SDSU to PAC12 Deal Dead

[Mike Jackson]

On 6/30/2023 at 8:57 PM, Victorygreen04 said:

Where are the usual SMU fans who post on here? Really would like to know their thoughts on this! 

Maybe they are on their own board I heard from a psychologist that small intimate support groups of 5-8 people are the most effective. 🤷🏽‍♂️

Edited July 6, 2023 by Mike Jackson

[Mike Jackson]

1 hour ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

But I would be very surprised if they don't end up adding at all, and it seems like these events with SDSU may have even bumped SMU to the very front of the queue

In front of queue to join a very unstable conference trending down towards being more G5 than P5 is not where SMU wants to be ideally.  The best brands they have left in the conference don’t view SMU as value add just a band aid.  SDSU made sense geographically and is actually trending up big time athletically with the championship game appearance.  SMU appeal is just to be the PAC 12’s Vanderbilt.  A smaller school that gets PAC 12 teams slightly better access major market. 

[DentonStang]

16 hours ago, Victorygreen04 said:

Where are the usual SMU fans who post on here? Really would like to know their thoughts on this! 

What is there to respond to?  They tried to get out before the deadline (in a bungled way) and then the MWC made it clear they weren't going to play nice and said they're "informing that we are going to inform" would be treated as an official intent to leave. So what else can they do?  You can't leave without having an offer somewhere else. This doesn't prevent them from turning around and leaving tomorrow (just at full cost this time) 

[NT80]

2 hours ago, DentonStang said:

What is there to respond to?  They tried to get out before the deadline (in a bungled way) and then the MWC made it clear they weren't going to play nice and said they're "informing that we are going to inform" would be treated as an official intent to leave. So what else can they do?  You can't leave without having an offer somewhere else. This doesn't prevent them from turning around and leaving tomorrow (just at full cost this time) 

SDSU can still leave anytime for $17m, but it would now be for the 2025 season, otherwise $34m for 2024.

What I don't understand is IF a PAC invite was/is still coming, and the media deal WILL get done soon (by PAC media day July 21), why didn't SDSU just pay the $17m now anyway?   UNLESS >  some things have changed, as in the potential invite or to the potential media deal causing SDSU to backout of a now unacceptable situation.  

[DentonStang]

3 hours ago, NT80 said:

SDSU can still leave anytime for $17m, but it would now be for the 2025 season, otherwise $34m for 2024.

What I don't understand is IF a PAC invite was/is still coming, and the media deal WILL get done soon (by PAC media day July 21), why didn't SDSU just pay the $17m now anyway?   UNLESS >  some things have changed, as in the potential invite or to the potential media deal causing SDSU to backout of a now unacceptable situation.  

It's a valid question. I think the reasonable answer is it's foolish to leave before you have a sure thing in hand. Anything could always blow up.  Leverage that risk against the $17M, which likely won't actually be $17M.  Pretty much every conference change we've seen has had a negotiated exit for better terms.

I will push back against the idea that someone had to have changed recently.  The original SDSU letter to the MWC said they were not giving notice of leaving before July 1, but that they intended to give notice at some point after that.  Nothing was ever happening on June 30.  Their strategy may be dumb, but it hasn't changed.

[NT80]

30 minutes ago, DentonStang said:

It's a valid question. I think the reasonable answer is it's foolish to leave before you have a sure thing in hand. Anything could always blow up.  Leverage that risk against the $17M, which likely won't actually be $17M.  Pretty much every conference change we've seen has had a negotiated exit for better terms.

I will push back against the idea that someone had to have changed recently.  The original SDSU letter to the MWC said they were not giving notice of leaving before July 1, but that they intended to give notice at some point after that.  Nothing was ever happening on June 30.  Their strategy may be dumb, but it hasn't changed.

I agree that the exit fee will probably get negotiated down once the invite to SDSU actually happens (but not to the original $17m), and the strategy of SDSU giving notice of future notice while wanting extension time was foolish.  

I also believe the PAC could have helped leverage the risk better for SDSU to keep the original exit of 2024.  It benefits the PAC greatly too.  Just a mess all around.

Everything is still under the gun to get it all finalized now before PAC media days July 21.  Otherwise the focus on the upcoming season and schools will be lost on media questions about the mess instead.

[DentonStang]

2 minutes ago, NT80 said:

 

Everything is still under the gun to get it all finalized now before PAC media days July 21.  Otherwise the focus on the upcoming season and schools will be lost on media questions about the mess instead.

It would be a distraction, but nobody actually knows if they are trying to beat that deadline. It's been a distraction for a year.  They may not care if it is a distraction on July 21, or may believe it's worth the distraction to continue whatever they are doing.   It's a fan/media derived deadline

[Mike Jackson]

On 7/1/2023 at 8:26 PM, DentonStang said:

They may not care if it is a distraction on July 21, or may believe it's worth the distraction to continue whatever they are doing.   It's a fan/media derived deadline

Actually the PAC 12 set these “deadlines” for themselves and various presidents in the league running off at month made it worse.  The PAC 12 without Southern California market represented is just not a valued product.  And potential media partners are not interested enough to get into a bidding war.

