Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
Author Message
Skyhawk Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,637
Joined: Nov 2021
Reputation: 550
I Root For: Big10
Location:
Post: #61
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-22-2022 02:55 PM)Poster Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 12:47 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 12:29 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 11:46 AM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 11:18 AM)YNot Wrote:  The B1G doesn't need a path; the western schools need more regional games. Kansas and Colorado would not really help USC and UCLA - although they would be great fits for Nebraska.

The best teams to add for USC and UCLA geography are Stanford, Cal, and Arizona State.

The path could be helpful, I think, though I agree with you - not mandatory.

but I agree on the other two counts. I think both Nebraska and the SoCal schools need more regional schools.

And so:

"Adding Kansas, Colorado, Arizona state, and Stanford [...] adds regional schools" for both.

Why does Nebraska need more regional schools? And Colorado is no more "regional" for them than Illinois is.

2 former B8 members. I'm starting to think that maybe it wasn't a good idea for Nebraska to leave all its long time rivals behind.

If you look at realignment now, everyone seems to be bringing a friend along. schools are being added in regional pairs.

But Nebraska and Penn state were added on the edge of the conference.

They helped out Penn state a bit by adding Rutgers and Maryland.

I think they should help out Nebraska the same way.

And I think of the potential choices, IA state is no longer AAU, and Missouri joined SEC. That leaves Kansas and Colorado, and both of which meet typical B10 criteria.

And still leaves room to add 2 for the SoCal schools.


According to Barry Alvarez, Rutgers and Maryland were added in part to prevent Penn State from possibly joining the ACC. (Back when the ACC/Big 10 money disparity was smaller than it is now.)

Unless USC starts claiming they’ll join the SEC if other PAC teams aren’t added, that isn’t completely comparable to the current situation.

the point wasn't the "threat", it was the reasons why.

being on the edge of a conference without local support of some kind, really is starting to appear to not be an enviable position.

Compare this to Missouri - also an outlier - but who at least has tamu. Adding Kansas to the SEC would likely be a boon for them. (a former B8 member, as opposed to just former swc members).

A lot of these conference members had 50 years or more of associations. And while money talks these days, it is telling that lately they're joining in pairs, with a friendly face.

Paying attention to the why of what people do, is often more important than merely what they do.
09-22-2022 03:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
djsuperfly Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 882
Joined: Sep 2021
Reputation: 172
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #62
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-22-2022 12:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  3. The ACC gets proactive and takes Cincinnati, UCF, USF, & WVU and the B12 makes a serious move backed by ESPN to land Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado. And the Big takes Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford.

There are 3 ways it could happen earlier and I'm sure there are a few more scenarios which could unfold.

And why exactly would those XII teams pay an $80 million dollar exit fee to join the ACC?
09-22-2022 03:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
djsuperfly Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 882
Joined: Sep 2021
Reputation: 172
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #63
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-22-2022 01:26 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 10:28 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  There is some truth to what Kliavkoff is awkwardly arguing. Over the first decade, it’s likely that USC’s and UCLA’s overall finances will not be better in the B1G. They’ll lose some donor support; opposing team’s attendance at the LA venues will decrease; travel costs will increase and student-athletes will lose more time traveling; and costs for coaches and facilities will increase significantly. No one is arguing that Nebraska, Maryland (even with the $25M travel allowance) or Rutgers received financial windfalls from changing conferences during the past ten years. In fact, Rutgers financial situation for athletics has actually deteriorated (obviously, the pandemic aggravated the problems).

The decision to switch conferences is more about the expected future of the B1G and PAC. The potential in the B1G is huge, while uncertain in the PAC. In addition, financial decisions aren’t made strictly on a 5 or 10 year horizon.

I agree. But I do think the schools that have made the jumps bank on that “potential,” without fully grasping the fullness of realization. Rutgers is probably the best example of that so far.

Moving to the Big Ten won’t make living or operating out in LA/CA any cheaper. It will alienate some of the turnstyle fans who lose the local connection to other regional/western schools.

I think we as fans, or maybe both fans and these school leaders, project too much onto the transplant alumni who might be embedded within the respective areas. Don’t put such expectations on them. Or students who can’t identify with the opponents when they’re stuck in the worst seats of the stadium waiting for the production truck to tell the refs how to manage the game.

There’s value to the local.

Meh. 2020 showed us one thing, and I told people this even before that: Especially in the pro leagues, but even in the big time college leagues too, they could play these games every night in an empty warehouse and still make millions to billions of dollars. Butts in seats don't matter. Especially "townies."
09-22-2022 03:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Alanda Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,535
Joined: May 2019
Reputation: 484
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #64
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-22-2022 06:02 AM)ken d Wrote:  “We think the incremental money they’re going to receive from the Big Ten media rights deal will be more than 100% offset by additional expenses,” Kliavkoff said. “

I want some of what he's smoking.

If it's going to affect me like that I'll pass.
09-22-2022 06:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ColKurtz Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 429
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 67
I Root For: Virginia Tech
Location: Raleigh
Post: #65
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-22-2022 02:55 PM)Poster Wrote:  According to Barry Alvarez, Rutgers and Maryland were added in part to prevent Penn State from possibly joining the ACC. (Back when the ACC/Big 10 money disparity was smaller than it is now.)

