Breaking USC & UCLAbia Joining BIG 10

[Alum-Ni]

A couple of interesting questions from Stewart Mandel's weekly mailbag at The Athletic:

Mandel's Mailbag: More realignment questions, from TV slots to revenue splits

The season's getting closer, but the mailbag is still filled with realignment questions. What now for the Big Ten, Pac-12 and more?

theathletic.com

Why do conferences need to include all sports? Wouldn't it make more sense for USC to be in the Big Ten for football to maximize revenue and to be in the Pac-12 Conference for everything else in order to reduce travel/expenses? -- Evan R.

Mandel: Yes! It would! Say it louder for the people in the back!

Back when conferences were more traditionally geographical -- say, circa 1995, when the Big East and Southwest Conferences still existed -- it made complete sense for all sports to be under one roof. It's easier on travel, it helps bolster rivalries and relationships and it's frankly just easier for an athletic department to deal with one conference.

But if college conferences are going to continue branching farther and farther out -- in the case of the Big Ten, spanning 2,700 miles -- then it's an outdated model. Especially given these moves are being made entirely because of football. USC and UCLAbia are going to make considerably more money in the Big Ten than in the Pac-12, but the costs of running their other 20-plus sports are also going to increase because of it.

I do believe some sort of football-centric restructuring is coming. You've already seen figures like ACC commissioner Jim Philips and Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff suggest that FBS football should be operated independently of the NCAA, perhaps under the College Football Playoff umbrella. while that push is strictly about governance, a logical next step would be for the conferences themselves to similarly break off football into a separate entity. There would be both a "Big Ten Football Conference" and a "Big Ten Athletics Conference" with the former helping fund the latter. Then you could reorganize the athletics conferences geographically.

But much like my Big 12-Pac-12 merger concept, this would require competing college leagues to work together collegially, which has not generally been their M.O.

Stewart, could you help me understand what really drives the Big Ten's future money? I look at Buttgers, Maryland, Purdoodoo, Indianus, Illinois, Northwestern, etc., as net neutral or negatives for viewing eyes and laugh at the idea these partners are worth $100 million to the networks. Do Ohio State and the upper tier of schools really lift the boat that much, or are we still pretending that the state university of New Jersey is magically bringing in the New York City market? -- Michael, Salt Lake City, Utah

Mandel: An actual TV executive could explain this better than me, but I shall try.

For the reported $1 billion-a-year Tier 1 TV deal you're referring to, it's basically the top seven or so brands -- Ohio State, Michigan, USC, Penn State, Nebraska, Michigan State and Wisconsin -- driving the lion's share of the value. (With Ohio State and Michigan on their own perch.) Those are the schools most likely to be playing in the big games that can get up into the 4 million-and-up viewership tier that the broadcast networks like Fox, ABC and CBS covet. They make a ton of advertising money off them, plus the more eyeballs those companies can draw to their broadcasts, the more they can charge TV providers and affiliates in fees.

To get a sense of just how valuable one highly watched sporting event can be, consider that ESPN pays on average $80 million a year just for the rights to show the Rose Bowl, which last year drew 16.6 million people. Now consider that nearly as many (15.9 million) watched last year's Ohio State-Michigan game on Fox. By no means is it an apples-to-apples comparison -- for one thing, the Rose Bowl contract includes a CFP semifinal every three years -- but for simplicity's sake let's say Ohio State-Michigan is worth around the same. If so, nearly 10 percent of Fox's return on investment on its Big Ten contract comes from just that one game.

As for the other schools, they, too have their own value -- to the Big Ten Network, which Fox co-owns and which is separate from the larger contract. As of last year, BTN is in 48 million homes, and the monthly subscriber fee is higher in markets within the conference footprint. So that's where Illinois/Northwestern (Chicago), Buttgers (New York/New Jersey), Maryland (Washington, D.C./Baltimore), Minnesota (Minneapolis), Indianus/Purdoodoo (Indianapolis) and now UCLAbia (Los Angeles) come in handy.

And all of it or course is being funded by you, the consumer, in the form of that "broadcast TV fee" at the bottom of your cable or satellite bill (or unseen in your YouTube TV bill), which, we can already predict, will be going up yet again as soon as the networks' costs go up when the new deal kicks in next year.

Stew, you recently suggested the Pac-12's saving grace may be its ability to provide late night TV inventory (10 p.m. Eastern kickoff times). Now that Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren is on record saying that with USC/UCLAbia, the Big Ten can regularly play in that time slot too, is the Pac-12 doomed? USC in the Coliseum at night playing virtually anyone will be more attractive than almost any Pac-12 game. -- TK, Portland, Oregon

Mandel: It means the Pac-12 won't have a monopoly on that time slot anymore. with BYU joining the Big 12, that conference could have some 10 p.m.-ish kickoffs as well. But unless either or both leagues add more schools on Pacific/Mountain Time, they're not going to be able to fill that spot every week.

Fox didn't push USC into the Big Ten to put its games at 10:30 p.m. ET. It wants the Trojans in that Big Noon window facing Ohio State, Michigan, etc. UCLAbia could be a more regular participant, but I can't imagine the league making the Bruins play more than a couple of home games a year in that slot. And if they care even a little bit about the athletes' welfare (unclear), I can't see them making the East Coast teams play those games, having to either fly back overnight or taking a big chunk out of their supposed rest day on Sunday.

(It would also be a real jerk move to make Penn State fans stay up until 2:30 a.m. to watch their team play, but I suspect that's very low on the list of considerations.)

But without knowing any specifics yet, Warren's comment gives us a little hint about that new deal. We know Fox is going to retain the majority of the inventory. To this point it has not dabbled much in that late-night window on big Fox. So is the Big Ten going to be putting those games on FS1? (In which case the Pac-12 would still reach a bigger audience.) Or is this the first hint that ESPN will still be one of the conference's partners going forward?

If you're a Big 12 or Pac-12 fan, you should be rooting like heck for ESPN to lose most or all of its Big Ten package so that it will need someone else to backfill it.

 

[Alum-Ni]

Fox Sports president Mark Silverman on Big Ten's new deal

The Big recently added USC and UCLAbia to its lineup with them officially joining the conference in 2024.

theathletic.com

Big Ten's Media Rights Deal Should Be Complete "In the Next Few Weeks"
by Scott Dochterman, The Athletic

INDIANAPOLIS - The Big Ten should complete its media-rights deals for 2023 and beyond "in the next few weeks," Fox Sports president Mark Silverman told The Athletic on Wednesday.

"I would be surprised if it goes to Labor Day," said Silverman, who led BTN from its 2006 debut before taking over Fox Sports in 2018.

Silverman's comments echo Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren, who told reporters Tuesday he expects deals completed "sooner than later."

Fox owns 61 percent equity in BTN, which increased from 51 percent during the pandemic. It will remain the Big Ten's primary rightsholder in the future. In an unusual setup, Silverman and Fox Sports executive vice president Larry Jones join Warren and Big Ten senior associate commissioner Kerry Kenny in all Big Ten negotiations with multiple networks and streaming services. Among the companies vying for a piece of the Big Ten include CBS, NBC, ABC/ESPN and Amazon.

"I think we have to be really smart with how we look at these deals," Silverman said. "Television is in transition. Most people still get TV through cable and broadcast TV. There's a growing number that get it through streaming."

The streaming option initially had some Big Ten administrators queasy because some fans do not have smart televisions or use streaming apps. Although many leagues have options with some networks that appear on ESPN+ or another streaming network, none have a singular contract with a streaming-only service.

