Arizona Expected to join Big 12
A lot of this broke later last night, but it looks like Arizona is jumping off the sinking PAC ship.
Tweet from Ross Dellenger (Yahoo Sports):
Big 12 executives met Thursday to approve the application of Arizona as a 14th member, sources tell @YahooSports, paving the way for the Wildcats to enter the conference. It is another step in UA’s path to join. The final step would be approval from its Board of Regents.
— Ross Dellenger (@RossDellenger) August 4, 2023
And an article from Pete Thamel (ESPN):
Arizona is in deep discussions about joining the Big 12, sources told ESPN, with a deal expected to be finalized in the near future.
The school is amid the final steps, sources said, including detailing the move in an Arizona board of regents meeting Thursday night. Big 12 presidents and CEOs met Thursday to vote on approving the move, sources confirmed to ESPN, another sign of the likelihood of it happening.
Barring an unexpected turn in the board of regents meeting, Arizona's decision is expected be formalized soon, sources said.
I'd imagine we'll probably see the B1G make offers to Oregon and Washington soon, but who really knows?
Arizona St and Utes will follow.
OU and UW(NTUW) to the BigTen(if 10=18).
Stanford, Cal, WSU, and Oregon State to… MWC? And the MWC would be smart to rebrand as the Pac14 or Pac16 or however many they will have. (Those four school will have the IP rights to Pac12 so sort of bring the name with them).
FSU and Clemson to…??? I bet BigTen(if 10=20) grabs them.
This makes sense. I wouldn't mind Utah in the BigTen though.
I'm already planning my vacations to away games on the west coast...
That's a smart idea to rebrand. I'd say just invite the MWC to join the Pac.
How far in advance are the bowl tie-ins negotiated? Would this new Pac have the rights to these bowl matchups?
I dont think any MWC will pay the exit fees to join the PAC-4
But that's what you negotiate with the network that's covering the MWC. Would that network prefer to say they are covering MWC games or Pac games? Substantively little difference, but there would now be a brand name attached to it.
Not sure what the fees are but you would think that it's worth it to take the hit up front for long-term stability. I also don't know if you invite everyone from the MWC. Seems kind of shitty to leave the lesser lucrative teams out in the cold but maybe a merger of the conferences makes sense and could possibly help eliminate the need for exit fees and such.
The long term stability is in the conference that is holding strong right now, not the one falling apart at the seams.
“leave the less lucrative teams out” I mean we’re talking about the likes of Oregon St and Wazzu here on the PAC side of things. You seem to be looking at this through the perspective that the remainder of the PAC is made up of respected programs with huge fanbases and lots of money. That’s just not the reality. This is like the B1G breaking up and Purdue, Illinois, Indiana and NW being what’s leftover.
Most likely scenario is a merger, where the MWC infrastructure is maintained and there’s a rebrand for the conference name. MWC teams aren’t “joining” the PAC.
Today will be a big day because the pac has a mandatory meeting in which the schools will be presented with a grant of rights. The reason for this is that the Apple deal expires at the end of the day. Arizona is almost completely out of the door, but Arizona State and Utah want to see how the meeting goes because they're holding on to hope that the pac can stay alive.
Oregon and Washington do have some hesitation to go to the Big Ten at the moment and are trying to negotiate for more money. The pac Apple deal is 20 million a year and Washington forecast that it's going to cost them an additional $10 million dollars for travel in the Big Ten. That comes with to 30 million and the big 10 is currently offering 35 to 40 million. They would be getting an escalating deal like a Maryland and Rutgers received.
It does feel that Oregon and Washington are running low on negotiating power if Arizona State and Utah leave for the Big 12. BUT there is still hesitation from the Big Ten to bring Oregon and Washington on as well from member institutions. Illinois, Rutgers, Maryland, Northwestern would more than likely get the Big Ten after dark time slots on the West Coast. They appear not to be fans of this. Michigan, Penn State and Ohio State would not get these because they would receive primetime spots.
Well Rutgers, Maryland and well Northwestern now can hit the bricks if they don't like it.
Still don't really understand the appeal of Oregon long-term. Does anyone care about them after Phil Knight dies? They have next to no research dollars attached. They're not particularly close to Portland but even if you consider that their TV market do you actually care about it?
August 4th, 2023 at 10:25 AM ^
This is my issue with Oregon. Are they the next Nebraska or Miami (YTM)?
Oregon isn't exactly California or Florida, it's much more Nebraska, size wise.
I think the last 2 to get the BIG to 20 (if that is indeed our goal) would be Virginia and UNC unless ND decides it's willing to come down of it's pedestal and actually join a conference. This likely won't happen for awhile given the Grant of Rights situation in the ACC.
