Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
Author Message
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,152
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2419
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #41
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-26-2024 11:08 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 08:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 06:50 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 06:31 AM)clunk Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 05:39 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Then how do you possibly math the math up to "hundreds of millions of dollars"?

“This agreement allows OSU and WSU to maintain control of , as we have always maintained they would, while calling for the vast majority of funds earned in 2023-24 to be distributed equally among the 12 members. We will take time in the coming days to work out the final details.”

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/spo...gal-battle

The NCAA Tournament credits don't get you there. $15M in 2024-25, $15M in 2025-26, another $25M after that if the PAC doesn't dissolve. About $50-60M in NCAA tournament credits.

Maybe the PAC 12 is still getting paid by the CFP like a Contract Bowl conference for the last two years of the original deal?
The compromise agreed upon Wednesday reduces disparity and allows the focus to be on per-school payouts instead of per-league payouts that then get sliced different ways based on varying membership size.
"Reduces disparity"? I'm putting a lot on choice of words here. But I think the most likely option is that the PAC 2 are splitting a CFP payment sized for a PAC-10 for the next 2 years. That $60 or $80M a year is the only way I can think of to get the PAC assets to "hundreds of millions", which I think has to be a minimum of $200M to justify saying that.

https://theathletic.com/3904973/2022/11/...rose-bowl/


Stuff I had wrong below.
****************

I'm pretty sure the CFP made compensatory payments to the P5 leagues in the years when their Contract Bowl hosted a semifinal so you wouldn't have year-to-year revenue jumps and dips.

The PAC 12 Form 990 for 2018-19 (filed June 2020), a year when the Rose Bowl as a regular Pac-12 vs Big Ten Rose Bowl shows $114M in Bowl REevenue. 2017-18, the Rose Bowl was a semfinal and the PAC 12 shows $84M.

OK there are no smoothing payments. PAC-12 doesn't get a Rose Bowl check when the Rose Bowl is a CFP semifinal / quarterfinal. So the PAC 12 isn't getting a Rose Bowl check.

Maybe the PAC 2 are still getting a PAC 12 sized CFP check for two years? I know that there was a rules change to pay larger P5 conferences more, paying by school instead of by conference. Maybe there was a floor on that?

PRe-rules changes:
For conferences that have contracts for their champions to participate in the Orange, Rose, or Sugar bowls, the base combined with the full academic performance pool was approximately $79.41 million for each conference.
https://collegefootballplayoff.com/sport...ution.aspx
The PAC previously said they were worth $50M per school, media companies don't negotiate during the holiday season, they'd agreed to a GoR, might go "shopping" in the B12, etc. Have you considered this "hundreds of millions" statement is just the latest thing tossed on their pile of things they were wrong about?

It's possible, but saying something in the context of a lawsuit settlement seems different than predicting / speculating on your future prospects. The phrasing indicated that "hundreds of millions of dollars" were already scheduled to show up in the PAC-12's mailbox / checking account.

If I'm right about this educated guess, then the PAC-2 "war chest" amounts to
$80M CFP money x 2 = $160M
$65M exit fees
$50-60M in NCAA tournament credits ($30M over next two years)
That's $250M.

Pac-12 paid out $37M per school in 2021-22. Little bit of inflation, let's say the PAC-2 pay themselves $40M per school per year. That's $160M, leaving $90M to rebuild the conference somehow. Another $25M or so from tournament credits if they do keep the PAC alive past 2026.

(If the PAC-2 is getting that much CFP money, I think that the $3.5M number reported has to be for 2026 and beyond, if they're still independents. And whatever TV money they get hopefully pays their MWC scheduling fees, so I'm calling that a wash.)

If there is no $80M a year in CFP money, just the $6M per year (80*5 / 69 P5 schools), then it's $65M exit fees + $30M tournament credits next two years + $24M CFP money = $120M. Divided by two schools over two years is $30M per school per year to keep the lights on at a P5 level.

And that assumes they can land a TV contract that pays off their MWC scheduling tab.

This issue of what WST and OST will receive from the CFP in 2024-2025 is interesting, and there is surprisingly little out there on it, as it seems like a pretty big deal.

One thing I found was this SBJ article from November 2022, well before the PAC collapsed last August. It admittedly is vague on details, but by my reading says the 2024-2025 payout model agreed to at that time put more emphasis on per-school payouts, whereas the 2014 deal had been on the old per-conference model, which meant that say a B12 team was getting considerably more than an SEC team, because both conferences were getting the same gross amount but it was dividing its payout 10 ways rather than 14. The new model creates more parity at a per-school level.

Given that, and given that IMO the Rose Bowl payouts for 2024-2025 will likely be folded in to the CFP payout, as it is a part of the CFP those years, I do not think WST and OST will get a big $160m windfall. Even given that every conference had a veto over the 2024-2025 deal, I just can't see the other P4 allowing that. So I suspect they are getting an average of what the CFP is paying out to the P4, on a per-school basis. So if the average P4 school is getting say $15m a year in 2024 and 2025 (because ESPN is presumably paying more for the expanded playoff), then WST and OST will get $15m each those years as well.

Heck, given that they agreed to take just $3.6m in 2026-2028, they might not even be sharing in that doubling of the 2024-2025 money, they might just be getting $3.6m each in 2024-2025, and not sharing in the extra money. I doubt that, but IMO it is possible.

Of course I could well be wrong.

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Da...ution.aspx

Its been very clear. The P4 + 2 Pac + ND will share the 80% power conference share equally per school. So 80% times $1.3 billion divided 69 ways (maybe 69.5 for SMU).

This makes sense.

I guess what could still be in doubt is whether the NY6 bowl payouts for conferences with tie-ins, like from the Orange, Rose, Sugar, are included in the CFP share. Such that if they are separate, maybe the PAC, meaning OST and WST, would get the full $40m Rose payout (or whatever it is) for each of the two years, and have it all for themselves.

But IMO that Rose payout is being folded in to the CFP.
03-26-2024 12:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,678
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3300
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #42
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-26-2024 12:19 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 11:08 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 08:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 06:50 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 06:31 AM)clunk Wrote:  The PAC previously said they were worth $50M per school, media companies don't negotiate during the holiday season, they'd agreed to a GoR, might go "shopping" in the B12, etc. Have you considered this "hundreds of millions" statement is just the latest thing tossed on their pile of things they were wrong about?

It's possible, but saying something in the context of a lawsuit settlement seems different than predicting / speculating on your future prospects. The phrasing indicated that "hundreds of millions of dollars" were already scheduled to show up in the PAC-12's mailbox / checking account.

