(01-22-2023 02:27 PM)Stugray2 Wrote: While Washington (especially) and Oregon were passed over by the Big Ten this round, they are cusp brands, more or less equal with the top five ACC options. In the long run, much like the Big Ten felt they needed Maryland and Rutgers to anchor Penn State, they will soon feel the same about USC and UCLA. And these Pacific northwest schools are far better options than those taken to support Penn State.
I for one do not think all of the top ACC choices will be on the board for the Big Ten, as the SEC and ESPN will have a say. As the ending of ACC GoR nears, much like they no doubt did with Texas (and thus Oklahoma) ESPN will be greasing the skids for a slide over by at least two of those five top ACC schools, no doubt targeting North Carolina (internal bias is strongly SEC anyway) and Florida State most. Clemson and Miami are definitely more a consolation prize than a goal for the B1G, while Duke, Georgia Tech and Virginia are boutique options akin to Cal and Stanford, not programming options that bring you anything. That alone is going to force the B1G to look west again. (Note, I can see the B1G taking Miami and Notre Dame, passing on Clemson, Duke et al).
Given both these issues, I think UW and Oregon have good reason to think they will eventually land in the Big Ten. It might take ten years but they will be there. I also think it's also unrealistic to think Cal, Stanford, UW and Oregon would not be invited to the Big 12 if they were available and the Pac-12 started to collapse. Their media providers would certainly make that work.
You can scold Washington and Oregon for arrogance, but in no way will they be left behind in a diminished Pac-12., and they know it.
As for adding schools, in my opinion this cannot happen until the ten schools remaining are in agreement on the media deal and settle in for awhile as the ten, committed to the approach. Very likely expansion will be visited, but I cannot see that happening for a couple years. If done to soon it will unravel and fracture the conference. Unlike the remaining eight of the Big 12 which quickly had a consensus from prior looks into expansion as to what to do, there is no such consensus in the Pac-12.
And let's be realistic; San Diego State, SMU and Fresno State will still be available in two years and even five years. Honestly the gap between what SDSU brings and the others is so great that expansion is far from certain, since they need a 12th. There is no reason, nor consensus to rush.
Stu, I appreciate the logic you put into this and largely agree with the options. But you need to consider what the actual obstacle is to completing realignment for the Big 10 and SEC. They both have 2 schools left which add to their stature and revenue. In spite of board wisdom most numbers say Washington and Oregon add to the Big 10, not much but add. The 2 increase market reach significantly and tie the West significantly to the Big 10. The issue is that nobody can conceive of truly creating a business and market synergy out West without California and Stanford.
Oregon State and Washington State have history but don't fit the Big 10 profile. Colorado, Utah, and Arizona all have the academic profile, but don't have the history with the core PAC 12 schools. What's more is that none of them are likely to be accretive to the value of the Big 10.
The SEC situation is no different. Florida State and North Carolina could be accretive. Clemson is at best a wash, but likely not accretive to the SEC's new contract. Duke, N.C. State, Virginia, and Virginia Tech all have history with North Carolina. They all fit the SEC well enough to be included, but they don't add to the bottom line.
North Carolina is not as likely to make that move if they have to leave so many of their associations behind.
My point is this. In both the SEC and B1G's case there are still a couple of schools which could make their cut, there are schools that add a great synergy if taken with the two which would add, but which are not accretive.
The answer to this dilemma is unequal revenue sharing.
I'm not talking a stark disparity, but rather an actual valuation being done on each school and then the conference compensated accordingly. As they work to reach the potential of their regional synergy with the other former mates taken, their value will rise and with it their revenue. The rest of the conference remains valued as a whole.
Do this and the Big 10 can seriously look at taking all 9 AAU schools to the West, schools with which they have more in common than perhaps anyone but Virginia in the ACC.
OU and UW would be free to move along with California, Stanford, Arizona, Colorado and Utah. Kansas makes 24 if Notre Dame doesn't do an all in.
Likewise in the SEC UNC and FSU join and now six of Virginia Clemson, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Louisville, and Georgia Tech can join without diminishing the SEC payout.
This move to unequal valuations for future members clears the path for a healthier consolidation, the maximization of market synergies, and the protection of valued associations.
Then Yormark can build his transcontinental conference as the New Big 12.
But as long as the SEC and Big 10 remained closed to adding some members at actual valuation we will remain in this stalemate.
In the interest of the game and of the protection of rivalries and associations and to get over this transition and let fans adjust, it needs to be doon sooner rather than later.
/
Realistic options for Pac-12 going forward.
