4 teams from AAC agree to leave?

[outoftown]

8 minutes ago, wardly said:

From what I read Luck, who is who the PAC 12 should if hired in the 1st place as commissioner, is exploring options for the remaining 4 programs. His first hurdle in saving the conference is to put together some type of TV contract that pays as much as the American Athletic Conference , somewhere if the $10 million plus range. Without one the PAC 12 conference is dead . If he can get one, which is a big if, then they can add 4 AAC programs now and a few MWC schools later. If not, then the PAC 4 can decide to go independent or join the AAC . The only 2 schools who might chose the independent rout are Stanford and Cal, and Cal has major financial problems in their athletic department. If appears the the MWC is a no go because of the length of their media contract and the fact it only pays $4 million a year,. On the other hand the AAC has an option in their media contract that they can renegotiate if they bring in new members that increases the conference's value. Isn't this fun.

The problem is that this is the wrong way around for it to work. Its administrators trying to get security for themselves and have the tv networks carry the uncertainty. The Tv networks however want certainty for themselves. You can't really negotiate a tv contract if you don't know what your product is (i.e. who your your member schools are). Its what the PAC10 got wrong in the first place. You can't negotiate on: we got these 4 schools and likely, but not yet contractually signed, these other schools. No tv network is gonna shell out top dollar if they are currently hurting for something that insecure.

If the PAC had expanded first, and only then tried to negotiate, I am fairly certain it would have gone at least slightly better. If you are a TV exec at the negotiation table, the whole SDSU fiasko doesn't make you want to give the PAC presidents the benefit of the doubt in all of this.

Edited August 16, 2023 by outoftown

[NorthTexasWeLove]

At this point, they are doing EVERYTHING in their power not to be affiliated with us and other AAC institutions. So, when they exhaust all of their options and have nowhere to turn they are suspectedly are supposed to show up at our doorstep all the while trying dictate top shares. Then, they will create a fractured foundation as they will continue an attempt to leave. Why let them in? If the 14 AAC institutions band together and stay pat while not letting them in they will squirm. At this point, weeks into this thing, let them. 

[TripleGrad]

56 minutes ago, NorthTexasWeLove said:

Why let them in? If the 14 AAC institutions band together and stay pat while not letting them in they will squirm. At this point, weeks into this thing, let them. 

 

I would agree with this, if the result is the teams joining the AAC.  But there is value in the name PAC, and that gives the 4 teams a bit of leverage.  UNT should jump at the change to join a P5 conference, even if there is a huge * behind that conference name.

[wardly]

1 hour ago, mustangfan said:

Good info!  One thing you are missing is there was some type pf accounting error from Comcast that overpaid Pac 12 by the tune of 50 million dollars and they will have to pay it unless they just shut the whole thing down.

https://cordcuttersnews.com/pac-12-network-must-pay-comcast-50-million-dollar-after-fiasco/?amp=1

I read that Comcast is going after all of the PAC 12 schools, not just the remaining 4, for repayment of the over payment. What a mess.

[TIgreen01]

1 hour ago, wardly said:

From what I read Luck, who is who the PAC 12 should if hired in the 1st place as commissioner, is exploring options for the remaining 4 programs. His first hurdle in saving the conference is to put together some type of TV contract that pays as much as the American Athletic Conference , somewhere if the $10 million plus range. Without one the PAC 12 conference is dead . If he can get one, which is a big if, then they can add 4 AAC programs now and a few MWC schools later. If not, then the PAC 4 can decide to go independent or join the AAC . The only 2 schools who might chose the independent rout are Stanford and Cal, and Cal has major financial problems in their athletic department. If appears the the MWC is a no go because of the length of their media contract and the fact it only pays $4 million a year,. On the other hand the AAC has an option in their media contract that they can renegotiate if they bring in new members that increases the conference's value. Isn't this fun.

This sounds like a fairly reasonable approach.  My question is what is the motivation for an AAC school to leave if the tv money is the same?