If I'm right about this educated guess, then the PAC-2 "war chest" amounts to
$80M CFP money x 2 = $160M
$65M exit fees
$50-60M in NCAA tournament credits ($30M over next two years)
That's $250M.

Pac-12 paid out $37M per school in 2021-22. Little bit of inflation, let's say the PAC-2 pay themselves $40M per school per year. That's $160M, leaving $90M to rebuild the conference somehow. Another $25M or so from tournament credits if they do keep the PAC alive past 2026.

(If the PAC-2 is getting that much CFP money, I think that the $3.5M number reported has to be for 2026 and beyond, if they're still independents. And whatever TV money they get hopefully pays their MWC scheduling fees, so I'm calling that a wash.)

If there is no $80M a year in CFP money, just the $6M per year (80*5 / 69 P5 schools), then it's $65M exit fees + $30M tournament credits next two years + $24M CFP money = $120M. Divided by two schools over two years is $30M per school per year to keep the lights on at a P5 level.

And that assumes they can land a TV contract that pays off their MWC scheduling tab.

This issue of what WST and OST will receive from the CFP in 2024-2025 is interesting, and there is surprisingly little out there on it, as it seems like a pretty big deal.

One thing I found was this SBJ article from November 2022, well before the PAC collapsed last August. It admittedly is vague on details, but by my reading says the 2024-2025 payout model agreed to at that time put more emphasis on per-school payouts, whereas the 2014 deal had been on the old per-conference model, which meant that say a B12 team was getting considerably more than an SEC team, because both conferences were getting the same gross amount but it was dividing its payout 10 ways rather than 14. The new model creates more parity at a per-school level.

Given that, and given that IMO the Rose Bowl payouts for 2024-2025 will likely be folded in to the CFP payout, as it is a part of the CFP those years, I do not think WST and OST will get a big $160m windfall. Even given that every conference had a veto over the 2024-2025 deal, I just can't see the other P4 allowing that. So I suspect they are getting an average of what the CFP is paying out to the P4, on a per-school basis. So if the average P4 school is getting say $15m a year in 2024 and 2025 (because ESPN is presumably paying more for the expanded playoff), then WST and OST will get $15m each those years as well.

Heck, given that they agreed to take just $3.6m in 2026-2028, they might not even be sharing in that doubling of the 2024-2025 money, they might just be getting $3.6m each in 2024-2025, and not sharing in the extra money. I doubt that, but IMO it is possible.

Of course I could well be wrong.

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Da...ution.aspx

Its been very clear. The P4 + 2 Pac + ND will share the 80% power conference share equally per school. So 80% times $1.3 billion divided 69 ways (maybe 69.5 for SMU).

This makes sense.

I guess what could still be in doubt is whether the NY6 bowl payouts for conferences with tie-ins, like from the Orange, Rose, Sugar, are included in the CFP share. Such that if they are separate, maybe the PAC, meaning OST and WST, would get the full $40m Rose payout (or whatever it is) for each of the two years, and have it all for themselves.

But IMO that Rose payout is being folded in to the CFP.

They have NEVER been separate in CFP years. Look at conference distributions the one year out of three that the Rose and Sugar were semi-finals and for the ACC the year the Orange was.
03-26-2024 02:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,222
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 681
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #43
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
Wilner's documents reveal that the departed schools will still get 1/12th each of the MBB credit payments of the Pac-12 for the years prior to 2024-25 for the years 2024-25, 2025-26 and subsequent years. Only future earnings of the Pac-12 (those after August 1st 2024), that is credits, CFP monies, etc.. Monies earned after August 1st, 2024 are defined in the settlement as new earnings, not those delayed earnings accrued prior to that date.

(thread with all the docs Wilner published https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status...4402953566)

This is a legal contract and overrides any NCAA ByLaw. Full stop period. The NCAA will not go to court to attempt to override a legal settlement. Especially one that doesn't threaten their authority in any meaningful and is simply an agreement among some of its members. The Pac-12 will exist at least to distribute delayed credits monies from pre-August 2024 earnings, even if all else shuts down.

What it appears to mean is the 10 exiting schools are having $50M ($5M each) withheld this year and will cut a check for $1.5M ($15M total) to leave but keep their 1/2th share of MBB credits from the past (as well as small monies from 1/12th of other credits). Media rights revert back to them with the GOR expiration. Basically, Oregon State and Washington State will each get $32.5M from the exit fees, and continue to get 1/12th shares of MBB and other credits previously earned. This really only covers one year of lost media revenue for these two schools (figuring $31-32M the four corners get from the Big 12 and Oregon and UW get from the Big Ten, with UCLA and USC almost double and Cal and Stanford a bit over half that, although maybe $10M from UCLA will transfer to Cal balancing that).

The biggest pile of money will be the CFP payments to the Pac-12 in 2024 and 2025, which are probably in the ball park of $65M per year. This money covers another two years of lost Pac-12 distributions.

Roughly speaking that covers three years for the two schools. In that same three years Oregon State will get a State subsidy of $10M for scholarships per year, effectively adding a year.

It's not really clear how much there is in the way of other assets held by the Pac-12 which can actually be converted to cash. Perhaps as much as $70M. Again that is another year plus. Or given liabilities, such as pensions and rent payments, taxes, et al, it could be only half that much is realizable. Some of this money will be spent on producing content for the WCC stipulated in their contract, and probably some for their games to have some broadcast access.

The fact that past earned MBB credits will still be split as if all schools were still in the Pac-12, and the CFP payment is only $3.6M for three years to OSU and WSU only for 2026-2028 seasons, doesn't incentivize restarting the Pac-12.

Instead, what you have is a four-year apron for Washington State and perhaps a six-year apron (with State subsidy) for Oregon State to ride out to the next realignment round. Each can probably extend that a year or two with budget cuts. WSU however has budget deficits it has to cover, so it may not buy any extra time. Put another way, Washington State has to get in an A4 conference by 2028 or dramatically downsize their athletics to remain afloat, while Oregon State can probably carry through to 2031 or 2032 when the next media deals come up.

The Pac-12 is dead. Survival mode for the Pac-2
03-26-2024 02:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,176
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 785
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-25-2024 08:38 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-25-2024 07:27 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  Will the PAC actually spend the money to rebuild with a best of the rest?

$65M Holdback
$85M Tournament Credits
$50M CFP/Rose Bowl

That's $200M of incoming revenue over the course of the next 2-5 years. I don't see how they get to $250M but let's just agree to that number.