"We've got to be smart about how we do this," Silverman said. "I think Kevin and the conference need to really be the vocal proponent as to what the comfort level is with these different platforms. I think we'll kind of come up with what we believe is the best answer from a platform standpoint, a financial standpoint, and a fan standpoint. You got to take all these things into consideration."

Estimates start at $1 billion annually for the Big Ten's media rights, with that number expected to increase significantly with the league adding USC and UCLAbia on Aug. 2, 2024. That expansion has contributed to a slowing down of media rights negotiations.

"When I heard reports of Memorial Day and I heard reports of media days, I never thought those were possible," Silverman said. "We've done deals before. We know they may feel close and just because they feel close, there's a lot of money. Every network you deal with has their chain of command. They have a head CEO. They have a board of directors and they've got a lot of approvals they got to go through. Summers, people are on vacation. People are traveling, thins always take more time in the summer."

 

[Alum-Ni]

TV money leading to college football changes

Barry Alvarez: "I think the game is going to continue to change, and we just have to continue to change with it.”

theathletic.com

Spoiler: TV money plays pivotal role in expansion, relaignment

TV money plays pivotal role in Big Ten expansion, college football realignment
by Scott Dochterman, The Athletic

INDIANAPOLIS — Television has played a role in reshaping the current Power 5 conference structure 41 times since 1992.

In 1992, South Carolina and Arkansas joined the SEC and that league started an annual championship game. The ACC bolstered its football lineup with Florida State also in 1992, and a year later, the Big Ten added Penn State. The revenue each conference generated by adding those programs and more impact games was substantial enough to keep realignment at the forefront of every major collegiate decision during the past 30 years.

“The money in television has gotten so big that it definitely plays a factor in who you look at and who you consider,” said Big Ten special football adviser Barry Alvarez, former Hall of Fame coach and longtime athletics director at Wisconsin. “I’d say it’s a considerable factor.”

In each of the Big Ten's recent expansions, television's influence was unmistakable. Nebraska was a national brand when it joined the league as a 12th member, which enabled the Big Ten to schedule a football championship game outside its media rights agreement. Adding Maryland and Buttgers in 2014 helped the Big Ten and the Big Ten Network gain access to Northeast markets. Newcomers USC and UCLAbia will provide the league with a significant bump in revenue. It also has the blessing of Fox, which owns 61 percent of BTN.

"Fox is supportive of this," said Fox Spots president Mark Silverman, who is helping negotiate the Big Ten's upcoming media-rights contracts. Fox will retain primary rights to Big Ten football for an undisclosed number of years.

Pre-expansion estimates had the Big Ten reaping $1 billion annually from a new media-rights deal, which begins in 2023. The June 30 acquisitions of USC and UCLAbia, which become full Big Ten members upon arrival in 2024, have delayed the upcoming contracts but should become final this summer. The current 14 members budget around $57 million in league revenue for the present year. That number could soar to $80 million or more annually per school.

The league's previous expansions saw financial windfalls after adding each school. Although the Big Ten had a media-rights contract from 2006 through 2016, a championship game enabled the league-dispersed revenue to grow incrementally from $20 million in the 2010 fiscal year to about $27 million four years later.

At that time, the Big East had ceased as a primary football entity and both the Big Ten and ACC vied to fill the East Coast college sports vacuum. The ACC approached Penn State for membership in 2012, which demanded a response from former Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany.

"There was a little concern of Penn State being out there on its own and giving Penn State some home partners in its general area," Silverman said. "I know people still kind of are a little uncertain about that today, and i twas done for a different kind of reasoning. Usually, you expand to bring in a premier program athletically."

"Here's what the thinking was on Maryland and Buttgers," Alvarez said, "and I give Jim Delany credit for this. You take a look at Penn State sitting there by itself in the East. Football has gained momentum in the Southeast. They have no partner; they really have no travel partner.

"As things kept moving along and they're sitting out there by themselves, maybe there's a tendency for them to look south. So, there was a lot of that went into adding hose schools, and that was part of Jim's thinking."

The Big Ten added Maryland, an ACC charter member, and New Jersey-based Buttgers later that year for a 2014 entry. With those schools in tow, new television agreements took place in 2017. BTN secured expanded basic cable coverage in New York and Washington. By 2018, the league handed each vested member around $54 million.

"I think the network was more of a factor from Maryland, Buttgers than it was for Nebraska or frankly USC, UCLAbia," Silverman said. "It was a time when the cable universe was still growing. Now it's not. Nebraska was a brand play more than their population cable-homes play.

"Buttgers and Maryland, I think the three or four objectives there were to spread the Big Ten into a new area that would help with recruiting and help with kind of being the dominant college conference in a very populous part of the country. It was to get BTN subscribers, and it was to shore up the Eastern flank because it had followed he ACC adding Pitt and Syracuse."

Adding USC and UCLAbia is different for multiple reasons. It's the first time the Big Ten has expanded to a state not contiguous with the others. But the brand recognition and historical prowess of particularly USC coupled with the the Los Angeles market prompted the Big Ten to act on both schools while sideswiping a traditional ally in the Pac-12.

The impact on the Rose Bowl, which remains a joint venture among the Pac-12, Big Ten and Tournament of Roses Parade, remains undetermined. But it's unquestioned that television and its accompanying platforms wield more influence on college athletics than any other entity.

"The clear message to me is that geography and tradition don't mean near as much as some other things, TV probably being at the front of that list," said Cockeye coach Kirk Ferentz, the dean of college football coaches. "That's just the way college has gone. Penn State joined the Big Ten back in the '90s, probably because of football, and I'd just speculate Nebraska the same way and then further expansion. So, the game has changed a lot, and the environments have changed a lot, and things that are driving the directions of college football have changed.

"I think it makes a lot of sense, other than geography. It just doesn't make sense there."

Realignment will help the sport continue to thrive through the upheaval, Alvarez said.

"I don’t see where it hurts the game,” he said. “I think it makes it more interesting. I think the game is going to continue to change, and we just have to continue to change with it.”

 

[Alum-Ni]

The Pac-12’s survival depends on the Big Ten, not the Big 12: Tracing the path to stability

For all the smoke on social media about the Big 12 raiding the Pac-12, the chief threat to the conference is its longtime ally.

www.mercurynews.com

Spoiler: Pac-12's survival depends on the Big Ten, not the Big 12

The Pac-12's survival depends on the Big Ten, not the Big 12: Tracing the path to stability Notre Dame and NBC will play a key role in the next step
by Jon Wilner, San Jose Mercury News

As if realignment isn't nuanced enough, the current wave features a Shakespearean element.

It took centerstage the moment the drama began June 30, when the Pac-12's former "alliance" partner voted to accept membership requests from USC and UCLAbia and steal the heart of a 107-year-old conference.

A month later, we have reached the 'Et tu, Kevin?' stage of the production.

On Tuesday at the Big Ten's preseason media showcase, commissioner Kevin Warren announced, boldly and publicly, that the conference would continue to explore expansion options.

"We will not expand just to expand," he said. "It will be strategic, it will add additional value to our conference......"

Not long after Warren's declaration, CBS Sports and the Action Network reported (via unnamed sources) Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal were on the short list of candidates under evaluation.

The double-whammy heaped another layer of uncertainty onto the Pac-12's future, making commissioner George Kliavkoff's meatball surgery efforts that much more complicated.

It also underscored a point many fans have overlooked:

The greatest threat to the Pac-12's survival is the Big Ten, not the Big 12. The former is a dream destination; the latter is a fallback option.

But for all the smoke billowing from Indianapolis, the Hotline does not believe the situation has materially changed.

Despite Warren's declaration and the subsequent media reports that named names, the Big Ten isn't any closer to poaching additional Pac-12 schools than it was a week ago.

