(11-17-2022 12:38 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The real question is: why didn't happen in Oklahoma or California before now? Did Oklahoma State and Cal really think it was impossible they could be left behind?

For the future: will this policy also be enacted in North Carolina, Virginia, and Arizona?

At the end of the day, Oklahoma State will be "fine" in the Big XII — and likely at times will win more games than Oklahoma in the dog-eat-dog SEC.

Same goes for Iowa State in the Big XII versus Iowa in the B1G.

Schools in Conference #3 will make enough money to have viable and competitive programs at the Division I-A level.

(11-17-2022 12:38 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The real question is: why didn't happen in Oklahoma or California before now? Did Oklahoma State and Cal really think it was impossible they could be left behind?

For the future: will this policy also be enacted in North Carolina, Virginia, and Arizona?

Because it's not wise to tether your strongest program to weaker programs. Very few programs are strong enough they can bring a "little brother" who doesn't actually provide anything extra. If OU couldn't go because of OSU, Texas would've still left and OU ends up in what's still a "middle 3" type of conference.

Rough news for Kansas… would’ve liked to see them in the B1G

(11-17-2022 11:54 AM)XLance Wrote:  It appears that the politicians have taken realignment out of the hands of administrators in Kansas.

Not necessarily. It could play either way. The politicians may shield Kansas's administration by approving a single move of the Jayhawks. Or they could tie the two together. In the end the state will do whatever gains their schools the most funding be that together or separate.

If anything, this clears conferences of liability in discussing moves with Kansas or Kansas State, in light of what is transpiring with U.C.L.A. Now the Kansas president can notify the regents and discuss openly their options with other conferences as the old Big 12 GOR grinds to its end.

The board is erroneously assuming that this means the two will be tied. It doesn't. It simply means the state wishes to remain apprised so that there are no surprises which blindside the politicians.

(11-17-2022 07:29 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  Guarantees both get left behind.

Nah, the Big 12 is in great shape they'll be fine. Kansas knows that the B1G is calling.

(11-17-2022 09:24 AM)otown Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 09:05 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 06:47 AM)TerpsNPhoenix Wrote:  TLDR: Kansas universities must get approval to talk to another conference and also change conference.

"Members of the Kansas Board of Regents on Wednesday unanimously approved a policy that will require any Regents university — KU, K-State...to get approvals from at least three non-university officials before moving to a new athletic conference."
....

Interesting. The odds of Kansas moving to the SEC or B1G just went down.

The odds of Kansas and Kansas State marking the east edge of an expanding PAC just went up.

Total lunacy. Explain the financial benefit to them paying the Big 12 exit fees to move to a conference with similar or less payout with an even worse media exposure being mainly streaming on Amazon.

Sometimes I wonder if people think before they post

No, they don't.

(11-17-2022 12:44 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 12:38 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The real question is: why didn't happen in Oklahoma or California before now? Did Oklahoma State and Cal really think it was impossible they could be left behind?

For the future: will this policy also be enacted in North Carolina, Virginia, and Arizona?

At the end of the day, Oklahoma State will be "fine" in the Big XII — and likely at times will win more games than Oklahoma in the dog-eat-dog SEC.

Same goes for Iowa State in the Big XII versus Iowa in the B1G.

Schools in Conference #3 will make enough money to have viable and competitive programs at the Division I-A level.

This is a great point. For all the doom and gloom around a P2 structure, AAC success (Cincy/Houston/UCF) has shown that conference consolidation will create new success for colleges who have been blocked by traditional college powerhouse programs. There are only so many teams who can run the table enough to block these schools from a playoff system. Plus new rules (expanded playoffs, NIL, Transfer Portal) will help to spread the talent more than what has been traditionally.

Power schools will still be power schools, but a new structure is rising where new schools to a higher status and other schools to a lower.

(11-17-2022 12:38 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The real question is: why didn't happen in Oklahoma or California before now? Did Oklahoma State and Cal really think it was impossible they could be left behind?

For the future: will this policy also be enacted in North Carolina, Virginia, and Arizona?

To answer the bolded question, IMO yeah, that's basically what happened - Cal and OKST and their supporters never really thought what happened could happen.

(11-17-2022 09:17 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 09:06 AM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  Status Quo then.

Not necessarily. Both could join a rebuilding and expanding PAC.

The conference has a history of 2-by-2 membership. Given the travel distances out west, that approach has a lot to recommend it.

The PAC would prefer to expand, if it chooses to, with public schools. The fact that the Sunflower State pair are resistant to being P2 raid bait would be a plus.

nobody is leaving the big 12 for the Pac. Maybe they could join an expanding ACC in 2036 though.