If they were to add 6 MW members, the PAC would need to pay $67.5M to the MW and those MW Schools would have to pay $105M ($17.5M x 6). The MW would likely settle for less but you're starting at $173.5M to rebuild with 6 MW schools. Let's say for argument's sake that the MW and PAC split the MW exit Fee, is the PAC going to spend $85M of their $250M nut for 6 MW schools?

I don't think they will. I think they will go as Independents until they have exhausted the $250M.

#1 They don't get any Rose Bowl money.
#2 tourney credits sound a little high
#3 they need the money for themselves. They aren't giving it away to others.

The thing about Tourney credits is that they only get the final four years of legacy credits if they rebuild the PAC or reverse merge the MWC into the PAC. So its 73 annual units for the next 2 years (including the 9 per year earned so far this year) and 80 annual units over the next four years if they rebuild / reverse merge. With a 13-5 record in 2021, the units are strongly frontloaded into the next three years until those roll out of the distribution. However:

(03-26-2024 02:07 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Wilner's documents reveal that the departed schools will still get 1/12th each of the MBB credit payments of the Pac-12 for the years prior to 2024-25 for the years 2024-25, 2025-26 and subsequent years.
SO at a BOTE $2m for full unit payout, that's $24m over the coming two years (plus a bit more if Arizona continues to win), $27m spread over the following four years with a rebuild / reverse merge, so $85m for the coming six years is high, $14m for the next two years is low. The PAC2 get 1/6th of that, so it's effectively $1m/school/year for the coming two years.

They don't get Rose Bowl money ... the reason they are likely to get power conference CFP money on a per school basis for the final two years of the CFP4 contract is because the conference is a signatory to the original contracts, and their signature is needed on the restructure. But releasing the Contract bowls to participate as QF bowls is part and parcel of the first two years of the CFP12 tournament, so whatever CFP money they get in the coming two years is acting like a severance on the Rose Bowl NY6 affiliation ending two years early.

Most of the recent reporting has been focusing on the money distribution on the following years, where they don't have any legal leverage that has to be taken into account. However, much the CFP money is over the coming two seasons (something like $15m/school/year sounds about right), it will not be reflected in the new contract / contract extension.
(This post was last modified: 03-26-2024 02:26 PM by BruceMcF.)
03-26-2024 02:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,067
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 781
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-25-2024 01:54 PM)e-parade Wrote:  So with that plus the NCAA credits they'll have access to over the next couple of years, how much money does that give them to help cover some MWC expenses for any school that leaves that conference for the PAC?


MWC commish handtied the PAC 2 where they can't raid the conference or there would be heavy penalties towards the 2 which could eat up a lot of money. Some people on Youtube for college football that are west coast still thinks that PAC 2 can grab any MWC teams today which they can't. The MWC are off the table to the PAC 2.
03-26-2024 02:16 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,222
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 681
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #46
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-26-2024 02:16 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(03-25-2024 01:54 PM)e-parade Wrote:  So with that plus the NCAA credits they'll have access to over the next couple of years, how much money does that give them to help cover some MWC expenses for any school that leaves that conference for the PAC?


MWC commish handtied the PAC 2 where they can't raid the conference or there would be heavy penalties towards the 2 which could eat up a lot of money. Some people on Youtube for college football that are west coast still thinks that PAC 2 can grab any MWC teams today which they can't. The MWC are off the table to the PAC 2.

You are actually correct for once. The Pac-12 has to pay the MWC $10M to add one school, $20.5M for two schools, $31.5M for three, $43M for four, $55M for five and $67.5M to add six schools (getting to the required 8). This is in effect until July 1st, 2026. If the Pac-12 waits until after that date then either the MWC schools pay an extra penalty of $14-15M each for less than a years notice to join in 2027, or else they cannot join until 2028.

With exit fees total cost of snagging 6 MWC schools for 2026-27, which has to be announced by June 2025, would be around $95M. Add that to the Pac-12 payment to the MWC of $67.5M and you arrive at a total of $160-165M. If announced after June 2025, that total would jump another $85-90M. All to a conference with no CFP status and no bowls. There has to be a media deal ready worth about $1B over 7 years to justify such a move.

The only realistic scenarios are for Oregon State and Washington State to join the MWC or remain Independents after 2025-26. They can always bring the Pac-12 brand to the MWC if they join.
03-26-2024 02:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,840
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2880
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-26-2024 02:16 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(03-25-2024 01:54 PM)e-parade Wrote:  So with that plus the NCAA credits they'll have access to over the next couple of years, how much money does that give them to help cover some MWC expenses for any school that leaves that conference for the PAC?


MWC commish handtied the PAC 2 where they can't raid the conference or there would be heavy penalties towards the 2 which could eat up a lot of money. Some people on Youtube for college football that are west coast still thinks that PAC 2 can grab any MWC teams today which they can't. The MWC are off the table to the PAC 2.

No---they arent off the table. They just cost more than they would have cost previously. Look---there is no doubt a Pac12 reboot that takes just the top of the MW---along with a few AAC teams---and perhaps Gonzaga---would provide its members a better per team payout than the MW+OSU/WSU. Long term, that route is better for those involved. If OSU/WSU are willing to use some of their Pac12 monies to make that course more financially feasible for 4-to-6 key MW schools---its the best course for those included schools. Then you add say Memphis/Tulane/UTSA---along with Gonzaga---and your good to go with a G5 conference thats probably going to have the inside track on the G5 playoff bid most years--as well as being a very good basketball conference.

What you dont really understand is OSU/WSU dont have to pay for the exit fee costs of 4 to 6 teams. They just need to pay for 2 to 3 teams. Once a couple MW schools get paid to leave, then it becomes all about being part of the better long term future in the new Pac12---and not getting left behind in the gutted MW. Schools looking at getting left behind will be far more willing to sholulder a larger part (or even all of) the cost to exit the MW and join the nPac12. It really comes down to does OSU/WSU believe that a nPac12 future has enough advantages over a full MW merger to ante up the money to make it financially advantageous for SDSU and Boise to make the move. Once thats done, the down side for the rest of the MW starts looking bleak enough, that the financial expenditure to make the move becomes an unavoidable cost that must be made for the long term future for the athletic program of each MW school holding a nPac12 invite.
(This post was last modified: 03-26-2024 03:08 PM by Attackcoog.)
03-26-2024 02:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,678
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3300
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-26-2024 02:07 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Wilner's documents reveal that the departed schools will still get 1/12th each of the MBB credit payments of the Pac-12 for the years prior to 2024-25 for the years 2024-25, 2025-26 and subsequent years. Only future earnings of the Pac-12 (those after August 1st 2024), that is credits, CFP monies, etc.. Monies earned after August 1st, 2024 are defined in the settlement as new earnings, not those delayed earnings accrued prior to that date.