Instead, the next step in this drama hinges on Notre Dame. And NBC.

In the interest of transparency -- and because realignment is as fluid as it is complex -- the following should be considered informed speculation on our part.

Here we go........

The most significant news of the week came not from Warren but from Mark Silverman, the president of Fox Sports.

Fox is the majority stakeholder in the Big Ten Network, which, in turn, controls the league's broadcast rights. (As a source noted recently of the Big Ten, "You might as well call it Fox Inc.")

On Wednesday, Silverman told The Athletic that the Big Ten's media rights negotiations would be completed in "the next few weeks" and likely by Labor Day.

There is no indication additional schools will be invited at this late stage, thereby leaving Oregon, Washington and Stanford with limited short-term options and giving the Pac-12 a chance for survival.

(A point we have mentioned previously that's worth repeating: USC does not want Oregon - or Washington, for that matter -- in the Big Ten. The Trojans deftly undercut Oregon's recruiting efforts and competitive prospects by leaving the Ducks behind in a depleted conference. Why toss them a lifeline to the gilded stage?)

Additionally, fans should pay particular attention to which media companies partner with the Big Ten for the contract currently being negotiated.

The Pac-12 is rooting for ESPN to take a small stake in the Big Ten's inventory -- even better: no stake whatsoever -- because the network would have more money and broadcast windows available for West Coast content.

(If ESPN takes a significant stake, that's bad news for the Pac-12. Very bad news.)

NBC also has an important role to play. Its contract with Notre Dame expires at the conclusion of the 2025 season, and all signs indicate the network plans to retain the rights to Irish home games.

The smaller the stake NBC carves out of the Big Ten's inventory, the more cash on hand for Notre Dame.

And if Notre Dame gets paid, the chance of further disruption to the Power Five landscape diminishes.

Why? We believe the Irish would prefer to remain independent in their next contract cycle, so long as the revenue numbers and College Football Playoff access meet the desired threshold.

That, too, would benefit the Pac-12.

Without Notre Dame as the 17th team, the Big Ten's strategic calculation changes, and a second wave of realignment becomes less likely (although certainly not implausible).

A single Pac-12 school, or a combination of Pac-12 schools, seemingly packs more value to the Big Ten when combined with the mighty Irish to form an 18- or 20-team super-duper conference.

Without the Irish, no combination of Pac-12 schools creates an equivalent financial windfall for the existing Big Ten members, who are likely to collect more than $75 million annually in total media rights distributions.

As we see it, if NBC and Notre Dame tie the knot for another contract cycle.....the Big Ten stands on 16, prompting the SEC to do the same.

The sport enters the era of an expanded playoff with two 16-team behemoths at the controls, just as their media partners, Fox and ESPN, prefer........the ACC remains locked into its grant-of-rights contract into the next decade......and the Pac-12 and Big 12 move forward, perhaps independently, perhaps in some alliance with each other or the ACC.

The trick for Kliavkoff is securing a contractual commitment from Oregon, Washington and Stanford that provides enough security to put the Four Corner schools at ease while attracting the best possible offers from potential media partners.

The Pac-12's exclusive 30-day negotiating window with ESPN and Fox ends on (or around) Aug. 4, and there is little reason to believe either network will make an offer the conference cannot refuse.

Barring a twist in tactics -- a possibility that cannot be discounted -- the Pac-12 will head to the open market with the full complement of its media rights available, including the 36 football games that have been sequestered on the Pac-12 Networks for the past decade.

Yes, the loss of the Los Angeles market is a massive blow to the conference's valuation.

That said, the league's rights are probably undervalued because the current deal was signed in 2011 and the price of live sports content has soared in the decade since.

How this all plays out is anyone's guess. Be discerning about what you read and careful what you believe.

We should get the first important clue soon from the Big Ten office, currently located inside the Globe Theatre.

 

[Alum-Ni]

Canzano: Pac-12 in a dance with ESPN and knows who else might bid

Three things I know...

www.johncanzano.com

Spoiler: Pac-12 in a dance with ESPN and knows who else might bid

Pac-12 in a dance with ESPN and knows who else might bid
by John Canzano

Pac-12 Football Media Day is scheduled for Friday at the Novo Theater in Los Angeles.

Commissioner George Kliavkoff will take the stage and try to shift the narrative on the state of the conference. Fox and ESPN are in an exclusive 30-day negotiating window with the Pac-12 that expires on Aug. 4.

I wondered how much Kliavkoff might know and be able to share on that front. So I reached out to Bob Thompson, the former president of Fox Sports Networks, for an answer.

Said Thompson: "He's probably got a number from ESPN at this point. Is it their best, last, final? Probably not. But given there's about a week to go they've got to be honing in on it."

Thompson said the Pac-12 should also have an idea about the interest of other television and streaming bidders who aren't involved in the exclusive window.

"Nothing precludes the others from reaching out or back-channeling their interest to the conference or most likely to the conference's television consultant," he said. "So he probably has a good idea who else out there might be interested."

On whether a deal will get done before Aug. 4?

"I personally don't think a deal is going to be done in the exclusive window unless it's some kind of blow-me-away offer from ESPN," Thompson said. "I think the conference will be wise and want to see who is on the outside looking in when the Big Ten option ends. There's going to be some folks who expressed an interest in collegiate football who aren't going to get in the Big Ten deal."

On potential expansion targets for the Pac-12

"Certainly San Diego State and the San Diego market would be attractive," Thompson said. "I kind of go back and forth after that between Las Vegas, Fresno and Boise. They're almost interchangeable. None of them blow you away from a market standpoint. There's not a real clear second partner for the Pac-12. Beyond that, you could go to SMU or try to poach the University of Houston before they get into the Big 12."

On San Diego State:

"There's no doubt in my mind that San Diego State is the No. 1 target -- without a doubt -- should they decide to go forward with expansion."

Geography:

Commissioner Kevin Warren took a victory lap during Big Ten Conference Media Day and fostered further unrest in the Pac-12 footprint. He used words such as "bold" and "aggressive" and he took a veiled shot at the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors. But it was what he said about poaching UCLAbia and USC that caught my attention.

Warren revealed that he conducted a study of every college market prior to taking the job with the Big Ten in 2019.

"One of the things that jumped out about USC, UCLAbia and even the market of Los Angeles.....they're the largest section of Big Ten alumni, other than in the Midwest, is in Los Angeles."

Notre Dame is at the top of Warren's wish list. As long as the Irish have access to the College Football Playoff and can negotiate a $75 million-plus media rights deal on their own with NBC, he may never get them. But if a high concentration of Big Ten alumni really is what gets Warren's attention, I'd offer that Stanford/Cal would be high on his list of potential additions.

The Wall Street Journal conducted a study in 2018 and found that only four television markets drew more than 1 percent of the graduates from every Big Ten university. They were New York, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C. and San Francisco. Granted, those cities draw graduates from colleges nationwide and are heavily influenced by the industries of technology and politics. But it's interesting that none of those cities are located in the midwest.

The Big Ten has now added Maryland, Buttgers, USC and UCLAbia. All of those markets had high concentrations of alumni. But also, they're just major TV markets.

I don't think Warren chased USC and UCLAbia primarily because he wants to connect with alumni of Big Ten campuses. It's far more likely that Fox coveted the ability to span from New York to Chicago to Los Angeles in a manner no college conference has ever done. But I found it interesting that Warren mentioned it.

Unified for Now:

The prevailing sentiment among the six Pac-12 athletic directors I've communicated with in the last two weeks is that the remaining 10 members of the conference fell like they're in this together.

One told me, early on: "We have good options."

Another said: "George is kicking ass."