Edited July 5, 2023 by Mike Jackson

[wardly]

10 minutes ago, Mike Jackson said:

Actually the PAC 12 set these “deadlines” for themselves and various presidents in the league running off at month made it worse.  The PAC 12 without Southern California market represented is just not a valued product.  And potential media partners are interested enough to get in a bidding war.

I don't believe that the decision on the move to the PAC 12 by SDSU and SMU is dead, just postponed until their media rights are firmed up. It would be impossible to expand without knowing how many beans are in the pot and the financial impact it will have on the remaining 10 members. If it is in the $20 million dollar range the PAC 12 will probably implode. If in the $30 million dollar range they will probably stay at 10 members. However if they get close to the BIG 12's number they probably will expand. Just a guess and by golly on my part.

[TheColonyEagle]

How can a school as prestigious as SMU with the athletic history and money and support….who the Big 12 would be lucky to have….

How can their future be dictated by what SDSU does? So strange.  

[UNTLifer]

4 hours ago, NT80 said:

“lucky to have”?  Seriously?, lol.  The Big12 could have added SMU anytime since 1994.  They have been passed over numerous times, and for good reasons. The PAC12 will have buyer-remorse if they invite them.  
 

 

I think you missed the sarcasm in his post. 
 

[NT80]

14 minutes ago, UNTLifer said:

I think you missed the sarcasm in his post. 
 

Doh. 😣 

[GMG_Dallas]

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/aztecs/story/2023-07-03/san-diego-state-sdsu-aztecs-mountain-west-conference-pac-12-exit-letters-6-6-million-distribution

This may get a bit nasty but should serve as a lesson to other overly eager ADs about premature announcements.

[greenminer]

oh man.  what a mess, if true.

MWC demands an exit fee, then lets SDSU stay?

Or, does SDSU somehow end up without a home, and has to navigate the treacherous waters of independent football?

[Mean Green 93-98]

37 minutes ago, greenminer said:

oh man.  what a mess, if true.

MWC demands an exit fee, then lets SDSU stay?

Or, does SDSU somehow end up without a home, and has to navigate the treacherous waters of independent football?

I think the MWC would seriously undermine their case for getting the exit fee if they let SDSU stay.  Maybe the PAC will throw them a lifeline before their time in the MWC is up, but I wouldn't count on it.

[wardly]

The MWC just replied to SDSU saying that they have accepted their resignation and are withholding $6.5 million in distribution owed to the Aztecs. In addition they want the $17 million exit fee. Both parties have turned their divorce over to their respective attorneys.

[GMG_Dallas]

2 hours ago, Mean Green 93-98 said:

I think the MWC would seriously undermine their case for getting the exit fee if they let SDSU stay.  Maybe the PAC will throw them a lifeline before their time in the MWC is up, but I wouldn't count on it.

Yes but it's also the MWC's most valuable athletic program right now. Ideally, the MWC is able to parlay this to either allow SDSU to stay but with a larger exit fee moving forward and/or lock them into a longer contract with the conference. They really can't afford to lose each other right now. The MWC would lose one of their top markets, I think only UNLV has a bigger market but they recently added several pro sports teams, and SDSU isn't a big enough brand to survive as an independent. The MWC currently has the upper hand, at least publicly, considering SDSU faces the threat of being independent whereas the MWC was under the impression they were going to move forward without SDSU.

[GMG_Dallas]

3 hours ago, NT80 said:

SDSU could just play this into the one month delay they wanted in the first place. 

If the PAC gets it's media deal finalized, then invites SDSU mid-July, SDSU then tells the MWC: yes, we are leaving and here is your $17 mil instead of the $34 mil.

Yes I've read that as well. If that's SDSU's intentions, they better have some strong inside information that a PAC media deal is coming soon. Otherwise they're going to play themselves out of a conference for the foreseeable future.

I don't think SDSU outsmarted the MWC with this move like many seem to believe. If the MWC really wanted SDSU back on the current terms, they'd have said "ok cool you never submitted your intentions to leave and you don't owe us an exit fee." This move by the MWC indicates they're going to severely screw SDSU over if the PAC media deal doesn't get done by July 17th and SDSU will have no choice but to pick the shackles they prefer. It won't be as simple as SDSU being reinstated as though they never submitted their intent to leave. I also think if SDSU gets the PAC invite, that exit fee won't simply be $17 million since their current stance is they're staying in the MWC. They won't be able to say "yes we did say we're leaving." They said both things and it'll come back to bite them regardless of the PAC deal.