(thread with all the docs Wilner published https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status...4402953566)

This is a legal contract and overrides any NCAA ByLaw. Full stop period. The NCAA will not go to court to attempt to override a legal settlement. Especially one that doesn't threaten their authority in any meaningful and is simply an agreement among some of its members. The Pac-12 will exist at least to distribute delayed credits monies from pre-August 2024 earnings, even if all else shuts down.

What it appears to mean is the 10 exiting schools are having $50M ($5M each) withheld this year and will cut a check for $1.5M ($15M total) to leave but keep their 1/2th share of MBB credits from the past (as well as small monies from 1/12th of other credits). Media rights revert back to them with the GOR expiration. Basically, Oregon State and Washington State will each get $32.5M from the exit fees, and continue to get 1/12th shares of MBB and other credits previously earned. This really only covers one year of lost media revenue for these two schools (figuring $31-32M the four corners get from the Big 12 and Oregon and UW get from the Big Ten, with UCLA and USC almost double and Cal and Stanford a bit over half that, although maybe $10M from UCLA will transfer to Cal balancing that).

The biggest pile of money will be the CFP payments to the Pac-12 in 2024 and 2025, which are probably in the ball park of $65M per year. This money covers another two years of lost Pac-12 distributions.

Roughly speaking that covers three years for the two schools. In that same three years Oregon State will get a State subsidy of $10M for scholarships per year, effectively adding a year.

It's not really clear how much there is in the way of other assets held by the Pac-12 which can actually be converted to cash. Perhaps as much as $70M. Again that is another year plus. Or given liabilities, such as pensions and rent payments, taxes, et al, it could be only half that much is realizable. Some of this money will be spent on producing content for the WCC stipulated in their contract, and probably some for their games to have some broadcast access.

The fact that past earned MBB credits will still be split as if all schools were still in the Pac-12, and the CFP payment is only $3.6M for three years to OSU and WSU only for 2026-2028 seasons, doesn't incentivize restarting the Pac-12.

Instead, what you have is a four-year apron for Washington State and perhaps a six-year apron (with State subsidy) for Oregon State to ride out to the next realignment round. Each can probably extend that a year or two with budget cuts. WSU however has budget deficits it has to cover, so it may not buy any extra time. Put another way, Washington State has to get in an A4 conference by 2028 or dramatically downsize their athletics to remain afloat, while Oregon State can probably carry through to 2031 or 2032 when the next media deals come up.

The Pac-12 is dead. Survival mode for the Pac-2

Are you sure you interpreted that correctly? Prior earned credits don't accrue until later years.
03-26-2024 09:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,678
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3300
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #49
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-26-2024 02:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 02:16 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(03-25-2024 01:54 PM)e-parade Wrote:  So with that plus the NCAA credits they'll have access to over the next couple of years, how much money does that give them to help cover some MWC expenses for any school that leaves that conference for the PAC?


MWC commish handtied the PAC 2 where they can't raid the conference or there would be heavy penalties towards the 2 which could eat up a lot of money. Some people on Youtube for college football that are west coast still thinks that PAC 2 can grab any MWC teams today which they can't. The MWC are off the table to the PAC 2.

No---they arent off the table. They just cost more than they would have cost previously. Look---there is no doubt a Pac12 reboot that takes just the top of the MW---along with a few AAC teams---and perhaps Gonzaga---would provide its members a better per team payout than the MW+OSU/WSU. Long term, that route is better for those involved. If OSU/WSU are willing to use some of their Pac12 monies to make that course more financially feasible for 4-to-6 key MW schools---its the best course for those included schools. Then you add say Memphis/Tulane/UTSA---along with Gonzaga---and your good to go with a G5 conference thats probably going to have the inside track on the G5 playoff bid most years--as well as being a very good basketball conference.

What you dont really understand is OSU/WSU dont have to pay for the exit fee costs of 4 to 6 teams. They just need to pay for 2 to 3 teams. Once a couple MW schools get paid to leave, then it becomes all about being part of the better long term future in the new Pac12---and not getting left behind in the gutted MW. Schools looking at getting left behind will be far more willing to sholulder a larger part (or even all of) the cost to exit the MW and join the nPac12. It really comes down to does OSU/WSU believe that a nPac12 future has enough advantages over a full MW merger to ante up the money to make it financially advantageous for SDSU and Boise to make the move. Once thats done, the down side for the rest of the MW starts looking bleak enough, that the financial expenditure to make the move becomes an unavoidable cost that must be made for the long term future for the athletic program of each MW school holding a nPac12 invite.

There aren't enough valuable schools in the MWC to make that viable. Realistically, there's Boise and everyone else. SDSU has value in certain ways, but their TV ratings are not particularly good. The other schools viewed as the "top"-UNLV and CSU-are historically bad at football and their TV ratings reflect that.

If they try to do to the MWC what effectively happened to them (I don't know why people who feel sorry for them want to leave MWC schools in even worse shape since there is no other G league in the west), it will cost them more than the gain.
03-26-2024 09:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,176
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 785
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-26-2024 09:36 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 02:07 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Wilner's documents reveal that the departed schools will still get 1/12th each of the MBB credit payments of the Pac-12 for the years prior to 2024-25 for the years 2024-25, 2025-26 and subsequent years. Only future earnings of the Pac-12 (those after August 1st 2024), that is credits, CFP monies, etc.. Monies earned after August 1st, 2024 are defined in the settlement as new earnings, not those delayed earnings accrued prior to that date.

(thread with all the docs Wilner published https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status...4402953566)

This is a legal contract and overrides any NCAA ByLaw. Full stop period. The NCAA will not go to court to attempt to override a legal settlement. Especially one that doesn't threaten their authority in any meaningful and is simply an agreement among some of its members. The Pac-12 will exist at least to distribute delayed credits monies from pre-August 2024 earnings, even if all else shuts down.

What it appears to mean is the 10 exiting schools are having $50M ($5M each) withheld this year and will cut a check for $1.5M ($15M total) to leave but keep their 1/2th share of MBB credits from the past (as well as small monies from 1/12th of other credits). ...

Are you sure you interpreted that correctly? Prior earned credits don't accrue until later years.

Ah, I was going on the above description, but in the actual tweet, the copied text says:
Quote:No departing member shall have any claim to distribution of any amount of Conference revenues earned, due to be paid, or except as set out in subclause (1) of this Section 2.a.ii, actually received Fiscal Year 2025, Fiscal Year 2026, or any subsequent Fiscal Year (including, without limitation, NCAA Basketball Performance Fund unit distributions even if related to prior Fiscal Years) ...