The main thing driving realignment has always been better tv money and exposure.  This would not be that.  I assume it is aligning the private elites?  If that’s the case, I’m all for them leaving as long as that is all it is.

Also, when does a Stanford and/or Cal just make the same decision that the other state UC schools made 3 decades ago, or the University of Chicago and Ivy leagues did in the 1930s?  Is football really adding to their profile enough to warrant this madness?

Edited August 16, 2023 by TIgreen01

[GMG_Dallas]

18 minutes ago, TIgreen01 said:

Also, when does a Stanford and/or Cal just make the same decision that the other state UC schools made 3 decades ago, or the University of Chicago and Ivy leagues did in the 1930s?  Is football really adding to their profile enough to warrant this madness?

Stanford has too much history to give it all up now. Not going to go down the list but John Elway and Jim Plunkett are the obvious historical ones. More recently, Christian McCaffrey and of course Andrew Luck were huge names. I'd imagine Oliver Luck is doing everything he can to make sure Stanford, his son's Alma mater, doesn't even consider dropping FBS football. Question is, is he biased in favor of Stanford? The PAC should have picked somebody with no ties to any of the remaining schools to work on all of this.

Does it add to their profile? At this point it does. Too many generations have witnessed great Stanford teams.

Edited August 16, 2023 by GMG_Dallas

[MrAlien]

The PAC brand is being drug through the mud and the name is not going to be worth anything when all is said and done.  The PAC does have a major financial issue with Comcast, among other law suits.  SDSU got a look at what was going on and changed their mind about joining, SMU probably got a peak as well.  I dont think these schools are going to jump ship just for a name, there is a lot of money on the line.

[Green Otaku]

6 minutes ago, MrAlien said:

The PAC brand is being drug through the mud and the name is not going to be worth anything when all is said and done.  The PAC does have a major financial issue with Comcast, among other law suits.  SDSU got a look at what was going on and changed their mind about joining, SMU probably got a peak as well.  I dont think these schools are going to jump ship just for a name, there is a lot of money on the line.

The highlighted is not true in any way. SDSU was waiting on hands and knees for any invite from the PAC. They even notified the MWC they were leaving before even having the invite in hand, just in case they got one. There's no need to make up a false narrative. 

Edited August 16, 2023 by Green Otaku

[MrAlien]

1 hour ago, Green Otaku said:

The highlighted is not true in any way. SDSU was waiting on hands and knees for any invite from the PAC. They even notified the MWC they were leaving before even having the invite in hand, just in case they got one. There's no need to make up a false narrative. 

you really think with millions of dollars at stake that SDSU didnt dig into what was going on in the PAC? 

[Green Otaku]

19 minutes ago, MrAlien said:

you really think with millions of dollars at stake that SDSU didnt dig into what was going on in the PAC? 

Of course they did, what's that got to do with anything? My comment is in no way about them looking into the PAC financials. It is about SDSU changing their mind about joining. Every step of the way SDSU was begging to join the PAC. They never backed out, the invitation never came. 

[El Paso Eagle]

 

 

[wardly]

3 hours ago, Green Otaku said:

Of course they did, what's that got to do with anything? My comment is in no way about them looking into the PAC financials. It is about SDSU changing their mind about joining. Every step of the way SDSU was begging to join the PAC. They never backed out, the invitation never came. 

Again, from what I read the members of the MVC are handcuffed by their $34 million exit fee. However, the AAC exit fee is mush less, about $10 million. If the PAC 4 is looking to add 4 AAC members based upon market size, then SMU,UTSA,Rice, and USF might be their choices since geography, logic and reason no longer prevail in conference realignment.  However, with no media contract, why would AAC members jump to the PAC 4? Even if they do get one how much better would it be than ours? In addition ,you would be joining the PAC 4 knowing that Stanford and Cal are gone as soon as they can and you gave up the security of the AAC to partner with OSU and WSU [ Hang on. I know that there is no real security in conference realignment but it just sounded good]. In summary, I can understand while members of the PAC 4 might join the AAC, but can't understand why some of us would want to join them. Its all about risk and reward.