Wat? No. If Alvarez actually said that he’s clueless. Rutgers and Maryland were added for BTN carriage fees. Rutgers alone brought in $50M for the BTN. That was a much more significant sum back then even ignoring the drop in cable subscribers. So while it was a great move at the time, I’m sure there’s some buyer’s remorse for taking Rutgers now.
09-22-2022 06:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ColumbusCard Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 270
Joined: Oct 2018
Reputation: 21
I Root For: U of L
Location:
Post: #66
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-22-2022 09:42 AM)Poster Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 09:30 AM)YNot Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 09:08 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 09:01 AM)YNot Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 08:57 AM)ken d Wrote:  The more I think about this the more questions I have. IMO, Kliavkoff is a smart guy. Maybe he knows something the rest of us don't.

Has anybody - the Big Ten, UCLA or USC - said that USCLA will enter the Big Ten with full revenue shares? If not, maybe his statement isn't as ridiculous as it sounds for some interim period or even for the length of the recently announced media deal.

Which raises another question for me. Is it possible that USC is getting a better initial deal from the Big Ten than UCLA is? Kliavkoff didn't say that [b]their/b] increased costs will offset their revenue gain - only that UCLA's will. What are the implications of these questions for UW, Oregon, Stanford, and Cal when they decide what they will do?

USC and UCLA will get full revenue shares upon Big Ten entry:

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/en...2022/07/12

If that's true, then his statement does seem pretty ridiculous. What are we missing?

I don't doubt that UCLA will spend more on coaching and in the AD. We will see whether those increased costs lead to improvements in the football program.

Of course, Kliavkoff is spinning his best sales pitch to the California Board of Regents and the Stanford, Oregon, and Washington administrators. So, we're not going to get the other side of the coin. PAC 12 football is almost an afterthought on the national stage and plays a bunch of games after the East Coast is in bed...the Big Ten just signed a huge media deal with key players with showcase channels and times.

UCLA also has serious ticket sales and attendance issues...for which the Big Ten provides a real-world solution - Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska, and Wisconsin fans are going to buy a lot more visiting-fan tickets than Stanford, Arizona State, Oregon, and Washington fans. I also believe that locals will be more interested in the UCLA-Big Ten games...not hard to see improvement.


No fan of a Midwestern team is going to travel to Los Angeles, California to watch their team play a regular season away game. UCLA is actually going to get less visiting fans in the Big 10 than they did in the PAC.

UCLA's hope is that the loss of visiting fans is more than compensated for by a greater number of UCLA fans attending the games. Well, actually, their belief is that even if their attendance doesn't increase (and might even slightly decrease), they don't care as long as they get more TV money.

Lol. No they wont
09-22-2022 06:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ColumbusCard Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 270
Joined: Oct 2018
Reputation: 21
I Root For: U of L
Location:
Post: #67
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-22-2022 11:09 AM)johnintx Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 10:44 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 09:42 AM)Poster Wrote:  No fan of a Midwestern team is going to travel to Los Angeles, California to watch their team play a regular season away game.

I doubt they see an increase, but this statement is entirely incorrect. Nebraska brought 10k+ to UCLA.

OU fans made up more than half of a crowd of 52,000 at UCLA in 2019. This was with UCLA giving away free tickets.
https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/201...depressing

LSU traveled very, very well to UCLA last year, making up more than half the crowd. UCLA announced a crowd of over 68,000. UCLA gave free student tickets to this game.
https://www.dailynews.com/2021/09/04/ucl...ball-game/

I doubt if UCLA will be giving away tickets to their B1G home games. But with the size of most B1G fan bases, they'll travel well to LA knowing they can get tickets easily (at least during UCLA's first rotation through the conference). And if the visitors can't easily get tickets for a regular season game in the Rose Bowl, that means UCLA is selling the tickets to their own fans.
When OSU played at California a few years back the crowd was 70 percent Buck3ye fans
09-22-2022 06:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Skyhawk Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,637
Joined: Nov 2021
Reputation: 550
I Root For: Big10
Location:
Post: #68
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-22-2022 06:34 PM)ColKurtz Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 02:55 PM)Poster Wrote:  According to Barry Alvarez, Rutgers and Maryland were added in part to prevent Penn State from possibly joining the ACC. (Back when the ACC/Big 10 money disparity was smaller than it is now.)

Wat? No. If Alvarez actually said that he’s clueless. Rutgers and Maryland were added for BTN carriage fees. Rutgers alone brought in $50M for the BTN. That was a much more significant sum back then even ignoring the drop in cable subscribers. So while it was a great move at the time, I’m sure there’s some buyer’s remorse for taking Rutgers now.

These things are rarely done for only one reason.

So for example, if the initial motivation was, as noted, to add some regional schools for Penn state, then it's a question of which ones.

And that's where things like academics, AAU status, markets, etc come into play.

As well as - what schools are feasibly "available"/ want to join?

And hello Maryland and Rutgers.

