UH could make $80-100M imo a year with media rights, BB credits, PO cut, stadium naming licensing, ticket sales, concession sales, special event sales at the stadium, XFL stadium use rights and other licensing rights Cougar paraphernalia etc we increase the stadium size to 60k and sale out every game even more
They werenât bigger brands BUT they represented a BIGGER share of their conferenceâs media money.
That made their loss, relatively speaking, more devastating.
Thereâs a reason Washington and Oregon tried to bail soon after. Sadly, they failed.
Adding the brands you suggested would not have stabilized the PAC, nor would it have made up for the loss of the LA schools.
Most sources agree that the Big 12 recovered well from their losses by adding the teams that they did.
By contrast, even the PAC itself has admitted that no expansion candidates will make up for the loss of the LA schools.
I definitely worked for the Big 12.
Yes, expanding with Growth stocks, in new time zones, will help the PAC.
Once again, they are in desperation mode.
They can always stay at 10 and accept the lower TV deal but If I were them, Iâd definitely find a way to get more National coverage.
With that said< i hope they do not expand and we kill the PAC!
you do remember that all, ALL EIGHT, of the leftover Big 12 members begged the PAC to take them immediately after the UT/OU newsâŠright?
It was such a blatant desperation ploy the PAC had to issue a formal announcement on their Expansion plans regarding the Big 12 schools that beggedâŠerrr⊠contacted them.
1 Like
Tulane was in the sec and left bc they couldnât compete and it was before the sec was sec like now. It was in the 60s.
Tulane is in a great spot in the aac now. They can win in that league even when there coach leaves.
And if they do win their conference, chances are as good as not that they are headed to the playoffs.
I look at that, and I think about SMU possibly getting an invite to the Pac-12, and how how wile the last two years have been that we look at both and kinda say âeh they can have it glad we got something elseâ
I think who the media partners are will determine what school PAC 12 will add, if any. If ESPN is major partner, I donât see SMU being viable since they already have their content under AAC contract for much cheaper.
If it is CBS, then SDSU is less appealing.
Ultimately Amazon has to drive the contract in order for there to possibly be expansion in PAC 12. But since they arenât linear, I donât see Amazon wanting to pay for schools who wonât pull in eyeballs
I donât think there is any way that adding schools - especially a 12th school after SDSU - doesnât lose them money in the short term. The only question is whether itâs worth it or not. I think it might be, but I doubt they will see it that way. I think they have a lot invested in that dollar figure.
Yes with all revenue sources. Big 12 payout plus other university only sources yes it could be close to $80M+.
Conference payouts usually form 1/5 for a large program like UT or Bama) to 2/3 (for small programs) of total athletic department revenue.
So going by that UH should see its total AD revenue be anywhere from $80M - $100M.
1 Like
Gone from the outhouse to the penthouse. 
1 Like
No one disputes that those schools reached out to the PAC. That was BEFORE they realized that it was about to lose half its value. Had they known that was about to happen, they probably wouldnât have done so.
They would have had buyerâs remorse as we would have.
That TRULY would have been Big East 2.0.
BUT NEVERTHELESSâŠâŠ
As I said before, those arenât the brands that YOU mentioned.
You proposed UH and Kansas which are smaller football brands.
If the PAC didnât take those other bigger brands, then there is ZERO chance theyâd take UH and Kansas which are smaller brands. Not sure why you continue to hold on to that bizarre delusion/fantasy.
But even if it were plausible, which it ISNâT, it would have been bad.
Weâd be stuck in a conference which just lost half its value, with the next two largest brands looking to jump and only small low value brands left.
Thatâs NOT a good result for UH.
And weâd then be playing home games in front of 20-25K instead of the sellouts weâd likely have next season.
BAD.
I 
all posts that begin with, âlet me get this straightâ. Because I know theyâll deliver.
2 Likes
I would not call us a one-hit wonder⊠we have consistently kept our name on the national scene even if we did not win the big bowl⊠recall 2009 with Case, 2015 Peach Bowl that you mentioned, 2016 wins over OU/Louisville, Ed Oliver hype years and 2021 with champ game match-up with Cincy. Couple that with our SWC history and we are actually a pretty familiar brand as far as former G5 schools go. That is why other G5 schools have a bit of an uphill climb. SDSU has been solid but never made a national splash. The casual college fan actually has heard of us and are more apt to watch a random game then most other G5 brands.
The PAC has no choice but to expand toward central time zone schools. Due to the Rockies presenting an obvious geographical obstacle they do not have many choices if at all.
smu is a must for them.
SDSU is paramount for obvious reasons.
Now who else?
Think if riceoroni had invested in their facilities? They would obviously get an invite.
utsa would too but you can be sure that madcowsu will never let another of their system school further dilute the Texas power conference landscape.
By all calculations you can only imagine smu and SDSU to be invited. Having Memphis in is IMO way too far.
The PAC to survive? Wait it out until the new BIG12 contract is up andâŠpoach the BIG12 otherwise they are dead in the water, salt water.
1 Like
I think UT would probably welcome UTSA elevating itself. They consider the other UT schools as extensions of themselves (instead of potential institutions, as the Alabama system does). Members of their club. Theyâd more likely see it as having two schools at the P5 level.
An elevated UTSA wouldnât dilute their recruiting pool because they arenât going to lose recruits to UTSA. If anything, it potentially dilutes UHâs recruiting pool, and the Big 12 recruiting pool, and theyâd consider that a plus. So even if we stipulate that they are evil, they still wouldnât stand in the way there.
Academics, however, probably would stand in the way. I think UTSA would be a better grab than SMU but the Pac-12 would consider it a bridge too far.
In any event, it doesnât appear they actually need to expand into the central time zone. They have already announced they are signing their next TV deal with ten and may expand after. That tells me that they know any additions wonât be immediately additive much less necessary. I believe you do it in that order (if you do it at all) to justify giving the incoming schools a reduced share because they donât bring in as much money (at first).
But I donât think they have the eight votes they need to expand to 12 even after their TV deal.
Agree, I think they stand pat at 10, wait for the next round in 2030s. They have a path to the playoffs. ( chances that @parialex , prediction 7 months ago , would come to fruition is at 80%)
San Diego State is possible, but am not sure they need them as much has been bandied in the media. SMU does nothing for them other than a eastward presence, although, itâs conceivable SMU could make more money than us if they receive an invite.
There is a one word answer. The PAC need the LA schools more than the Big-12 schools need OUT for RECRUITING.
1 Like
Agree Pac is just trying to max their per school payout while they can. I do not think they have any long-term vision.