[Green Otaku]

1 hour ago, wardly said:

Again, from what I read the members of the MVC are handcuffed by their $34 million exit fee. However, the AAC exit fee is mush less, about $10 million. If the PAC 4 is looking to add 4 AAC members based upon market size, then SMU,UTSA,Rice, and USF might be their choices since geography, logic and reason no longer prevail in conference realignment.  However, with no media contract, why would AAC members jump to the PAC 4? Even if they do get one how much better would it be than ours? In addition ,you would be joining the PAC 4 knowing that Stanford and Cal are gone as soon as they can and you gave up the security of the AAC to partner with OSU and WSU [ Hang on. I know that there is no real security in conference realignment but it just sounded good]. In summary, I can understand while members of the PAC 4 might join the AAC, but can't understand why some of us would want to join them. Its all about risk and reward.

Did you quote the wrong post? My post you quoted was about SDSU. 

[wardly]

20 minutes ago, Green Otaku said:

Did you quote the wrong post? My post you quoted was about SDSU. 

Sorry, my bad. Arthritis in the hands is a bitch. But while I have you,in my opinion the administration at SDSU really dodged a bullet. It would have been a pisser to have paid $17 million to join the PAC 12 and then have it blow up, and even worse if they had left the MWC without an invitation in hand, which to my knowledge was never offered. While they may have done their due diligence regarding the stability of the PAC 12 after the loss of USC and UCLA, no one could have predicted that the conference would lose 5 members in basically one day. Just ask the remaining 4 schools. Personally I think that the Aztecs would have done anything to join the PAC 12 but were saved by dumb luck. Now if the PAC 12 and AAC join forces will SDSU be as passionate about gaining entry in the future? Who knows. Certainly not me.

[Green Otaku]

1 hour ago, wardly said:

Sorry, my bad. Arthritis in the hands is a bitch. But while I have you,in my opinion the administration at SDSU really dodged a bullet. It would have been a pisser to have paid $17 million to join the PAC 12 and then have it blow up, and even worse if they had left the MWC without an invitation in hand, which to my knowledge was never offered. While they may have done their due diligence regarding the stability of the PAC 12 after the loss of USC and UCLA, no one could have predicted that the conference would lose 5 members in basically one day. Just ask the remaining 4 schools. Personally I think that the Aztecs would have done anything to join the PAC 12 but were saved by dumb luck. Now if the PAC 12 and AAC join forces will SDSU be as passionate about gaining entry in the future? Who knows. Certainly not me.

All good, I was just confused haha. If you remember back in the original "SMU to the PAC" thread there's a reason I said I was in full support of them leaving, and that they should do so and sign immediately 😂. Indeed SDSU got lucky, and they should by all accounts be paying for their reckless decision to put in notice before having an invite in-hand. Considering there were reports that they tried to lead a "best of the rest" effort to cherry pick the AAC/MWC with the PAC4, I'd say they are still pretty interested. 

[golfingomez]

6 hours ago, El Paso Eagle said:

 

 

This is what I don't understand. What is the appeal of hitching your wagon to the for remaining schools... They bring no eyeballs and you could easily argue that any of the potential schools they are "targeting" could automatically be the best football school in the conference. 

On the flip side, Stanford wants private schools like smu/Tulane... Who have almost no following at all... I don't see how they can put together any sorry if media deal that puts them over 15/year...

[Green Otaku]

2 hours ago, golfingomez said:

This is what I don't understand. What is the appeal of hitching your wagon to the for remaining schools... They bring no eyeballs and you could easily argue that any of the potential schools they are "targeting" could automatically be the best football school in the conference. 

Autonomy status

$80m a year CFP payouts

For intangibles they bring the reputation of a 100+ year old conference that is nationally known, meaning winning in this conference gets you national coverage and more attention, which in turn means better chance of being ranked/better recruits/more money. At least up to this point, we'll see how that changes in the future. 