Better academics, decent enough sports (better Bball than Football admittedly), and gives the east coast some other teams. This would better balance the national footprint of the conference. 4 West coast (USC, UCLA, OR, Wash) and 4 East coast (Rutgers, Maryland, Virgina, and UNC) and the rest in the midwest.
Also, this would give the mid and lower tier football programs MSU, IU, NW, Rutgers, etc. some "fair" competition.
Clemson and FSU seem a better fit for SEC and their inevitable expansion.
August 4th, 2023 at 12:58 PM ^
I agree with all of this but I don't know why the SEC would want Clemson or FSU. They already have football teams in those states and wouldn't necessarily be expanding their market footprint. Florida is such a big (and growing) state that it could make sense for FSU. I think that VA Tech may be better for the SEC than Clemson. That gives them access to a new and bigger market.
Stanford and Cal to the MWC?
They'll wind up in a better conference.
August 4th, 2023 at 10:18 AM ^
Agreed. That makes no sense to me.
I think the only remaining question is: does the PAC survive in a reduced form by picking up some west coast G5 schools? Or does it just disappear and the remaining schools go independent or self-relegate to the Mountain West or WAC or something?
If the PAC survives, it will be a fraction of its former self…. And, I don’t think it will be referred to as. P5 conference.
In the likely event of the Pac-12 meteor crashing, the remaining schools going independent is kind of a worse-case scenario, especially for Wazzu and Oregon State. Stanford and Cal likely could likely make it for a few years but they would want to join a stable conference asap and should have at least 1 suitor willing to offer them. I believe there were rumblings about Wazzu having athletic department funding shortfalls and without a slice of the media payout pie, that would leave them in dire straights. Not sure about the Beavers though.
Lastly, if an CFP auto-bid is still left for the Pac-Whatever after all is said and done, wouldn't the combination of Stanford, Cal, Wazzu and OSU want to remain in the zombie conference with the addition of MWC/G5 teams? They basically would take away the premier football teams in the conference and thus making it much easier to get to the post-season? Besides the likely additions of Boise St and SDSU, one would think it would be much more comfortable to compete against the likes of New Mexico, San Jose State, and Wyoming?
Theres no benefit for those West Coast G5 schools to join the Pac-whatever. Wait it out and you’ll end up in the same conference anyway. Why pay the exit fees to end up with the same group of schools? PAC has zero leverage at this point. Best case is an agreed merger where the PAC branding is maintained.
WAC doesn’t exist anymore at the FBS level btw. So unless you’re insinuating that a P5 school is going to relegate itself to a lesser conference and FCS football, that’s not one of the options.
Dear Big Ten: add UW, UO, Cal, and Stanford please
August 4th, 2023 at 10:05 AM ^
It might just be me......but there's no way that I'd take Cal. Also, I'd only take Stanford if that could be used as leverage to get Notre Dame. If Notre Dame is an absolute "no go". I'd reserve those last two slots (assuming that B1G is trying to get to 20) for ACC teams. That could be FSU and Clemson. My preference would be UVA and UNC to keep the B1G somewhat contiguous on this side of the country (and keep up academic standing).
B1G 1: Michigan, OSU, MSU, IU, Purdue
B1G 2: Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern
B1G New: PSU, Maryland, Rutgers, UVA, UNC
B1G West: USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington and Nebraska.
August 4th, 2023 at 10:54 AM ^
Florida State’s board pres is a joke. They cant go anywhere and everyone sees through his BS posturing.
The ACC is locked up for a long time.
Several years ago it really looked like the Big 12 was going to be the odd man out. Now it appears the Pac 10 will die or change dramatically and the ACC is starting to look a little wobbly. College football barely resembles the sport I remember as a kid. I do love the expanded playoff though.
Same. Not sure if I like it but it seems like we don't have much of a choice. I liked the idea of regional conferences and how each one had its style of play.
If it was up to me, I'd return to the Big 10 as an actual regional conference and restore the traditional conference-aligned bowl system. I don't give AF if people argue about the final polls. Playoffs are, in my boomer view, just another step in turning college football into a minor league professional system.
But I'm well aware that's all just dreaming; the train has left the station.
I agree. The fact that people debate national champions in the pre-BCS/pre-playoff era was a fun quirk of CFB. The sport was fine and fun the way it was. We've set ourselves on a path toward financial optimization above every other consideration. It's going to destroy (and already partially has destroyed) what made CFB uniquely durable as an entertainment product.
Regional conferences are fun because they let you have rivalries with your neighbors. Michigan-USC will be a "big game" when it happens, but its outcome will be abstract for me because (working and living in Michigan), I don't work with or know personally any USC alums or fans. I'm not going to dunk on my USC coworkers if Harbaugh smokes them in 2024, because I don't have any USC co-workers. That is not the case with OSU, MSU, Purdue, IU, Wisconsin, etc. I interact with those people in my work and social life day in and day out, which makes the regional games meaningful beyond football.