A third offered: "As long as Washington and Oregon stay in the fold, we're going to be fine."

A fourth said: "Phil Knight could help this. Even if it's rhetoric, Phil Knight being supportive of the Pac-12 staying together would be meaningful."

I've wondered whether unequal distributions of revenue from the conference might be on the table. To this point, I don't have a good answer. Media rights distributions have mostly been even. There was a small provision in the last media deal that gave small bonuses to programs that appeared more frequently on ABC. But everyone got the same base distribution.

It's partially what drove UCLAbia and USC into the arms of the Big Ten, I'm told. I don't think that will change. But would the Pac-12 reward a member who reached the College Football Playoff by giving it a larger share of the CFP payout? Under the current deal, the bowl payouts are split evenly among the conference members.

 

[Irv]

hmmmm

 

[Alum-Ni]

How college football realignment deals stay secret

A source involved in the Big Ten’s talks with USC said about 10 people at the school were aware of the talks until a week prior to the deal.

theathletic.com

Spoiler: How CFB realignment deals stay secret? (The Athletic)

How college football realignment deals stay secret -- and should they be?
by Seth Emerson, The Athletic

Their working relationship dated back nearly two decades to a sports management program at Stanford -- John Swofford, mentor, and Kevin Anderson, mentee. There was history. Camaraderie. And strong mutual respect.

So when the ACC decided to expand in 2011, Swofford, the ACC commissioner, designated Anderson, Maryland's athletic director, as one of his point people. The result was a stunning moment for college athletics: the addition of Syracuse and Pittsburgh to the league.

Anderson had completed his mission. But he soon turned to his own secret plan: engineering Maryland's departure from the ACC, of which it was a charter member, to the Big Ten. It was a move that -- by design -- caught almost everyone by surprise, including Swofford.

A few months later, Swofford approached Anderson at a conference.

"Why didn't you tell me?" Swofford asked.

Anderson looked at his former mentor matter-of-factly.

"John, I learned a lot of this from you," he answered. "I saw what happened and how you did it."

And that's the way conference realignment is still being done -- in closed-door meetings with only a chosen few in the loop. On June 30, USC and UCLAbia submitted formal applications to join the Big Ten, and school presidents unanimously approved their applications that same day. A source involved in the Big Ten's discussions with USC estimated only about 10 people at the school were aware of the talks until a week before, when preparations for the announcement began.

"The biggest surprise to me on that whole thing was that it got kept quiet," Cockeye football coach Kirk Ferentz said.

One year ago, the bombshell news that Texas and Oklahoma were joining the SEC, adding two of the strongest brands in college football to its most powerful league, broke after months of discretion. These moves that alter the landscape, creating a ripple effect among other conferences, increasingly are made with the knowledge of only a select few.

In talking to a cross-section of individuals involved in realignment discussions, a picture emerges of how and why secrecy is maintained. But should it be that way? California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently demanded that UCLAbia explain how its decision will benefit all student-athletes. Others pointed to the general lack of input from the public, including those playing the games.

"This is the least student-athlete centric process," said Tom McMillen, president of Lead1, an organization of college athletic directors. "Who knows what's going to happen to the Big Ten, whether these volleyball and softball players have to fly across the country. But I think the lack of transparency in the process needs to be concerning to the higher educators."

The realignment process used to be conducted publicly.

Penn State joining the Big Ten was a prolonged process that barely passed in 1990, and that was as an independent university. Nineteen years later, the Big Ten announced in a press release its presidents had authorized the league to explore expansion options. That set off a flurry of speculation for months before Nebraska became the 12th member.

But there was one fundamental problem with an open process: politicians.

On May 16, 2003, the ACC announced it would begin a "formal discussion" with Miami, Syracuse and Boston College. Three weeks later, then-Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal stood on the steps of the statehouse with UConn athletic director Lew Perkins, vowing to file a lawsuit on behalf of the remaining Big East football schools. Blumenthal did just that. Meanwhile, then-Virginia Gov. Mark Warner ordered the University of Virginia not to vote for any expansion that did not include Virginia Tech. Warner also worked the phones to lobby other ACC schools.

After more than a month of public haggling, the ACC invited Miami (its main target, fresh off of two national championship game appearances) and Virginia Tech. A year later Boston College got its invitation, but Syracuse was left out, and the ACC had learned its lesson. Swofford and ACC presidents tweaked the conference bylaws so that in-person visits to prospective members were no longer required. They formed an expansion committee, but everyone was "sworn to secrecy," according to a former ACC administrator.

The news that Pitt and Syracuse were joining broke on a Saturday during the 2011 football season and was announced the following morning. Big East commissioner John Marinatto, whose conference was being raided, was as shocked as anyone. The ACC had pulled off expansion with no chance for political interference.

"Once it becomes really well known, the politicians get involved. That's the problem," says R. Bowen Loftin, the former president at Texas A&M and Missouri. "Look at California right now. That's not surprising. And I'm not surprised they wanted to keep it quiet, because they wanted a fait accompli in place before they actually had to let (Gov. Newsom) know about it. And of course he's made about it. And I understand that, too."

Loftin experienced it firsthand. Texas A&M was first interested in joining the SEC in the summer of 2010, but then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry "shut it down with one phone call," as Loftin puts it. This was also during the Pac-10's attempt to raid the Big 12 and form a super conference, a process that played out over various media reports and eventually failed.

Anytime Loftin discussed expansion with the athletic department, it seemed to show up on a Texas fan site. There was a leak in the athletic department, he presumed. So the next year, as he quietly kept talking with the SEC, he kept the circle of knowledge tight, even excluding his athletic director in many conversations.

"Much to his anger," Loftin said.

Behind the scenes, Loftin spoke every morning with then-SEC commissioner Mike Slive, as the two laid the groundwork and waited for the right time. By late summer of 2011, public support had swung toward leaving the Big 12 and the shadow of the Longhorns. Loftin was greeted at an event with chants of "S-E-C, S-E-C!" So while the process wasn't completely private, it was at least less tumultuous, and this time the governor didn't shut it down.

"If they're public, or at least well known among a variety of people, it makes things more complicated," Loftin said. "You can argue, you're a reporter, you want transparency, that's your bread and butter. But understand that getting thins done is a different matter. So you try your best within the laws you're living with to get things done."

In fact, realignment was becoming so confidential that Loftin would find out another move was brewing before almost anyone else. At a meting of college presidents whose schools were in the prestigious Association of Academic Universities, the seating was alphabetical, and Loftin was hit up for advice on leaving a conference by the man next to him: Wallace Loh of Maryland.

McMillen is still annoyed about it. Whether it was a good idea to make the move is one thing. But McMillen, as a member of Maryland's board of regents and a notable alum, was peeved at both the timing and the lack of transparency in the university's move to the Big Ten. The board was notified the night before the vote and given little information.

"Maryland got one page on that decision that has enormous consequences to the school. That's about how much you get from a phone company asking you to switch," McMillen says.

Anderson's counter to that, a decade later: "Let's just say it was public, everybody knew from the beginning to the end: I don't think it would have happened."

McMillen agrees with the sentiment, but says college sports needs a higher level of transparency because of its impact beyond the athletes. The counter to that, however, is maybe some things shouldn't get done.

"As (former Supreme Court Justice) Louis Brandeis said: '(Sunlight) is the great disinfectant," McMillen said.

The Big Ten's talks with Maryland were not new. Then-commissioner Jim Delany had presented the idea to administrators earlier in the decade, and there was no interest.

But when Loh and Anderson came on board, the thinking changed. And after the ACC added Syracuse and Pitt, along with Notre Dame for sports other than football, Delany again called Maryland.