So, no, future NCAA unit redistributions are not shared with departing members.

So the total FY25/FY26 kitty is not $200m, it's more like $90m plus whatever the CFP is for FY25/FY26. ... ~$24m NCAA units, $65M departing member withholding/exit fee + the CFP phase out.

At that kitty, the penalties for raiding the MWC mean that a 6 school raid is effectively off the table. It's getting a P4 invite, or PAC2 + 4 from the AAC + 2 from the MWC, or a reverse merger with the MWC, where they agreed to negotiate on a reverse merger in the scheduling deal.
(This post was last modified: 03-26-2024 11:08 PM by BruceMcF.)
03-26-2024 09:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,840
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2880
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #51
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-26-2024 09:41 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 02:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 02:16 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(03-25-2024 01:54 PM)e-parade Wrote:  So with that plus the NCAA credits they'll have access to over the next couple of years, how much money does that give them to help cover some MWC expenses for any school that leaves that conference for the PAC?


MWC commish handtied the PAC 2 where they can't raid the conference or there would be heavy penalties towards the 2 which could eat up a lot of money. Some people on Youtube for college football that are west coast still thinks that PAC 2 can grab any MWC teams today which they can't. The MWC are off the table to the PAC 2.

No---they arent off the table. They just cost more than they would have cost previously. Look---there is no doubt a Pac12 reboot that takes just the top of the MW---along with a few AAC teams---and perhaps Gonzaga---would provide its members a better per team payout than the MW+OSU/WSU. Long term, that route is better for those involved. If OSU/WSU are willing to use some of their Pac12 monies to make that course more financially feasible for 4-to-6 key MW schools---its the best course for those included schools. Then you add say Memphis/Tulane/UTSA---along with Gonzaga---and your good to go with a G5 conference thats probably going to have the inside track on the G5 playoff bid most years--as well as being a very good basketball conference.

What you dont really understand is OSU/WSU dont have to pay for the exit fee costs of 4 to 6 teams. They just need to pay for 2 to 3 teams. Once a couple MW schools get paid to leave, then it becomes all about being part of the better long term future in the new Pac12---and not getting left behind in the gutted MW. Schools looking at getting left behind will be far more willing to sholulder a larger part (or even all of) the cost to exit the MW and join the nPac12. It really comes down to does OSU/WSU believe that a nPac12 future has enough advantages over a full MW merger to ante up the money to make it financially advantageous for SDSU and Boise to make the move. Once thats done, the down side for the rest of the MW starts looking bleak enough, that the financial expenditure to make the move becomes an unavoidable cost that must be made for the long term future for the athletic program of each MW school holding a nPac12 invite.

There aren't enough valuable schools in the MWC to make that viable. Realistically, there's Boise and everyone else. SDSU has value in certain ways, but their TV ratings are not particularly good. The other schools viewed as the "top"-UNLV and CSU-are historically bad at football and their TV ratings reflect that.

If they try to do to the MWC what effectively happened to them (I don't know why people who feel sorry for them want to leave MWC schools in even worse shape since there is no other G league in the west), it will cost them more than the gain.

Whatever they build would be better than the MW which has plenty of dead weight. Im not suggesting they can become a M2 conference. Im suggesting they probably can get paid as much or more per school than the AAC--especially if they keep the membership down to 8-10. Those left in the MW will be looking at a massive cut in their payout without the top 2 or 3 schools---so once the top 2 or 3 schools leave the MW----for those left----its not a matter of getting 4-million in the MW vs 7-million or so in the nPac12. Its matter of getting 1 or 2 million a year vs whatever the nPac12 is paying. The nPac12 wont need to pay exit fee subsidies to fill out its membership once they nab the first few schools. Thats all Im saying.

It can be done. The real question is whether its worth spending 30 million up front to OSU/WSU in order to get those first 3 MW teams to jump. It may not be if OSU/WSU are confident any MW stay will be short lived and a call from the ACC or B12 is likely to come sooner rather than later.
(This post was last modified: 03-27-2024 12:09 AM by Attackcoog.)
03-27-2024 12:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 13,101
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 1341
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #52
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-26-2024 09:54 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 09:36 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 02:07 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Wilner's documents reveal that the departed schools will still get 1/12th each of the MBB credit payments of the Pac-12 for the years prior to 2024-25 for the years 2024-25, 2025-26 and subsequent years. Only future earnings of the Pac-12 (those after August 1st 2024), that is credits, CFP monies, etc.. Monies earned after August 1st, 2024 are defined in the settlement as new earnings, not those delayed earnings accrued prior to that date.

(thread with all the docs Wilner published https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status...4402953566)

This is a legal contract and overrides any NCAA ByLaw. Full stop period. The NCAA will not go to court to attempt to override a legal settlement. Especially one that doesn't threaten their authority in any meaningful and is simply an agreement among some of its members. The Pac-12 will exist at least to distribute delayed credits monies from pre-August 2024 earnings, even if all else shuts down.

What it appears to mean is the 10 exiting schools are having $50M ($5M each) withheld this year and will cut a check for $1.5M ($15M total) to leave but keep their 1/2th share of MBB credits from the past (as well as small monies from 1/12th of other credits). ...

Are you sure you interpreted that correctly? Prior earned credits don't accrue until later years.

Ah, I was going on the above description, but in the actual tweet, the copied text says:
Quote:No departing member shall have any claim to distribution of any amount of Conference revenues earned, due to be paid, or except as set out in subclause (1) of this Section 2.a.ii, actually received Fiscal Year 2025, Fiscal Year 2026, or any subsequent Fiscal Year (including, without limitation, NCAA Basketball Performance Fund unit distributions even if related to prior Fiscal Years) ...

So, no, future NCAA unit redistributions are not shared with departing members.

So the total FY25/FY26 kitty is not $200m, it's more like $90m plus whatever the CFP is for FY25/FY26. ... ~$24m NCAA units, $65M departing member withholding/exit fee + the CFP phase out.

At that kitty, the penalties for raiding the MWC mean that a 6 school raid is effectively off the table. It's getting a P4 invite, or PAC2 + 4 from the AAC + 2 from the MWC, or a reverse merger with the MWC, where they agreed to negotiate on a reverse merger in the scheduling deal.