[outoftown]

3 hours ago, Green Otaku said:

Autonomy status

$80m a year CFP payouts

For intangibles they bring the reputation of a 100+ year old conference that is nationally known, meaning winning in this conference gets you national coverage and more attention, which in turn means better chance of being ranked/better recruits/more money. At least up to this point, we'll see how that changes in the future. 

I am guessing that they may actually get that money in 24/25 (after that it is almost certainly gone). But it will not be without a fight from the SEC, G5 and ACC, who will all angle to get a piece of that. I doubt the B1G and B12 will play hardball on that money, because they don't want to get sued.

Edited August 17, 2023 by outoftown

[wardly]

On 8/15/2023 at 5:00 PM, meangreenbob said:

TWIST AND TURNS. 

 

21 hours ago, mustangfan said:

Good info!  One thing you are missing is there was some type pf accounting error from Comcast that overpaid Pac 12 by the tune of 50 million dollars and they will have to pay it unless they just shut the whole thing down.

https://cordcuttersnews.com/pac-12-network-must-pay-comcast-50-million-dollar-after-fiasco/?amp=1

Well, probably to no ones surprise I am confused as to Andrew Luck's actual roll in the PAC 4. I watched Trey Smith's Podcast last night and he interviewed a personal friend [ whose name escapes me] of Lucks who said that Luck at this time is representing OSU and WSU only and not Cal or Stanford. However, this could change.This is a college friend whose career is in media and was told this personally by Luck. I also watched Harry interview Smith who thinks that the AAC commissioner will not drop any existing  AAC members in order to gain the remaining PAC 4 programs. Smith is really high on Aresco and thinks he is doing a great job. For those of us who are interested in " all things AAC " I would strongly recommend that you follow Trey Smith.

[keith]

7 hours ago, Green Otaku said:

Autonomy status

$80m a year CFP payouts

For intangibles they bring the reputation of a 100+ year old conference that is nationally known, meaning winning in this conference gets you national coverage and more attention, which in turn means better chance of being ranked/better recruits/more money. At least up to this point, we'll see how that changes in the future. 

Exactly.  While all of the PAC-4 seemed to have expressed interest in rebuilding the PAC, I think more is at stake for OSU and WSU and to a lesser extent Cal keeping the PAC alive.  It's my understanding the repayment to Comcast are the obligation and liability of the schools and not the conference, so it doesn't go away for these schools or get transferred to new PAC members whatever happens.  Stanford may say they want to reconstitute the PAC, but they will always be looking for a way out to the B1G, the ACC or B12, so they are a short-timer whatever happens with the PAC.  OSU, WSU and Cal need to realize Stanford is looking out for its own best interest and will screw them in at the first opportunity.  There is already a crack between the three and Stanford.  Can the AAC drive a wedge between them and get this band-aid ripped off?

The lifeline the AAC proposed should be amended to reflect the reality everyone knows and include only OSU, WSU and Cal in the offer.  Stanford can pound sand.  Could this force the PAC-3 to act?  Either accept the AAC offer or proposed a counter offer from the PAC-4 voting 3-1 to invite all members of the AAC to join the PAC and therefore "rebuilding" the PAC (it's really an AAC take-over with it's media agreements, etc., but preserving the PAC conference and everything mentioned above).  If Stanford comes along or not, it doesn't matter as they will do whatever they want.  Even if Cal leaves at some point, all the institutions of the AAC will have further separated themselves from the rest of G5s they were previously part of.

Edited August 17, 2023 by keith

[Green Otaku]

7 hours ago, outoftown said:

I am guessing that they may actually get that money in 24/25 (after that it is almost certainly gone). But it will not be without a fight from the SEC, G5 and ACC, who will all angle to get a piece of that. I doubt the B1G and B12 will play hardball on that money, because they don't want to get sued.