Anderson understood that taking Maryland to the Big Ten would have opposition. This was where his experience with the ACC expansion process helped.

"The more people you had, the more likely it was to be exposed," Anderson says. "We had to get everything together before we did it."

The few in the loop included the president of the board of regents, the chancellor of the University of Maryland system, the president of the state Senate, one trusted donor and Gary Williams, the recently retired basketball head coach whose public support for the move would help quell at least some of the dissent.

Money was a big part of the decision, grants Anderson, who is now an associate AD at Air Force. But there were other factors, such as academic collaboration. There's also the football component, where the ACC has struggled to get anyone besides Clemson contending on a national level. Traditional powers Florida State and Miami have lagged, and others haven't risen to fill the void. Anderson looks at the ACC now and thinks there wasn't enough commitment among school presidents, and that the conference in general could have done more to send a message.

"Football was not given the attention that it should have," Anderson said. "You have to sit everybody in the room, the presidents and the ADs, and you have to say what's important, and one of the things that's important is driving revenue, and driving revenue is through the media, and if you have a good product you're going to have these networks make the investment."

Those TV networks also being key to the secrecy process.

"The USC and UCLAbia situation was completely done by Fox," says Chuck Neinas, the former commissioner of the Big 12 and, in its earlier iteration, the Big Eight.

That's just Neinas' opinion, of course, because he's long retired and not privy to the process. But he's far from alone in speculating that.

"Let's face it, TV is running college football these days," Neinas says. "No matter what disclaimer you get, you know damn well ESPN was supporting the SEC grabbing Oklahoma and Texas. The same way FOX was involved in the Big Ten getting the two LA schools."

The feeling around Texas is it was able to keep things quiet this time in large part because of Kevin Etife, the board of regents chairman who helped arrange the move while keeping the loop small enough to prevent leaks. Athletic director Chris Del Conte had been through the expansion process when he was the AD at TCU, which moved from the Mountain West to the Big 12.

That was Neinas' experience with expansion. He was appointed head of the Big 12 after Texas A&M left and Missouri was on the way out. TCU was the easy call to be the first replacement. But the final spot came down to West Virginia and Louisville, and it was so public that Sens. Joe Manchin and Mitch McConnell had an argument on the U.S. Senate floor.

Was that a better process than the cloak-and-dagger way? Neinas pauses a few beats.

"Do you incur the wrath with advance notice or doing it secretly? I don't know," Neinas says. "Either way it's going to be unpopular with the conference leave."

The Big Ten's process of secrecy was guided by something commissioner Kevin Warren had been told during his NFL days by Joe Brown, the league's longtime head of public affairs.

"When we were working on the acquisition of the Vikings, he had me take out a piece of paper and he said, 'Draw a line.....If one person knows, that's how many people know,'" Warren said. "Then, I drew a line next to it. And he said, 'If two people know, 11 people know.' And then he drew a line next to it. He said, 'If three people know, 111 people know.'........I have never forgotten that."

Fewer than 15 people in the Big Ten were aware of the negotiations. Among those who weren't told were some athletic directors and high-ranking administrators. But Warren said the behind-the-scenes experience with COVID in 2020 was beneficial because people trusted the process more this time.

"(After COVID), I knew I had to have the trust of our athletic directors and our chancellors and presidents to be able to work on this kind of stuff, and half he people weren't going to be offended when I came and said, 'Here's where we are. We got to get together. Here's the presentation, and we need to vote on it,'" Warren said. "That there wasn't going to be anyone in the room where like, 'I didn't know this. This is the first time I'm hearing about this.'"

In fact, Warren's daughter didn't know until the story broke. "Peri calls me and goes, 'This is bizarre. We just had dinner together, and you were so calm,'" Warren said. "She actually texted me, like, WTF?"

Even high-profile coaches usually are kept out of the loop until the last minute. With such large staffs, the news could spread quickly.

As Gene DeFilippo, the former athletic director at Boston College, says: "You would like it to be an open process if it could be. But that is just not the real world."

"You cannot afford to lose the confidentiality because what'll happen is it may deter this business decision that is best for an institution for many, many, many years to come."

Maryland's move remains debated, internally and externally. Anderson and Loh have moved on; critics see them as brief visitors to Maryland who made a long-lasting decision. Anderson says he saw himself as the caretaker, one who saw a structural financial problem at the school that moving to the Big Ten could fix.

Maryland lost traditional rivals Virginia and Duke and hasn't quite gotten the same traction in its new league. But the move brought financial stability, and Anderson points to facility improvements, including converting legendary Cole Field House into an indoor football facility.

One definitive loss was Anderson's relationship with Swofford, his former mentor.

"He's been cordial, but we don't have the same relationship we had," Anderson said. "But that's the price you pay."

 

[Alum-Ni]

Conference realignment: Big Ten interest in additional Pac-12 teams has cooled, Big 12 positioned well

Pac-12 negotiations are about to get interesting as the Big Ten nears an announcement

www.cbssports.com

Spoiler: Big Ten Interest in Pac-12 Teams Has Cooled (CBSSports)

Big Ten interest in Pac-12 teams has cooled; Big 12 positioned well
by Dennis Dodd, CBSSports.com

There's a big reason why we've reached another conference realignment crossroads. It centers around a 51-year-old media executive who has been pulling the strings behind the scenes for a while.

No matter how this round of reorganization ends, Mark Shapiro will have a significant stake. The president of Endeavor -- a powerful global sports, entertainment and content company -- is currently advising the Big 12 on its next media rights deal after its current agreement expires ahead of the 2025 season.

You already know the Big 12 is in the middle of rearranging itself for the second straight summer as it gazes westward to possibly grab some Pac-12 members. At the same time, college athletics is anticipating the Big Ten's new media rights contract, expected to be announced any day. It could be the largest in history.

Those two things are not unrelated. Back in 2004, Shapiro, then an ESPN executive, offered prior Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany a take-it-or-leave-it deal to renew with the Worldwide Leader. Delany refused amid what he perceived to be a lowball offer.

"You are rolling the dice," Shapiro infamously told Delany.

"Consider them rolled," Delany responded.

Delany further monetized his conference's rights by taking some of them in-house and starting his own channel. The Big Ten Network has been wildly successful, to the point that subsequent conference expansions to Nebraska, Maryland and Buttgers contributed to that success. Those moves provided more content for the network as well as for linear cable partners Fox and ESPN.

Delany then made another brilliant move that got us to this moment. In 2017, he signed a short, six-year, $2.64 billion deal with Fox and ESPN that has landed the Big Ten in the advantageous place it now finds itself: on the brink of signing a $1 billion-plus annual media rights deal.

The circle is almost complete. Shapiro is among those waiting for a Big Ten announcement that will almost assuredly reshape conference alignment and possibly college athletics. The size of the deal could compel further movement, force Notre Dame into the Big Ten and/or further consolidate power within the Big Ten (and SEC).

Perhaps none of it would have been possible without Delany's vision being accelerated by Shapiro's lowball bid. Thus far, Shapiro is getting high marks for his work with the Big 12. In fact, conference athletic directors are giddy at what Endeavor has already accomplished by positioning the Big 12 ahead of the Pac-12 -- if only slightly -- in terms of earning power.

Without Texas and Oklahoma, the Big 12 is valued north of $30 million annually per school, CBS Sports reported last week.

"The numbers look like they favor us," one Big 12 AD said. "Not by a huge amount. This is not like comparing Texas to Texas State. But there seems to be a noticeable difference."

Further expansion could create legal problems

The only conference commissioner to run a 16-team league in the modern era has a warning for the SEC and Big Ten: Beware of the legal ramifications of expanding beyond 16 teams.