What makes you think they'd use any of that money to pay for MWC school exit fees? They'll use that money as parachute payments to help smooth the drop to g5 status, hope that they get an M2 invite, then join/reverse merger the MWC if they don't.
03-27-2024 12:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,176
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 785
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #53
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-27-2024 12:29 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 09:54 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 09:36 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 02:07 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Wilner's documents reveal that the departed schools will still get 1/12th each of the MBB credit payments of the Pac-12 for the years prior to 2024-25 for the years 2024-25, 2025-26 and subsequent years. Only future earnings of the Pac-12 (those after August 1st 2024), that is credits, CFP monies, etc.. Monies earned after August 1st, 2024 are defined in the settlement as new earnings, not those delayed earnings accrued prior to that date.

(thread with all the docs Wilner published https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status...4402953566)

This is a legal contract and overrides any NCAA ByLaw. Full stop period. The NCAA will not go to court to attempt to override a legal settlement. Especially one that doesn't threaten their authority in any meaningful and is simply an agreement among some of its members. The Pac-12 will exist at least to distribute delayed credits monies from pre-August 2024 earnings, even if all else shuts down.

What it appears to mean is the 10 exiting schools are having $50M ($5M each) withheld this year and will cut a check for $1.5M ($15M total) to leave but keep their 1/2th share of MBB credits from the past (as well as small monies from 1/12th of other credits). ...

Are you sure you interpreted that correctly? Prior earned credits don't accrue until later years.

Ah, I was going on the above description, but in the actual tweet, the copied text says:
Quote:No departing member shall have any claim to distribution of any amount of Conference revenues earned, due to be paid, or except as set out in subclause (1) of this Section 2.a.ii, actually received Fiscal Year 2025, Fiscal Year 2026, or any subsequent Fiscal Year (including, without limitation, NCAA Basketball Performance Fund unit distributions even if related to prior Fiscal Years) ...

So, no, future NCAA unit redistributions are not shared with departing members.

So the total FY25/FY26 kitty is not $200m, it's more like $90m plus whatever the CFP is for FY25/FY26. ... ~$24m NCAA units, $65M departing member withholding/exit fee + the CFP phase out.

At that kitty, the penalties for raiding the MWC mean that a 6 school raid is effectively off the table. It's getting a P4 invite, or PAC2 + 4 from the AAC + 2 from the MWC, or a reverse merger with the MWC, where they agreed to negotiate on a reverse merger in the scheduling deal.

What makes you think they'd use any of that money to pay for MWC school exit fees? They'll use that money as parachute payments to help smooth the drop to g5 status, hope that they get an M2 invite, then join/reverse merger the MWC if they don't.

The problem with working out which scenario they are going to do before working out what the feasible options are is that it forecloses looking at the trade-offs between the options.

Plan A is to get into an M2 conference.

The tradeoff between rebuild and reverse merger as Plan B is that rebuild has higher up front costs, higher ongoing media revenue per school, and higher status.
03-27-2024 08:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,152
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2419
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #54
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-27-2024 12:01 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 09:41 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 02:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 02:16 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(03-25-2024 01:54 PM)e-parade Wrote:  So with that plus the NCAA credits they'll have access to over the next couple of years, how much money does that give them to help cover some MWC expenses for any school that leaves that conference for the PAC?


MWC commish handtied the PAC 2 where they can't raid the conference or there would be heavy penalties towards the 2 which could eat up a lot of money. Some people on Youtube for college football that are west coast still thinks that PAC 2 can grab any MWC teams today which they can't. The MWC are off the table to the PAC 2.

No---they arent off the table. They just cost more than they would have cost previously. Look---there is no doubt a Pac12 reboot that takes just the top of the MW---along with a few AAC teams---and perhaps Gonzaga---would provide its members a better per team payout than the MW+OSU/WSU. Long term, that route is better for those involved. If OSU/WSU are willing to use some of their Pac12 monies to make that course more financially feasible for 4-to-6 key MW schools---its the best course for those included schools. Then you add say Memphis/Tulane/UTSA---along with Gonzaga---and your good to go with a G5 conference thats probably going to have the inside track on the G5 playoff bid most years--as well as being a very good basketball conference.

What you dont really understand is OSU/WSU dont have to pay for the exit fee costs of 4 to 6 teams. They just need to pay for 2 to 3 teams. Once a couple MW schools get paid to leave, then it becomes all about being part of the better long term future in the new Pac12---and not getting left behind in the gutted MW. Schools looking at getting left behind will be far more willing to sholulder a larger part (or even all of) the cost to exit the MW and join the nPac12. It really comes down to does OSU/WSU believe that a nPac12 future has enough advantages over a full MW merger to ante up the money to make it financially advantageous for SDSU and Boise to make the move. Once thats done, the down side for the rest of the MW starts looking bleak enough, that the financial expenditure to make the move becomes an unavoidable cost that must be made for the long term future for the athletic program of each MW school holding a nPac12 invite.

There aren't enough valuable schools in the MWC to make that viable. Realistically, there's Boise and everyone else. SDSU has value in certain ways, but their TV ratings are not particularly good. The other schools viewed as the "top"-UNLV and CSU-are historically bad at football and their TV ratings reflect that.

If they try to do to the MWC what effectively happened to them (I don't know why people who feel sorry for them want to leave MWC schools in even worse shape since there is no other G league in the west), it will cost them more than the gain.

Whatever they build would be better than the MW which has plenty of dead weight. Im not suggesting they can become a M2 conference. Im suggesting they probably can get paid as much or more per school than the AAC--especially if they keep the membership down to 8-10. Those left in the MW will be looking at a massive cut in their payout without the top 2 or 3 schools---so once the top 2 or 3 schools leave the MW----for those left----its not a matter of getting 4-million in the MW vs 7-million or so in the nPac12. Its matter of getting 1 or 2 million a year vs whatever the nPac12 is paying. The nPac12 wont need to pay exit fee subsidies to fill out its membership once they nab the first few schools. Thats all Im saying.

It can be done. The real question is whether its worth spending 30 million up front to OSU/WSU in order to get those first 3 MW teams to jump. It may not be if OSU/WSU are confident any MW stay will be short lived and a call from the ACC or B12 is likely to come sooner rather than later.

It's a very strange and delicate dance between the 2PAC and the MW. I think we all know that the 2PAC would like to do what you have been talking about - cream off the top four or so MW schools and say four top AAC schools and form a 10-team league. I agree, that would boost payouts to AAC level, heck maybe beyond, it would definitely pay more than absorbing the entire MW.

But as we all know the MW knows this and has wisely - from the POV of the weaker schools - added some poison pills to their current deal to make that costly.

How it plays out will tell whether those MW pills are enough to disincentivize the 2PAC from launching a "cream" attack, and both sides are biding their time waiting for 2026.