Like you I realize the cat is long since out of the bag, and toothpaste left the tube 20 years ago, the horse not only left the barn but retired and moved to Florida, etc. It is worse though. The product is declining and it stinks because it didn't have to be this way. These were conscious choices made by people in charge to maximize their next-quarter and next-year profits over the long-term health of their enterprise. I realize that impulse is as American as apple pie, but it doesn't make it something we should cheer.
It’s completely arbitrary to point to 20 years ago to say that’s when the sport lost its way. The fact is, this was always going to be inevitably where the sport went. Mixing big time athletics and major educational universities was never a good fit, and it was never going to be a viable long-term solution. Specifically, college football and basketball are now just minor league sports programs pigeonholed into some academic framework. The whole system is broken and arguably never should’ve existed in the first place.
August 4th, 2023 at 10:19 AM ^
Newsflash: it's basically been that since forever.
Klatt did a really good review of this in one of his recent youtube pods, but he basically said that as soon as the Big10/SEC rose above the rest of the conferences, the rest of the power 5 would need to make a decision on how to compete for the crumbs.
The Pac 12 and ACC diluted themselves in to thinking they could remain in the top tear, and specifically, the Pac 12 thought they would get a TV deal like they used to get with USC/UCLA, and they found out that wasn't happening.
The Big 12, which was probably in the worst place when this reallignment started, decided to embrace it's status as a large mid-major conference, took the (smaller) available TV rights while the Pac 12 is left in the cold, and now seems happy to be the backup plan for any team that needs to bolt their conference, but isn't getting a B10/SEC offer.
Basically, in the new world order, the B10/SEC is the reach conference, Big 12 your safety, and the Pac 12, and likely next year, the ACC, will not exist as we've traditionally known them,
So, the big 12 upon losing Texas and Oklahoma immediately grabs four g5 teams to improve footprint and works it's tail off to get a better tv/media rights deal without texas in the way to stop the bs and all B12 teams improve their tv deal.. Again, without texas they improved their tv deal..
How bad is the pac12 commish to completely blow it so bad they lose the entire conference? Many expected the Pac12 to immediately try and replace Usc/Ucla with SDSU and begin looking at the conference footprint to find another way to go. Nope, sit back, dont do anything, wreck the tv negotiations worse and implosion is impending? It's comical how bad the pac12 is ran and no wonder Usc/Ucla bolted and Oregon/Washington were begging the big10 as well as the 4 corner schools begging the big12..
How bad is the pac12 commish to completely blow it so bad they lose the entire conference?
Well... Let me tell you the story of a man named Larry Scott...
For a minute there I was feeling sorry for the NorCal and PNW schools. Larry Scott really screwed the PAC 12 up. Then I remembered that they're the ones that hired Larry Scott.
I dunno man, the current guy turned down the Big 12 deal because he thought he could get more for the PAC... oops. If he accepted that deal the PAC probably survives and the Big 12 is withering on the vine.
The AZ Board of Regents (with jurisdiction over both AZ schools) had an emergency meeting last night and were expected to green light ASU's move to the Big 12, too. They want to keep the state schools together. This is the domino that kills the PAC 12 and puts the ACC on notice. And even though it's been radio silence from the South, I can't imagine the SEC is sitting quietly waiting for things to happen.
The SEC shouldn't expand until they move to a 9-game conference schedule. If they expand to 16 and put one team in the East and West, they would only play one cross-divisional rival as it stands at an 8-game schedule.
BTW: great username. I came across a Yooper in Hawaii this summer. You people sure do get around 😊
August 4th, 2023 at 11:17 AM ^
You people sure do get around 😊
Of course...how many of them are eager to get out of the cold?
What is interesting about all of this to me is, for the sake of the CFP, I would’ve at least figured there would be four super conferences. It appears as if that isn’t going to be the case. as it appears now, the Bigten, SEC and Big12 are the only major conferences expanding. The ACC might lose teams and the only possible team they could even remotely add would be Notre Dame. All other teams appear to be going to one of the three conferences I mentioned above.
Given the locations of the ACC teams in huge and growing markets, it's hard to imagine how they screwed that up. Might be because their strength is more in basketball which is less valuable than football.
They have the same issue the PAC has though. Their footprint just doesn't care enough about football and football is where the money is made.
Respectfully, which ACC markets are huge and growing?
Atlanta - Georgia Tech.. IMO, Atlanta is a desirable market.
Florida - FSU and Miami - a lot of people.
South Carolina - Clemson.. hmmm?
North Carolina - UNC, Duke, NC State, and Wake Forest… one or two of four.
Virginia - UVA and Va Tech. One of two.
Boston College - great school.. what’s their national following?
Syracuse - upstate NY.. hmmm..