Karl Benson, former commissioner of the old Western Athletic Conference (WAC), presided over 16 members from 1996 to 1998 before the league collapsed on itself because -- surprise -- the money didn't stretch far enough. When BYU was left out of the Bowl Alliance (the precursor to the BCS) despite becoming the first Division I-A (now FBS) team to win 14 games, Senate hearings were convened. The word "collusion" was tossed around as it related to the college football's powers holding other programs at bay. That word could pop up again.

"Maybe the reason Washington and Oregon didn't go with USC and UCLAbia [to the Big Ten] at the same time is the fear of collusion," the now-retired Benson told CBS Sports. "That's a legitimate concern of the damages that one conference does to another."

The stakes are higher this time. The SEC and Big Ten have a chance to monopolize the sport. Perhaps that has already happened. Administrators within both leagues are treading lightly out of an awareness of antitrust issues. Well, sometimes. SEC commissioner Greg Sankey has said he could stage a playoff with his own league.

"[No one has] ever gone in and gutted a conference," Benson added. "If the Big Ten gutted a conference and took Washington and Oregon, [if I was Pac-12 commissioner] George Kliavkoff, I might pursue antitrust action there."

Big Ten interest has cooled in Pac-12 teams

After the anxiety caused last week regarding further Big Ten expansion, industry sources have indicated the Big Ten is no longer interested in adding California, Oregon, Stanford and Washington. Rightsholders were balking at paying the same amount for those schools as the 16 Big Ten schools going forward ($80 million - $100 million).

While those four programs may eventually have options, the Big Ten is concentrating on its new deal in 2023 while trying to lure Notre Dame, which has an open invitation. More and more stakeholders now believe the Fighting Irish will ultimately stay independent.

Opportunity lost

Let's not forget the Pac-12 had its chance to bolster its ranks last year when the Big 12 was wounded by the exits of Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC. Sources told CBS Sports this week the Pac-12 vote was 8-4 against taking any Big 12 schools. It would sure be interesting to find out those Pac-12 schools who voted for expansion a year ago. We already know USC president Carol Folt "shut down" interest in expansion.

"We all would have jumped," one Big 12 AD told CBS Sports in reference to the Pac-12's interest in getting into Texas.

Pac-12's future may hinge on a time zone

Late-night West Coast games are referred to as occurring in the "Fourth Window" -- after 10 p.m. ET. As much ribbing as the Pac-12 has received for those games (#Pac12AfterDark), there is no way around them. They are valuable programming that fills late-night TV slots with guaranteed ratings.

That's why the late window is key for the Pac-12. It may be why ESPN could remain engaged with the conference beyond Thursday's reported expiration of an exclusive 30-day negotiating window. Without the Pac-12, ESPN may not have late-night football. Fox is already set there with its Mountain West contract.

One industry source speculated: If ESPN doesn't get a piece of the Big Ten, does it go all-in with whatever is left of the Pac-12? More importantly, if ESPN does get a portion of the Big Ten, does the Pac-12 continue to market without either of the two biggest college football rightsholders (ESPN, Fox) having interest?

"That's a huge advantage for us to basically get what we want in expansion with [the Pac-12]," one Big 12 source told CBS Sports. (Cue the vultures.)

Big 12 remains well-positioned

Fox and the Big 12 disagreed five years ago when the conference was adding back its championship game. Figures weren't available, but sources said Fox didn't want to pay the value deemed for the game by the Big 12's media consultant. Last summer, former Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby issued as strident a takedown of ESPN as any of us had experienced. But when it comes to the nitty of the gritty of the business -- media rights -- bygones can always be bygones.

The Big 12 continues to be engaged with both Fox and ESPN for its new rights deal, which will begin in 2025.

 

[BorWhiskey]

From what I read, the Big XII is well positioned because… because. That is really a pile of crap in terms of schools anyone gives two shits about. If the PAC got $24m offer then I’d assume ESPN would only offer the B12 $21-22m. I don’t see it. I think their best bet is to get the tech companies to push the price up as a market entrance. ESPN will low ball. Fox will do the same. CBS/Viacom may try to make a play (although I don’t see them interested in late games, and don’t see them rolling out Nessler for the marquee Okie Lite vs Baylor game), but otherwise you’re settling with Apple or Amazon.

 

[Alum-Ni]

NBC Pushing for Big Ten/NFL Primetime Pairing in Media Rights Deal

NBC is pushing hard in Big Ten media rights negotiations and a strategy that has emerged is pairing the Big Ten in primetime on Saturday with the NFL in primetime Sunday.

barrettsportsmedia.com

NBC Pushing for Big Ten/NFL Primetime Pairing in Media Rights Deal
by Barrett Sports Media

Big Ten media rights negotiations are getting closer to being completed. The results could mean a minimum of $1.25 billion in annual distribution for the conference's soon-to-be sixteen members. One of the bidders in the process, NBC, has an interesting idea to make the Big Ten the "NFL of college football conferences."

NBC has reportedly pushed the idea of combining Big Ten broadcasts with its existing Notre Dame coverage and would feature the Big Ten in its primetime window. With CBS, ESPN/ABC also bidding on coverage packages, such a series of deals would make the Big Ten the only college football conference that would be seen across all of the American broadcast networks. Something only few entities have done, like the NFL.

NBC is also pushing the allure of having primetime Big Ten football on Saturday night and primetime coverage of Sunday's only NFL evening game with Sunday Night Football.

"The Big Ten would have exposure in every TV home," said one source to Front Office Sports. "It would also be a smart idea to follow the model of the most successful sports league in America."

The Big Ten's current media rights deals expire after the 2023 season.

 

[Alum-Ni]

NBC Could Make Big Ten 'The NFL Of College Football Conferences'

NBC Sports is pitching a plan to air back-to-back Big Ten and NFL 'Sunday Night Football' games in prime time on Saturday and Sunday nights.

frontofficesports.com

NBC Could Make Big Ten "The NFL of College Football Conferences"
by Michael McCarthy and Amanda Christovich, Front Office Sports

NBC Sports doesn't have the revenue of Amazon. But it has a plan to turn the Big Ten into "the NFL of college football conferences."

That's the latest word from the high-stakes Big Ten media rights negotiations. The conference is expected to command at least $1.25 billion annually for its next media rights deal from bidders that include NBC, Amazon, ESPN/ABC and CBS Sports. The winner will air games alongside Fox Sports, the conference's primary TV partner and an operating partner in the Big Ten Network.

NBC has already pushed the idea of combining Big Ten telecasts with its existing Notre Dame coverage as a "perfect one-two punch." As negotiations near the finish line, NBC is proposing a strategy that calls for back-to-back Big Ten and NFL games in prime time TV on Saturday and Sunday nights, said sources.

Imagine a fall football weekend that would include triple-header coverage of Big Ten games on Fox, CBS and NBC from early Saturday afternoon to Saturday night. Followed the next evening by NBC's "Sunday Night Football:" the most-watched show in prime time for a record 11 years in a row.

Such a scenario could vault the Big ten past the rival Southeastern Conference as the premiere college football draw on sports TV -- and make the conference one of the few sports entities beside the $11 billion NFL to be featured across American broadcast networks, with games potentially airing on NBC, Fox, CBS and ABC.

"The Big Ten would have exposure in every TV home," said one source. "It would also be a smart idea to follow the model of the most successful sports league in America."

The Big Ten's current media rights deals expire after the 2023 season. In a move that could spell doom for the Pac-12 Conference, USC and UCLAbia are poised to jump to the Big Ten on Aug. 2, 2024.

