do with it. There's just so much more to do out west, particularly in California, and populations are way more transient and fanbases less entrenched.

Also, in California, all four Pac 12 schools are elite institutions with few people likely to have a direct association with. Quite a bit difference than states like South Carolina or Alabama where everyone has a dozen family members that attended one school or the other.

In all fairness Gamecock it is very much about politics. Remember the PAC calling for a boycott of scheduling teams from states that would not back transgendered access to the opposite sex's bathrooms. That ban is still in effect.

The nonsense coming from the West is deserved, earned, and proven by actual legislation.

That aside they are culturally different with regard to their entertainment preferences. If college sports are dependent upon content value or market participation then the PAC has a major uphill climb. It is why they are likely to be the least paid moving forward (when the ACCN kicks in).

JR, I have to speak up. I've lived and worked in California - the general population are NOT what you are describing here. University Presidents - SURE - but not the fans. The issue with fans is what Gamecock was saying: there's tons to do (68% of Californians live in counties that border the ocean - think about THAT!), and pretty much all of the big cities have pro teams which soak up most of the fan loyalty.

So criticize the administrations of Pac-12 schools if you wish, but please don't stereotype the fans - they're mostly ordinary joes who happen to live near the beach and with a pro team across town. No wonder they have wandering eyes for college football...

Mark the people are who and what represents them. The State is not made up of University Presidents, yet they defy the Federal Government with sanctuary cities, their government imposes boycotts on those who believe differently than them about social issues, and those who live near the beach are paying rent well in excess of 1500 a month for the smallest of apartments so they sure as heck aren't average Joes.

Do I feel sorry for them, sure. But the ones I feel sorry for are the minority which hasn't politicized everything. But when painting with a broad brush it is more than fair to judge a people by their laws and practices. In an elected government it is fair to assume that the position of the people is reflected in how they govern.

Football in California has problems besides the plethora of natural activities that compete with it.

(09-25-2018 04:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-25-2018 11:10 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(09-24-2018 02:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-24-2018 02:19 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Don't think politics has anything to do with it. There's just so much more to do out west, particularly in California, and populations are way more transient and fanbases less entrenched.

Also, in California, all four Pac 12 schools are elite institutions with few people likely to have a direct association with. Quite a bit difference than states like South Carolina or Alabama where everyone has a dozen family members that attended one school or the other.

In all fairness Gamecock it is very much about politics. Remember the PAC calling for a boycott of scheduling teams from states that would not back transgendered access to the opposite sex's bathrooms. That ban is still in effect.

The nonsense coming from the West is deserved, earned, and proven by actual legislation.

That aside they are culturally different with regard to their entertainment preferences. If college sports are dependent upon content value or market participation then the PAC has a major uphill climb. It is why they are likely to be the least paid moving forward (when the ACCN kicks in).

JR, I have to speak up. I've lived and worked in California - the general population are NOT what you are describing here. University Presidents - SURE - but not the fans. The issue with fans is what Gamecock was saying: there's tons to do (68% of Californians live in counties that border the ocean - think about THAT!), and pretty much all of the big cities have pro teams which soak up most of the fan loyalty.

So criticize the administrations of Pac-12 schools if you wish, but please don't stereotype the fans - they're mostly ordinary joes who happen to live near the beach and with a pro team across town. No wonder they have wandering eyes for college football...

Mark the people are who and what represents them. The State is not made up of University Presidents, yet they defy the Federal Government with sanctuary cities, their government imposes boycotts on those who believe differently than them about social issues, and those who live near the beach are paying rent well in excess of 1500 a month for the smallest of apartments so they sure as heck aren't average Joes.

Do I feel sorry for them, sure. But the ones I feel sorry for are the minority which hasn't politicized everything. But when painting with a broad brush it is more than fair to judge a people by their laws and practices. In an elected government it is fair to assume that the position of the people is reflected in how they govern.

Football in California has problems besides the plethora of natural activities that compete with it.

The NFL is finding that out too. The Rams, who have a history in LA and are most likely the most talent team in the league this season, are hitting a league medium of 69k average attendance. Meanwhile the relocated Chargers are mostly filling the 35k soccer stadium in LA with 25k of fans for their opponent. If the Chargers don’t move back to San Diego, I would hope this abandoned franchise moves to London.