I am not sure it will be worth it. Let's say the 2PAC absorb the entire MW. IMO that probably would boost the new PAC over the current MW to maybe $5m or $6m a year. Take the cream route and that goes up to maybe what, $8m - $9m a year? About a $3m a year difference.

Over the course of say a six-year media deal that adds up to maybe $18m each, spread over six years. Is that really worth absorbing the costs? Not sure. I think your last sentence above frames the issue nicely.

Now of course, the conference will go on beyond those six years, and the benefits of "cream" will continue to accrue. But let's face it, Wazzoo and OST *have* to have, IMO, a plan to get out of this MW-merged 2PAC, or the "cream" PAC. If they are stuck in either league indefinitely, then "G" status is cemented. They want and need to get to the M2 to maintain the programs they have historically had. So IMO thinking long-term about either type of league is probably not on their agenda.

Just MO.
(This post was last modified: 03-27-2024 08:22 AM by quo vadis.)
03-27-2024 08:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
freshtop Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,014
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation: 274
I Root For: WKU
Location:
Post: #55
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
What if the PAC2 went big... Like really big! Merge with the entire MWC to avoid fees. Poach other programs (including prominent FCS programs like the Montanas and Dakotas) and then form Promotion/Relegation leagues?

Say you end up with 24 total teams, split them into two 12 team Champion and Challenger leagues based on performance. Set up schedules that allow some cross league play. Get some sort of waiver from the (weaker than ever) NCAA to keep an auto bid for each league. Make payouts performance based as well (more money depending on order of finish in each league). If the model works, you can expand further with other G5 programs. Would create a lot of intrigue in your regular season games as you have to win to move up or stay up.
03-27-2024 08:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,393
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 1004
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #56
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-27-2024 08:19 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(03-27-2024 12:01 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 09:41 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 02:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(03-26-2024 02:16 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  MWC commish handtied the PAC 2 where they can't raid the conference or there would be heavy penalties towards the 2 which could eat up a lot of money. Some people on Youtube for college football that are west coast still thinks that PAC 2 can grab any MWC teams today which they can't. The MWC are off the table to the PAC 2.

No---they arent off the table. They just cost more than they would have cost previously. Look---there is no doubt a Pac12 reboot that takes just the top of the MW---along with a few AAC teams---and perhaps Gonzaga---would provide its members a better per team payout than the MW+OSU/WSU. Long term, that route is better for those involved. If OSU/WSU are willing to use some of their Pac12 monies to make that course more financially feasible for 4-to-6 key MW schools---its the best course for those included schools. Then you add say Memphis/Tulane/UTSA---along with Gonzaga---and your good to go with a G5 conference thats probably going to have the inside track on the G5 playoff bid most years--as well as being a very good basketball conference.

What you dont really understand is OSU/WSU dont have to pay for the exit fee costs of 4 to 6 teams. They just need to pay for 2 to 3 teams. Once a couple MW schools get paid to leave, then it becomes all about being part of the better long term future in the new Pac12---and not getting left behind in the gutted MW. Schools looking at getting left behind will be far more willing to sholulder a larger part (or even all of) the cost to exit the MW and join the nPac12. It really comes down to does OSU/WSU believe that a nPac12 future has enough advantages over a full MW merger to ante up the money to make it financially advantageous for SDSU and Boise to make the move. Once thats done, the down side for the rest of the MW starts looking bleak enough, that the financial expenditure to make the move becomes an unavoidable cost that must be made for the long term future for the athletic program of each MW school holding a nPac12 invite.

There aren't enough valuable schools in the MWC to make that viable. Realistically, there's Boise and everyone else. SDSU has value in certain ways, but their TV ratings are not particularly good. The other schools viewed as the "top"-UNLV and CSU-are historically bad at football and their TV ratings reflect that.

If they try to do to the MWC what effectively happened to them (I don't know why people who feel sorry for them want to leave MWC schools in even worse shape since there is no other G league in the west), it will cost them more than the gain.

Whatever they build would be better than the MW which has plenty of dead weight. Im not suggesting they can become a M2 conference. Im suggesting they probably can get paid as much or more per school than the AAC--especially if they keep the membership down to 8-10. Those left in the MW will be looking at a massive cut in their payout without the top 2 or 3 schools---so once the top 2 or 3 schools leave the MW----for those left----its not a matter of getting 4-million in the MW vs 7-million or so in the nPac12. Its matter of getting 1 or 2 million a year vs whatever the nPac12 is paying. The nPac12 wont need to pay exit fee subsidies to fill out its membership once they nab the first few schools. Thats all Im saying.

It can be done. The real question is whether its worth spending 30 million up front to OSU/WSU in order to get those first 3 MW teams to jump. It may not be if OSU/WSU are confident any MW stay will be short lived and a call from the ACC or B12 is likely to come sooner rather than later.

It's a very strange and delicate dance between the 2PAC and the MW. I think we all know that the 2PAC would like to do what you have been talking about - cream off the top four or so MW schools and say four top AAC schools and form a 10-team league. I agree, that would boost payouts to AAC level, heck maybe beyond, it would definitely pay more than absorbing the entire MW.

But as we all know the MW knows this and has wisely - from the POV of the weaker schools - added some poison pills to their current deal to make that costly.

How it plays out will tell whether those MW pills are enough to disincentivize the 2PAC from launching a "cream" attack, and both sides are biding their time waiting for 2026.

I am not sure it will be worth it. Let's say the 2PAC absorb the entire MW. IMO that probably would boost the new PAC over the current MW to maybe $5m or $6m a year. Take the cream route and that goes up to maybe what, $8m - $9m a year? About a $3m a year difference.

Over the course of say a six-year media deal that adds up to maybe $18m each, spread over six years. Is that really worth absorbing the costs? Not sure. I think your last sentence above frames the issue nicely.

Now of course, the conference will go on beyond those six years, and the benefits of "cream" will continue to accrue. But let's face it, Wazzoo and OST *have* to have, IMO, a plan to get out of this MW-merged 2PAC, or the "cream" PAC. If they are stuck in either league indefinitely, then "G" status is cemented. They want and need to get to the M2 to maintain the programs they have historically had. So IMO thinking long-term about either type of league is probably not on their agenda.

Just MO.

Something I figured 10 other people would mention, but didn't.

Part of the MWC / Pac-2 dance is the risk that the "cream" strategy only gets halfway across the canyon. If they don't line up 5 schools to jump to the new PAC in 2026, there is no PAC, it ceases to exist under NCAA bylaws (as currently written anyway). (7 members to be a Division I conference).