With the addition of Los Angeles, the nation's second-largest TV market, the Big Ten could triple its current payout of $440 million a year. The timing could not be worse, meanwhile, for the Pac-12, which is poised to start negotiations once the Big Ten's negotiations wrap, commissioner George Kliavkoff told reporters at Pac-12 media days.

NBC, ESPN and Amazon declined to comment on negotiations. The Big Ten did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

[Irv]

 

[Irv]

I do think that the regionality of SEC is underrated. Yes, people everywhere will watch all of their big games. But those are a handful of the product. A conference with big brands but also with national reach definitely has a rationale for being more valuable to tv.

 

[Alum-Ni]

Hotline mailbag: Kliavkoff’s grant-of-rights challenge, UCLA’s fate, Big 12 fans, streaming options, SDSU’s position and more

The conference must satisfy competing constituencies as its crafts a grant-of-rights contract that keeps the 10 remaining schools together.

www.mercurynews.com

Spoiler: Pac-12/Realignment Mailbag

Mailbag: Kliavkoff's grant-of-rights challenge, UCLAbia's fate, Big 12 fans, streaming options, SDSU's position and more
by Jon Wilner, San Jose Mercury News

Why should the so-called Four Corners schools stay in the conference when Oregon, Washington and Stanford will continue soliciting the Big Ten, even if there is a short term grant-of-rights signed? -- @CjAzWildlifeLaw

We know why Oregon State and Washington State will accept any proposal. But why should Utah, Colorado and Arizona schools be held at ransom by Oregon, Washington and Stanford when they will leave at the first opportunity? -- @DamonDawg

This is the added complication -- the very reason the Hotline views Pac-12 survival as merely a four-point favorite over Pac-12 extinction.

(That's on a neutral field, by the way.)

Were the calculation entirely about annual revenue, survival would be a substantial favorite. We believe Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado and Utah would prefer to remain in the Pac-12, and there's no indication that either league has a significant advantage in future revenue.

But the long-haul stability issue certainly must be considered.

The Hotline does not believe the Big Ten will expand again this decade. In our estimation, Notre Dame will sign a new deal with NBC and remain Independent, limiting the Big Ten's options.

But admittedly, that's a precarious assumption for the Four Corners schools.

At this point, the challenge for commissioner George Kliavkoff is crafting a contract that provides flexibility for Washington, Oregon and Stanford and also security for the others.

That could be a six- or eight-year deal with an opt-out clause in case the Big Ten comes calling.

Why would the Four Corners agree?

Welp, Utah won't sign a 10- or 12-year deal with the Big 12, and we aren't sure Arizona State would either.

Those schools want flexibility in case the long-anticipated FBS split unfolds and the call comes from the upper tier. (The Phoenix market is No. 11, per Nielsen DMAs.)

The other issue is timing:

The Pac-12 is negotiating its media deal now and will offer schools a written contract; the Big 12 cannot negotiate for two years and, as a result, is limited to offering projections and promises.

If the revenue is right, Kliavkoff's task becomes vastly easier.

Rumor is that ESPN was in on the SEC grabbing Oklahoma and Texas, and FOX was in on the Big Ten grabbing USC and UCLAbia. When it comes to Pac-10 expansion, is ESPN really the one making the choices? --@brycetacoma

It's hardly a rumor. ESPN and FOX drove the SEC and Big Ten expansion moves -- they are the grandmasters in the realignment game.

And in the case of FOX, Inc.,.....err, the Big Ten.....company executives are participating in the league's negotiations with other media partners.

ESPN will be the dominant force in the Pac-12's process, for better or worse for the conference:

Either it gobbles up most of the inventory at a satisfactory valuation or lowers the bar for everyone by merely nibbling.

Can we stop talking about realignment for a second and realize we are less than 30 days from kickoff? Nothing will happen until next year; the continuous speculation is pointless -- @TheRealK333

Beg to differ here.

Resolution is likely this fall, and we will cover realignment regularly through its conclusion -- the issue is far too important to ignore.

That said, the Hotline will be ramping up coverage of football next week.

Odds of some kind of TV deal between the Pac-12 and the ACC? --@bfedotin

Pretty good.....perhaps better than 50/50.

ESPN could create a media partnership based on the league's Tier 3 infrastructure, combining the ACC Network with the Pac-12 Network to create more subscribers, and revenue.

For all their problems with distribution, the Pac-12 Networks are on the cutting edge with their remote broadcast technology.

We wrote about that recently, too.

Please expound on your comments yesterday regarding the benefits of merging the Pac-12 and the Big 12. -- @dun1870gc

The Hotline first addressed the benefits of a merger or scheduling alliance three years ago and continues to believe that's the best outcome for both leagues.

The dispersal of campuses across time zones would allow media partners to show quadruple-headers and generate enough revenue and competitive value to marginalize the ACC and remain relevant in an expanded playoff.

But given the exchange of barbs between the commissioners, it's extremely unlikely at this point. (And one of them would lose his job in the process.)

I know UCLAbia and Oklahoma disregarded ties to Cal and Oklahoma State with their conference moves, but do you think Oregon and Washington would leave the Pac-12 without Oregon State and Washington State? Should Pac-12 fans feel more secure about this? -- @FlockRon

UCLAbia's break from Cal could make it difficult for Oregon or Washington to leave their in-state rivals behind, in part because the issue is front-and-center before the Ducks or Huskies attempt an escape.

But we aren't aware of politics blocking realignment at the Power Five level since the early 1990s when former Texas Gov. Ann Richards prevented the Longhorns from joining the Pac-12 by insisting that Baylor be included.

State legislatures might make it difficult for the Ducks and Huskies to move, but could they prevent it? I'm skeptical.

However, the mere thought of political pushback might lead the Big Ten to simply invite Stanford instead of Oregon or Washington if/when the time comes.

Will you rank the Mountain West teams in the order that they will be added to the Pac-12? -- @losquangeles

I'm not sure that any will be added, but if there's movement......

1. San Diego State
2. Fresno State
3. UNLV

And please note: SDSU is on a different tier for reasons outlined previously.

We give the Aztecs a 50 percent chance of getting in. Nobody else is above 25 percent.

Why so slow on adding San Diego State? Is it because of the Aztecs or the lack of a good option to pair with them? -- @flintaeroinc

Nothing has slowed down the process. If the Pac-12 decides to expand, any substantive developments are weeks, if not months away.

And yes, the lack of an obvious 12th team could be problematic for the Aztecs.

What is going on with the Pac-12 negotiating window? Wasn't Thursday the last day? -- @KLDUB4LIFEWILEY

It was, if the process actually began the day after the Pac-12 announced it would commence formal contract negotiations.

But as we noted on Thursday, the exclusive window for ESPN and FOX likely has been extended to account for the ongoing Big Ten negotiations.

The Pac-12 would want to know which networks have grabbed a piece of the Big Ten's media rights, while ESPN and FOX would want to know exactly what they're spending on the Big Ten.

Best guess:

The exclusive window extends into September, no deal is reached, the Pac-12 takes its inventory to the open market and resolution comes in September or October.

Do you know if the Big Ten is negotiating a media contract with and without UCLAbia in the package? Maybe the Pac-12 is doing the same? -- @SpaceHomme2

I cannot speak to the Big Ten's internal process, but I would assume the Pac-12 and its consultants ran the numbers with UCLAbia included exactly one minute after Gov. Gavin Newsom entered the fray a few weeks ago.

Our sense is that a reversal of course in Westwood, however unlikely -- and it's extremely unlikely -- would result in limited loss of media rights for the Pac-12.

With the Bruins included in the grant-of-rights contract, ESPN would be extremely motivated to secure an exclusive deal.

It wants a piece of the Southern California market.