So one thing isn't necessarily wrong if other things turn out to also be correct.
09-22-2022 06:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Poster Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,084
Joined: Sep 2018
Reputation: 162
I Root For: Auburn
Location:
Post: #69
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-22-2022 06:34 PM)ColKurtz Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 02:55 PM)Poster Wrote:  According to Barry Alvarez, Rutgers and Maryland were added in part to prevent Penn State from possibly joining the ACC. (Back when the ACC/Big 10 money disparity was smaller than it is now.)

Wat? No. If Alvarez actually said that he’s clueless. Rutgers and Maryland were added for BTN carriage fees. Rutgers alone brought in $50M for the BTN. That was a much more significant sum back then even ignoring the drop in cable subscribers. So while it was a great move at the time, I’m sure there’s some buyer’s remorse for taking Rutgers now.


https://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/bs-x...story.html



I didn’t say that keeping PSU was the only reason why Rutgers and Maryland and Rutgers were invited by the Big 10. But I doubt that Barry Alvarez was lying when he said it was a reason.


I agree that with the decline of cable, Big 10 probably regrets the Maryland and Rutgers invites at this point.
(This post was last modified: 09-23-2022 01:33 PM by Poster.)
09-22-2022 09:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eichorst Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 501
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Nebraska
Location:
Post: #70
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
At this moment, I really don't think the Pac-12 is an option for UW. There's too much risk that other members will bolt for the B1G (Stanford, Oregon), Big XII (4 corners), and even the SEC (ASU + Oregon?), which would further diminish the Pac-12's value.

Depending on UW's goals, they may want to consider joining up with Stanford + Cal and joining the ACC, along with a pair of Texas schools to create a new national conference with elite academics.

In any event, I think UW should be exploring all options, and they should not be afraid to make a move before the Pac-12 is further impaired.
09-22-2022 10:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
Post: #71
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-22-2022 09:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 07:29 AM)goofus Wrote:  Interesting argument.

It's like saying don't leave your job that is paying $50k a year for a job that's paying $150k because its farther away. You will have to buy a new car because you will be driving so much more and you will be home less. And you won't save any money because you will just spend it all on a bigger house you don't need. Just keep your low paying job, keep your old car and your little house and you will be happier.

You forgot to add that your old job is with a brand lagging its competitors and may go under.

And Occam's Razor says your new company may swipe the best division of your old company and you may not have to move, and travel might be minimalized.

The simple, and obvious, answer is that the Big 10 will likely take 4 more PAC schools because USC and UCLA will not graft long term as flyovers. Market synergies between Seattle, Portland, San Francisco and Los Angeles are too strong to simply quit with L.A. and place your 2 additions at an overhead disadvantage.

If they're not careful then the CA Board of Regents will find out that none of the programs they oversee would end up in the P2 when all is said and done. They don't have as much leverage they think they have.
09-23-2022 04:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gitanole Offline
Barista
*

Posts: 5,050
Joined: May 2016
Reputation: 1170
I Root For: Florida State
Location: Speared Turf
Post: #72
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-22-2022 07:29 AM)goofus Wrote:  Interesting argument.

It's like saying don't leave your job that is paying $50k a year for a job that's paying $150k because its farther away. You will have to buy a new car because you will be driving so much more and you will be home less. And you won't save any money because you will just spend it all on a bigger house you don't need. Just keep your low paying job, keep your old car and your little house and you will be happier.

A good analogy. Of course, we have to understand that moving closer to the new office is not an option here. You've got the real estate you've got, and that's where you're planted.

The argument has its appeal, too, if all your neighbors sharing the same living standard and everyone's needs are met.
09-23-2022 04:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Poster Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,084
Joined: Sep 2018
Reputation: 162
I Root For: Auburn
Location:
Post: #73
RE: The Seattle Times (Vorel): Pac-12 or Big Ten, what's best for Washington?
(09-23-2022 04:13 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 09:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-22-2022 07:29 AM)goofus Wrote:  Interesting argument.

It's like saying don't leave your job that is paying $50k a year for a job that's paying $150k because its farther away. You will have to buy a new car because you will be driving so much more and you will be home less. And you won't save any money because you will just spend it all on a bigger house you don't need. Just keep your low paying job, keep your old car and your little house and you will be happier.

You forgot to add that your old job is with a brand lagging its competitors and may go under.

And Occam's Razor says your new company may swipe the best division of your old company and you may not have to move, and travel might be minimalized.

The simple, and obvious, answer is that the Big 10 will likely take 4 more PAC schools because USC and UCLA will not graft long term as flyovers. Market synergies between Seattle, Portland, San Francisco and Los Angeles are too strong to simply quit with L.A. and place your 2 additions at an overhead disadvantage.

If they're not careful then the CA Board of Regents will find out that none of the programs they oversee would end up in the P2 when all is said and done. They don't have as much leverage they think they have.


Like I said, I’m not sure the California Board of Regents would be doing this if they thought Cal had a shot at the PAC. It seems like UCONN might have been rejected by the ACC after Maryland’s departure in part because of their 2003 lawsuit against the ACC. This risks Cal similarly angering the Big 10.
09-23-2022 07:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.