Pitt .. Pittsburgh - loves NFL football.
Louisville. Doesn’t seem to be a targeted market.
Miami started shrinking. Drastically. Too expensive (and insurance is a nightmare).
August 4th, 2023 at 10:43 AM ^
Kind of thought the same thing. 4 power conferences at 16 teams a piece would be the cleanest way to go about it. But looks like we are headed towards a "power three" conferences with 20 teams each. and then probably like 2 mid major conferences, followed by a somehow even more irrelevant G5.
August 4th, 2023 at 11:23 AM ^
Not sure I'd put the BigXII into "power three." What are their top brands, and how far down the list of B1G & SEC schools do you go until you find the first BigXII school?
KSU? TCU? TTech? OSU (NTOSU)? Baylor? Colo? AZ? ...everything there falls in the middle-to-bottom half of the B1G/SEC.
August 4th, 2023 at 11:38 AM ^
Yeah SEC and B1G will be considered top 2 no doubt. But Big 12 looks like it will be a cut above the other conferences when it all shakes out. If you want to divide it into 4 tiers and put them alone in the second tier then that's fine.
So the PAC can't get a TV deal done, so we are going to take a bunch of PAC teams and some how this is going to all work out financially during the next round of negotiations. It's starting to feel like conference expansion is akin to biting off the nose to spite the face at this point. If the conference gets so big that you can't guarantee USC vs Michigan or OSU vs USC on a yearly basis then we've accomplished nothing.
These TV contracts have all largely relied on the number of marquee matchups you can promise. There has never been a groundswell for games between Iowa, Purdue, Indiana, Rutgers, Maryland, or even really Nebraska. But right now the Big 10 can promise matchups between national brands like UM, OSU, USC, PSU, and to a lesser extent UCLA. If you add Oregon and Washington, those are teams with national profiles that have been good long enough, and recently enough, that you can market those games to advertisers and they'll be a big deal. Oregon-OSU was a huge game a couple years ago, and UM-UW would have had some juice had 2020 not happened and UM was viewed as a down program. So that's inventory that justifies the price tag.
What hurt the Pac-12 is Oregon and Washington were really the only schools anybody cared about left over. Barely anybody watched Cal and Stanford games even when the latter was good, Oregon St. and Wash St. are fun teams but they're small-ish schools in far-flung parts of the PNW. Arizona and ASU have some juice being in a growing state but other than Arizona hoops they haven't been relevant nationally for decades. Utah's a good football program but that's not a national brand, and anyone buying CU as anything more than a flash-in-the-pan somehow believe Deion is going to (a) make them good quickly and then (b) stick around afterwards if he does.
So yeah, it sucks to see the Pac-12 fall apart but I do think those years where UM and OSU don't play USC you can still get key matchups with, say, UM vs. Oregon and OSU vs. UW that would have playoff stakes. And honestly, let's see how USC looks when they don't get to feast on a mediocre conference.
I think in ten years M-OSU-PSU-USC are going to form their own conference and bring 3-4 others - maybe oregon, MSU, Nebraska but if M and USC are real petty it could be like Nebraska Wisconsin Maryland or something. It'll be dumb but also not any dumber than what's going on right now.
I fully assume there will be more conference alignment, and a humorous analogy would be the proliferation of streaming services that let people "cut the cord" only to become so unwielding that everyone sort of wished there was a single service they could subscribe to in order to get all the content they liked.
I will be in the minority here and say that the Big 10 bought high on Nebraska and that's a program that will be relegated to second-class status nationally for the foreseeable future. This take by Matt Brown nicely encapsulates my view of the Cornhuskers as a football school.
If the Big 10 ever broke out again they'd basically be in the Rutgers tier for me in terms of teams I'd like to see sticking around.
The irony here is palpable. Lord knows what Nebraska's conference record is against the B1G West division is but comparing the other programs they play as "slumming" is a complete slap in the face.
If I were Minny, Iowa, Wisky, and Illinois, I certainly take that comment personally and want to take the Huskers behind the corn silo and give them a goodly beating with a corn stalk.
August 4th, 2023 at 11:45 AM ^
That's an insanely bad take, but what's even more ironic to me is the fact that Nebraska partially did this to themselves by joining the Big 10. Their Texas recruiting footprint became significantly more difficult when they stopped regularly playing the Texas schools, and now they recruit like the "slum" teams they compete with regularly - Minnesota, Iowa, etc.
Absolutely - Nebraska makes sense as a Big 12 school and them nakedly cash-grabbing an invite from the Big 10 did this to themselves. They had some success recruiting in CA, especially around Fresno, and so going to the Big 10 hurt them even more. I fully expect them to get a bit better with Rhule but there's a hard cap on that program and it's probably Bo Pelini took them - 9/10 wins and being a pain to play.