[dodgefan]

The facts (not opinions)
SDSU sent a letter stating it was intending to leave the MWC and asked for a couple of caveats. The MWC responded hell no and that they considered the letter an official withdrawal notice. As we sit today, the MWC's official stance is that SDSU submitted their withdrawal notice. The president of SDSU was promptly removed from her position on the conference leadership council, they aren't paying SDSU their yearly conference payment and are withholding SDSU bball tournament credits. All of this normal for a departing team.

SDSU has argued for weeks that the letter intending to leave the conference was not a formal statement of withdrawal and the latest letter stating SDSU will remain in the MWC doesn't change anything in the factual department although we'll get to that in a minute. MWC disagrees. This where we stand on the facts.

Conjecture:
SDSU made a very shrewd decision in their recent actions. At minimum, they laid the groundwork for a legal fight if they indeed are forced to stay in the MWC. At best, they bought time. Time for the Pac 12 to finish their sheet.

The Pac-12 knows they need to handle their business in the next couple of weeks before their conference on July 21st. That has always been the "unofficial" deadline. I strongly suspect they will. Will it be enough to keep the conference together? We will see. I have some ideas about the delays but I would ask intrepid ponyfans to look at the ESPN fiasco with their recent layoffs and the mobs targeting them over the money they gave to Pat McAfee. Optics bad for announcing a PAC 12 deal? Thoughts for another day and I've digressed.

Prediction:
The PAC 12 announces their deal after getting buy in and GOR rights signed in the next two weeks. I'll guess 7/13-14. Invites promptly go out to SDSU and SMU. Accepted.

SDSU smiles at MWC and says "you were right all along and we agree." MWC counters that SDSU claimed it wasnt a withdrawal letter and they want the double fee. Both parties do a 180 degree turn on their previous positions. Hilarity ensues.
 

[MrAlien]

the Pac12 is a mess, I dont think they are close to a deal.  Obviously the media deal is not going to be as good with out USC/UCLA.  Colorado and Arizona seem to be heading to the Big12, thats going to impact the what ever deal the Pac12 is hoping to get. 

[emmitt01]

I just wish I was in the room for the media rights discussions. 

Any broadcast/internet representative:  "Your conference just lost USC and UCLA, and therefore the Los Angeles market"

Pac12: "Yeah, but we're bringing in SMU and they have the Dallas market" 

Any broadcast/internet representative: "Who?"

Pac12: "SMU...you know, Southern Methodist University"

Any broadcast/internet representative: "So you're replacing Southern Cal with Southern Meth?"

Pac12: "Yeah, they bring the Dallas market"

Any broadcast/internet representative: "They don't even bring the University Park market" 

Pac12: "Look, we're desperate here" 

Any broadcast/internet representative: "Clearly" 

[Coach Andy Mac]

 

[outoftown]

While I get that the Mountain West is annoyed at SDSU, I think acting fast and negotiating fairly benevolently instead of playing hard ball is actually its best buisness decision.  Because if they insist SDSU left, then there is zero chance at getting 34 million in case they need to leave late, because then SDSU can rightfully say: you insisted we told you we are leaving in June, so we get to go for the lower prize. So i would hurry and tell SDSU they can come back in for 2 million or so. You can still play hard ball when they try to make their move official (provided it ever happens, which at this point I don't think is a given anymore). But actually losing SDSU for only 17 million is not good buisnes for the MWC in the long run.

[NT80]

3 hours ago, outoftown said:

While I get that the Mountain West is annoyed at SDSU, I think acting fast and negotiating fairly benevolently instead of playing hard ball is actually its best buisness decision.  Because if they insist SDSU left, then there is zero chance at getting 34 million in case they need to leave late, because then SDSU can rightfully say: you insisted we told you we are leaving in June, so we get to go for the lower prize. So i would hurry and tell SDSU they can come back in for 2 million or so. You can still play hard ball when they try to make their move official (provided it ever happens, which at this point I don't think is a given anymore). But actually losing SDSU for only 17 million is not good buisnes for the MWC in the long run.

"Assuming they learned from San Diego State's mistake, SMU likely won't inform the American of their plan to leave until they know it's a for sure thing. In order to leave they would have to pay the AAC an exit fee of $10 million and also provide a 27-month notice of departure. 

A fee that could come down as the commissioner, Mike Aresco, has revealed he's open to negotiating with a program that is leaving."

https://www.si.com/college/stanford/football/where-smu-stands-with-pac-12-after-san-diego-states-retreat-back-to-mwc

Edited July 6, 2023 by NT80

[outoftown]

16 hours ago, NT80 said:

"Assuming they learned from San Diego State's mistake, SMU likely won't inform the American of their plan to leave until they know it's a for sure thing. In order to leave they would have to pay the AAC an exit fee of $10 million and also provide a 27-month notice of departure. 

A fee that could come down as the commissioner, Mike Aresco, has revealed he's open to negotiating with a program that is leaving."

https://www.si.com/college/stanford/football/where-smu-stands-with-pac-12-after-san-diego-states-retreat-back-to-mwc

It feels like the AACs exit fees are low. Particularly if you compare them to those in the MWC.