(11-17-2022 01:40 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 11:54 AM)XLance Wrote:  It appears that the politicians have taken realignment out of the hands of administrators in Kansas.

Not necessarily. It could play either way. The politicians may shield Kansas's administration by approving a single move of the Jayhawks. Or they could tie the two together. In the end the state will do whatever gains their schools the most funding be that together or separate.

If anything, this clears conferences of liability in discussing moves with Kansas or Kansas State, in light of what is transpiring with U.C.L.A. Now the Kansas president can notify the regents and discuss openly their options with other conferences as the old Big 12 GOR grinds to its end.

The board is erroneously assuming that this means the two will be tied. It doesn't. It simply means the state wishes to remain apprised so that there are no surprises which blindside the politicians.

Exactly, it's just politicians ensuring they will have the power to decide if and when the time comes. After all the hue & cry over conference realignment over the years, I'm surprised this hasn't happened in more states sooner.

(11-17-2022 10:07 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 09:24 AM)otown Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 09:05 AM)Gitanole Wrote:  Interesting. The odds of Kansas moving to the SEC or B1G just went down.

The odds of Kansas and Kansas State marking the east edge of an expanding PAC just went up.

Total lunacy. Explain the financial benefit to them paying the Big 12 exit fees to move to a conference with similar or less payout with an even worse media exposure being mainly streaming on Amazon.

Mind manners.

First, your reaction confuses 'odds just went up' with 'odds just went 100% slam-dunk certain' or 'odds just went over 50%.' That's a very message-board-partisan assumption to make but it's not what you read. I'm just noting where odds went up and went down relative to each other on the bar chart.

We have yet to see how many PAC questions resolve. We know surviving PAC schools prefer to remain together rather than join the B12. We know the Pacific coast, even without LA, claims appealing media markets. As of now the PAC retains Stanford and Washington, which (sorry) turn the heads of university presidents a lot more than Baylor.

At the time of this writing, we are still waiting to learn the outcome of UCLA's meeting with the California Board of Regents. Even if UCLA ends up leaving, what does it agree to in that meeting? Are any discussions also taking place with the ACC about providing content for its network? Is the B1G staying put or talking to the 2-4 schools it may still want?

We do know the B12 held serve in its own media deal but didn't achieve anything awesome. Most of the figures we see online are padded with the anticipated CFP money that other leagues also get. We know no B12 school has signed a grant of rights yet. We know the B12 is a league that hemorrhaged teams over the years even when it had the University of Texas going for it.

If you ask the B12 where they stand right now, they tell you their BO smells like fields of jasmine because they always say that. In reality, the outcome of a number of PAC questions will answer a lot of questions about the B12, too.

Quote:Sometimes I wonder if people think before they post

What a coincidence. I sometimes wonder if they read first.

Or FSU for that matter.

Looking at the situation on the ground as it sits on right now, there is overwhelming evidence that the Pac is at risk while the big 12 is not. I can list the reasons if you want, though we both know them very well. Is the situation likely to change in the coming months/years? Undoubtedly, though it's unclear if the situation gets better or worse for the Pac, short/medium/long term all are in doubt.

Having said that, what's the best case for the Pac? A media rights deal $3m more per school over what the big 12 has signed, a 10 year GoR signed by all members + 2 years distribution exit fees puts them basically on par with the big 12 after NCAAT units are factored in, but all that does is enforce a big 12/Pac stalemate as nobody from either conference would want to pay $100m++ to make a lateral move to a similar conference with much worse travel. And the Pac would still be vulnerable to future raids by the B1G, depending upon what they get from the ACC in 2036.

I'd like to hear your theoretical situation in which anybody from the big 12 would even briefly consider a Pac move.

(11-17-2022 11:29 AM)Just Joe Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 10:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Good for Kansas State, bad for Kansas.

It's also foolhardy by the administrators. In the (admittedly unlikely, but far from impossible) scenario that Kansas's geography, AAU status, top flight basketball program, and suddenly respectable football program gets them an invite to the P2 these administrators will have a no-win decision to make, to either hold KU back or to let them leave KSU behind, because there's zero chance of KSU getting a ticket with them. For all the bluster and dog and pony show happening in California right now, it's a much easier PR spin to let the two schools fend for themselves leaving no blood on anyone's hands on the Board of Regents. If Kansas leaves, you have a few legislative hearings where you "ask hard questions and demand answers" like Texas held last year after UT to the SEC was announced to make KSU feel represented and then the matter goes away.