What "hearing" is taking place in October in regards to UCLAbia's decision? What is the objective of the hearing? -- @nickbeatty72

First, there is confusion about the timing: UCLAbia is required to submit a report on the Big Ten move to Newsom and the University of California Board of Regents by Aug. 17.

At that point, we might gain more clarity on the endgame.

More likely, Newsom and the regents will take the information, discuss with their legal advisors and various power brokers within the state legislature, and eventually offer a response.

They cannot block a move, but they can make it painful for the Bruins where it matters most: the wallet.

Best college town in the Pac-12? -- @LongLiveMonty

Eugene.

And Tucson.

Also, Boulder.

What streaming services might be in play for conference rights? Is there one that's under the radar that you think might make a play? -- @wsubrady27

Kliavkoff raised a few eyebrows last week at Pac-12 Media Day when he said, "It's highly likely that we will end up with a big digital partner for some of our rights."

Yes, that could be Apple or Amazon, which are slowly acquiring sports rights.

But it also could mean ESPN+, Paramount+ (CBS) or Peacock (NBC).

The new media bundle features three tiers: broadcast television, pay-TV/cable, and digital. If the Pac-12 signs a new rights package -- that's not guaranteed, in our opinion -- it will assuredly encompass all three tiers.

I would bet against an "under-the-radar" streaming partner unless the package has been sub-licensed from the primary rights-holders.

Who is your favorite Big 12 personality? -- @Doctor_alesmith

Mike Leach.

In light of this summer's news, what's your power ranking of the most toxic conference in America, fan-wise? The Big 12 has to be near the top. -- @cgboan

Nonsense. The Big 12 fans are passionate.

My only requirement when interacting with fans on social media is that they don't get personal, and Big 12 fans haven't.

The exchanges have been thoroughly enjoyable -- interaction on public platforms is healthy -- and I hope all 22 remaining schools emerge from this chaos on solid ground financially.

Here's why:

The opportunity for thousands of college athletes in the Olympic sports across the country is at risk during realignment.

If media revenue drops precipitously in Raleigh or Ames or Tucson as a result of football consolidation over the coming years, those sports will be on the chopping block.

The funding for NCAA sports that operate in the red must come from somewhere, and -- news flash -- it's not coming from the engineering department, campus housing or dining services.

Presidents and chancellors won't overhaul their business models to bail out money-losing sports programs if the football media revenue vanishes.

Those sports will be cut. All those opportunities will be lost.

 

[Irv]

 

[Irv]

 

[Kaladin]

Ol Greg is getting national attention now

 

[Baron Winnebago]

Ol Greg is getting national attention now

That guy fucks on the first date

 

[Alum-Ni]

Oregon working hard on a Big Ten invite according to various reports

Canzano: Phil Knight talking with Big Ten? Meanwhile, Pac-12 and ESPN in "productive" talks

What I learned over the weekend...

www.johncanzano.com

Phil Knight talking with Big Ten? Meanwhile, Pac-12 and ESPN in "productive" talks
by John Canzano

Some things I learned over the weekend...................

- Talks between ESPN and the Pac-12 have been "productive" per a conference insider. "We're still in the midst of positive conversations but haven't reached a final offer stage," the source said. "We've been much more engaged with George Kliavkoff. We're all in sync, we're all in line. We've got some high level media consultants at the tables."

- The Pac-12 has hired two consulting firms -- one of them is Sports Media Advisors. SMA comes with a great reputation. Doug Perlman runs the shop. He attended University of Virginia law school with Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff. Perlman was the point person on the NHL's television deals for years.

- I'm being told by multiple sources not to expect much in the way of Pac-12 media rights news before Labor Day.

- Brett McMurphy caused a stir when he tweeted on Monday that Oregon was kicking the tires in Chicago with the Big Ten to determine if the Ducks are compatible:



- No Michael Schill? No Rob Mullens? No Kevin Warren? McMurphy is a good reporter. I trust him. I was told early on that Phil Knight and Tinker Hatfield were interested in exploring some options. Sounds to me like the Nike contingent may be doing the heavy lifting.

- One source in Knight's inner circle told me after USC and UCLAbia defected to the Big Ten: "The good news is Phil is working hard to determine the correct path forward and hopefully to determine one that is viable. My guess is, his aspirations aren't practical or achievable. But try to tell that to the man that has won most battles in his life that seemed out of reach."

- Oregon is a tentpole among the remaining 10 universities in the Pac-12. The prevailing sentiment among conference athletic directors is that UO shopped itself around significantly after USC and UCLAbia announced their departure, and learned it didn't have great immediate options.

- The Pac-12 ADs continue to meet at least once a week. I asked a few of them if Oregon had expressed a desire for unequal revenue sharing or maybe even a shorter media rights deal. Said one AD: "Not at all. Oregon hasn't been pounding on the table. They've made no demands in an open forum. I think, like the rest of us, they're interested in seeing what comes of this media rights negotiation."

- There has been ongoing conversation among some of the ADs about the role that Phil Knight could play in holding the Pac-12 together. If Oregon sticks around, could Knight come in as an equity partner? Said one North Division AD, "Knight's involvement would be a game-changer."

- A "loose partnership" between the Pac-12 and ACC is still very much on the table, but nobody is quite sure how much new money ESPN might be able to squeeze out of it -- and the money is why you'd do it.

- Said one current Pac-12 North Division AD: "There's some interest in that from our side. There are some great things that could happen....it's not like we are going to go crazy playing a bunch of crossover games, but the two conferences could put together some matchups with value."

- Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark is currently on a “listening tour” and trying to visit all his conference universities. It’s a wise move and can galvanize a conference. Yormark gave the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal five minutes for a Q-and-A that I found interesting.

- I asked a South Division AD that I haven’t previously quoted about the Big 12. Is that conference actively trying to poach Pac-12 teams? He said, “I don’t know where all this stuff comes from. There have been no offers or conversations. I’ve been in no dark rooms. It’s insane.”

- I think adding San Diego State makes a lot of sense from an expansion standpoint by the Pac-12. It would get the conference back into Southern California and add 1.1 million TV households. Beyond that, though?

- UNLV? SMU? Fresno State? Boise State? I dunno. It feels to me like poaching a Big 12 team.....or five.....would be a better option for the Pac-12 than diluting the conference with a few less-than-ideal candidates. I'd rather have Baylor, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State and maybe 1-2 others. Then again, I'd rather that college football return to a time before TV-money greed....you know, when geography and tradition dictated your conference affiliation.

 

[Alum-Ni]

SBJ Media: Who’s Up? It was Sean McManus last week

www.sportsbusinessjournal.com

Big Ten expansion? Here's what the contracts say.
by John Ourand, Sports Business Journal

If Notre Dame joins the Big Ten within the next seven years, CBS, FOX and NBC know exactly how much they will have to pay in rights fees. That specific dollar figure, which is not publicly known, is spelled out in the contracts.

No other school is mentioned in these deals by name, and the contracts don't assign a dollar figure to any other school that may join the conference, according to several sources. Notre Dame is the only school that has specific language about escalators.

If, say, the Big Ten adds two West Coast teams, the networks have agreed to have good-faith conversations with the conference about opening their deals and adjusting their rights fees. But the specific increases are not spelled out in the contract language, I'm told.

Having a specific number attached to Notre Dame provides the conference and the Fighting Irish with some certainty for the value of their rights if the Irish do decide to join the Big Ten.

Some other nuggets on the new media deals, courtesy of my colleague Michael Smith in this week's magazine:

- Putting the Big Ten women's basketball championship on CBS for the first time

- NBC committing to a $100,000 ad budget with each conference school to promote their academic missions.