I can't remember where I read it, but the process to remove the autonomy label would be pretty tough. The original vote was made by the NCAA board or directors, so will it be them who vote or will it be the Division 1 council? 

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/ncaa-adopts-new-division-i-model-giving-power-5-autonomy/

This part of the article is key:

Quote

There will be two ways to pass new rules: Get 60 percent of all the votes from 65 school representatives and 15 athletes plus a simple majority from three of the Power 5 conferences; or get 51 percent of the votes and a simple majority from four of the five Power 5 conferences.

 

Assuming the PAC gets to keep its votes, and the B1G, and Big12 having pity on their former conference mates I would think it'd be hard to pass. 

[keith]

27 minutes ago, Green Otaku said:

I can't remember where I read it, but the process to remove the autonomy label would be pretty tough. The original vote was made by the NCAA board or directors, so will it be them who vote or will it be the Division 1 council? 

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/ncaa-adopts-new-division-i-model-giving-power-5-autonomy/

This part of the article is key:

 

Assuming the PAC gets to keep its votes, and the B1G, and Big12 having pity on their former conference mates I would think it'd be hard to pass. 

Fantasy world, I'm sure, but it could go down like this.  I haven't done the math on this, but let's say the SEC, B1G, ACC and B12 turn on a weakened and out-numbered PAC.  It would not be hard to get 51% and a simple majority.  We are now down to the A4.  Then the SEC, B1G and ACC get wary of the resurgent B12, so they do the same thing.  The SEC, B1G and ACC don't like the B12 having a say in their affairs, so the three ensure 51% and a simple majority.  Down to an A3.  Finally, SEC and B1G realize they are the ones driving the boat.  Why should the ACC get a 1/3 say.  They vote out the ACC and get to what's they've always wanted, an A2.  All autonomy conferences are created equal, just some are more equal than others. 

Hahaha.  This is why if the PAC wants to stay around they need numbers, but even then, it may not be enough.

[VideoEagle]

14 hours ago, golfingomez said:

On the flip side, Stanford wants private schools like smu/Tulane

Do they really or is I just internet rumor. Stanford did really want in the ACC. Yes, there are private schools in the ACC, but all of them have much higher profiles and fan basses than SMU, Tulane, and Tulsa. 
 

Does Stanford really want them or are they just willing to accept them until Stanford can get  in the group they really want?

[Rudy]

14 minutes ago, VideoEagle said:

Do they really or is I just internet rumor. Stanford did really want in the ACC. Yes, there are private schools in the ACC, but all of them have much higher profiles and fan basses than SMU, Tulane, and Tulsa. 
 

Does Stanford really want them or are they just willing to accept them until Stanford can get  in the group they really want?

Maybe there should be an all private school conference.  The Douche Athletic Conference "DAC", or they could keep the PAC moniker after the PAC 12 dissolves.  It could be the Prick Athletic Conference.

[Green Otaku]

53 minutes ago, keith said:

Fantasy world, I'm sure, but it could go down like this.  I haven't done the math on this, but let's say the SEC, B1G, ACC and B12 turn on a weakened and out-numbered PAC.  It would not be hard to get 51% and a simple majority.  We are now down to the A4.  Then the SEC, B1G and ACC get wary of the resurgent B12, so they do the same thing.  The SEC, B1G and ACC don't like the B12 having a say in their affairs, so the three ensure 51% and a simple majority.  Down to an A3.  Finally, SEC and B1G realize they are the ones driving the boat.  Why should the ACC get a 1/3 say.  They vote out the ACC and get to what's they've always wanted, an A2.  All autonomy conferences are created equal, just some are more equal than others. 

Hahaha.  This is why if the PAC wants to stay around they need numbers, but even then, it may not be enough.

Make sure to read the article in detail. They must have the conferences AND the Division 1 council votes to approve/change anything. 

http://web1.ncaa.org/committees/committees_roster.jsp?CommitteeName=1COUNCIL