You could convincingly argue that either KU or KSU leaving the big 12 would have a very small impact on revenues to the left behind school, my guess would be about $1m per year. So if a the BoR is given a choice between, say:

KU: $105m per year
KSU: 64m

or

KU: 65m
KSU: 65m

That seems like a pretty easy decision to make. The California situation is somewhat messier b/c Cal could be losing $5-10m per year with the loss of not only UCLA but all of SoCal. The texas situation last year was much worse, people were expecting that to cost the left-behind schools $30m per year, though that situation was alleviated somewhat by the fact that 2/3 of the complaining schools were privates and A&M had already left a decade earlier (and texas was just following Big Brother to the SEC anyway).

This is bad for the Jayhawks. It definitely makes it harder for them to jump quickly on an offer if one ever comes. Anyone who is remotely interested in adding Kansas is now going to have their expansion moves leaked, delayed, and publicly scrutinized by Sunflower State bureaucrats and politicians.

(11-17-2022 11:46 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 11:22 AM)utpotts Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 10:04 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Kansas' odds of a B1G invite were already very low.

They never existed, except for people on this board.

Yep. It's like the one guy who lives in an alternate reality and posts 800+ times how Kansas and Arizona St are going to the B1G. Some people believe if you repeat yourself 800+ times, you will it into reality.

I'm really bullish on ASU. I don't know that they'll ever get into the P2 b/c of their geography, but if they were closer to the B1G and/or SEC footprints then they would be getting a whole lot of interest right now. My gut tells me they'll be a Cornerstone for the Pac or big 12 long term and miss out on the P2, but there's at least as good of a chance for them as there is for Cal of making the B1G. KU is more "if basketball takes off and really becomes a huge money maker closer to par with football they'll attract interest". Which is not nothing, but it's also still theoretical at this point.

(11-17-2022 12:38 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The real question is: why didn't happen in Oklahoma or California before now? Did Oklahoma State and Cal really think it was impossible they could be left behind?

For the future: will this policy also be enacted in North Carolina, Virginia, and Arizona?

Before OUT left the big 12, this hadn't happened before. When Nebraska left, there was nobody else in their state. Ditto CU and Mizzou. A&M left but it took us 20+ years to escape, and even then the left-behinds still had texas to carry them. OU was blocked several times b/c they would not/could not consider leaving without bring OSU with them.

Now that schools have seen what the disaster looked like at the left-behinds in the big 12 (which they did end up salvaging impressively), and what it still potentially looks like for the Pac, it's not surprising that actual legislation has been passed.

I think Oklahoma should move that Okie State have to go to SEC conference or no move. I think all 50 states should do that to stop having schools jumping conferences where they do not fit.

(11-17-2022 04:16 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  This is bad for the Jayhawks. It definitely makes it harder for them to jump quickly on an offer if one ever comes. Anyone who is remotely interested in adding Kansas is now going to have their expansion moves leaked, delayed, and publicly scrutinized by Sunflower State bureaucrats and politicians.

To be fair, it should be like that. More transparent. What happened at Maryland, Texas, Oklahoma, and UCLA? It was wrong. And the schools knew that.

(11-17-2022 09:25 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If the SEC goes to 24, that's great news for the ACC's southern flank. 8 teams is enough to bring everybody over and leave nobody.

Miami, Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Virginia Tech, Virginia (or Duke if UVA goes B1G)

It won't happen, but if you could wave a magic wand a deposit Missouri where ever Kansas is, the SEC could get literally the entire ACC 9 of the 90's, swapping VT for WF.

Yeah. The impact on potential SEC expansion is the first thing that came to me as well. Though I would be surprised if Kansas didn't get those approvals if they got an invite to the SEC and KSU didn't. Feels like they just want to be able to act like they had some level of authority in the decision.

(11-17-2022 03:16 PM)CatsClaw1 Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 07:29 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  Guarantees both get left behind.

Nah, the Big 12 is in great shape they'll be fine. Kansas knows that the B1G is calling.

Not a chance. There was some reason for the BIG to take Kansas before, basketball, an AAU, history/rivalry with Nebraska and possibly a bridge to Colorado and the rest of the Pac. But there is noway those are worth having to take KSt as well. Cincy will be playing both for many years to come.

(11-17-2022 03:53 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2022 12:38 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  The real question is: why didn't happen in Oklahoma or California before now? Did Oklahoma State and Cal really think it was impossible they could be left behind?

For the future: will this policy also be enacted in North Carolina, Virginia, and Arizona?

To answer the bolded question, IMO yeah, that's basically what happened - Cal and OKST and their supporters never really thought what happened could happen.

OSU knew and successfully blocked it for a decade at least.