That raises the risk factor for the first school to jump. That school is counting on the PAC getting 4 more at a minimum, 5 to be an FBS conference. The Mountain West will exploit the small but real chance that the PAC-2 jump for an ACC or Big 12 invite.
03-27-2024 08:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,678
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3300
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #57
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
Where is the cream? All of the TV analyses have limitations, but Sic-Em seems to be the best as he points out his limitations.
Here are the G5 ranked with 36 games:

School All 2013-2021 Top 36 (4 Per Year) Top 36 Rank
Navy 45 Games, 2.33mm 2.819mm 35
Washington St. 56 Games, 1.407mm 1.905mm 50
Boise St. 72 Games, 0.827mm 1.258mm 63
Memphis 52 Games, 0.918mm 1.257mm 64
Oregon St. 40 Games, 1.124mm 1.214mm 66
USF 48 Games, 0.861mm 1.103mm 68
Temple 42 Games, 0.773mm 0.891mm 70
Tulsa 51 Games, 0.603mm 0.82mm 72

Northern Illinois 36 Games, 0.648mm 0.648mm 74
East Carolina 37 Games, 0.547mm 0.56mm 75

Below is the rest of the G5 who don't have the 36 games, listed by their average:
Army 24 Games, 3.331mm
Rice 13 Games, 0.836mm

Fresno St. 33 Games, 0.697mm
Coastal Carolina 10 Games, 0.647mm
Ball St. 15 Games, 0.635mm
Colorado St. 22 Games, 0.605mm
Western Michigan 26 Games, 0.603mm
Appalachian St. 27 Games, 0.587mm
Air Force 30 Games, 0.584mm
Florida Atlantic 13 Games, 0.583mm
Connecticut 31 Games, 0.571mm
Utah St. 33 Games, 0.563mm
ULL 25 Games, 0.562mm
Western Kentucky 18 Games, 0.553mm
UAB 8 Games, 0.552mm
Hawaii 15 Games, 0.55mm
Southern Miss 11 Games, 0.541mm
Buffalo 25 Games, 0.529mm
San Diego St. 28 Games, 0.522mm
Kent St. 25 Games, 0.503mm
Marshall 18 Games, 0.498mm
Nevada 24 Games, 0.493mm
Bowling Green 25 Games, 0.478mm
Arkansas St. 24 Games, 0.472mm
Massachusetts 6 Games, 0.468mm
Wyoming 29 Games, 0.45mm
UTEP 12 Games, 0.444mm
Ohio 29 Games, 0.44mm
Toledo 31 Games, 0.439mm
Georgia St. 9 Games, 0.434mm
South Alabama 15 Games, 0.42mm
Tulane 35 Games, 0.419mm
Miami (OH) 15 Games, 0.405mm
San Jose St. 20 Games, 0.398mm
New Mexico 25 Games, 0.371mm

Middle Tennessee St. 12 Games, 0.359mm
Eastern Michigan 9 Games, 0.35mm
Central Michigan 17 Games, 0.347mm
Texas St. 15 Games, 0.337mm
Louisiana Tech 14 Games, 0.334mm
UTSA 16 Games, 0.314mm
UNLV 20 Games, 0.307mm
Georgia Southern 18 Games, 0.269mm
ULM 10 Games, 0.269mm
Troy 20 Games, 0.267mm
North Texas 8 Games, 0.252mm
Old Dominion 5 Games, 0.186mm
Charlotte 5 Games, 0.167mm
New Mexico St. 3 Games, 0.167mm
Liberty 4 Games, 0.138mm
Florida International 10 Games, 0.102mm
Sam Houston St. 2 Games, 0.09mm
(This post was last modified: 03-27-2024 09:56 AM by bullet.)
03-27-2024 09:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,678
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3300
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #58
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
What this shows its that you have Boise from the MWC and Army, Navy, USF, Memphis from the AAC and then a big dropoff. Maybe Temple, Tulsa and Rice from the AAC are in the next tier before you get below .7 million. The rest really aren't much different.

Now the MWC doesn't have great exposure, but that's true for the G5 in general. There's just no cream in the MWC to skim.
03-27-2024 10:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,152
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2419
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #59
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-27-2024 10:03 AM)bullet Wrote:  What this shows its that you have Boise from the MWC and Army, Navy, USF, Memphis from the AAC and then a big dropoff. Maybe Temple, Tulsa and Rice from the AAC are in the next tier before you get below .7 million. The rest really aren't much different.

Now the MWC doesn't have great exposure, but that's true for the G5 in general. There's just no cream in the MWC to skim.

Regardless of what TV numbers say, IMO schools like San Diego State and Fresno State and Air Force are like Boise a cut above other MW schools in terms of brand recognition. Maybe UNLV is emerging now as well.

So to me, a conference that consists of say OS, WS, SDST, Fresno, Air Force, Boise, USF, Navy, Army and Memphis would be a "cream" conference that would earn about $3m a year more than absorb-the-entire-MW route.

But I admit, I am not a media consultant with expertise.

EDIT: Apparently, this was my 50,000th post. Whoa.
(This post was last modified: 03-27-2024 12:43 PM by quo vadis.)
03-27-2024 10:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,678
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3300
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #60
RE: Wilner: PAC-2 vs Departing 10 settlement is out.
(03-27-2024 10:11 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(03-27-2024 10:03 AM)bullet Wrote:  What this shows its that you have Boise from the MWC and Army, Navy, USF, Memphis from the AAC and then a big dropoff. Maybe Temple, Tulsa and Rice from the AAC are in the next tier before you get below .7 million. The rest really aren't much different.

Now the MWC doesn't have great exposure, but that's true for the G5 in general. There's just no cream in the MWC to skim.

Regardless of what TV numbers say, IMO schools like San Diego State and Fresno State and Air Force are like Boise a cut above other MW schools in terms of brand recognition. Maybe UNLV is emerging now as well.

So to me, a conference that consists of say OS, WS, SDST, Fresno, Air Force, Boise, USF, Navy, Army and Memphis would be a "cream" conference that would earn about $3m a year more than absorb-the-entire-MW route.

But I admit, I am not a media consultant with expertise.

If nobody watches, is it still a "brand?" That conference would also add about $3 million in travel expenses or more.

There's a difference between what this board recognizes and the general public who make the mass of TV viewers. How many casual viewers would know Appalachian St. isn't still FCS? Will Fresno St. or San Diego St. generate any more viewer interest than Northern Illinois or Western Michigan?
(This post was last modified: 03-27-2024 10:35 AM by bullet.)
03-27-2024 10:32 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.