The B1G has already invited them.
SO WAKE UP!!!
ND has an OPEN invitation to join the B1G.
So yes, THAT ONE exception, literally the exception that PROVES the rule, already exists.
And again, WAKE ME UP when the B1G invites a non-AAU school other than ND.
As Iāve told you beforeā¦I suspect Iāll sleep soundly.
Iād rather go after UTah, col, zona and zona st bc Oregon and wash will be constantly looking so of the top 6 , Iād go that 4 before or add all 6 then if tge 2 leave, weāre good.
My SMU buddy is adamant it will be 35-40 million per legacy PAC 12 school and 20 million per expansion school.
They are ready to pop some bottles.
There was no invitation issued. That is speculation. Again, wake me up when it happens.
I agree, the PAC12 is on the ropes, hit them hard now and finish them off.
Tell him itās still good to join but they are about to get raided soon
Ah, but there was.
As it says, it was issued, and was declined, but remains open.
Youāre simply incorrect.
I, by contrast, as always, am correct.
And my challenge remains.
Wake me up when the B1G invites a Non-AAU school other than ND.
I suspect Iāll sleep soundly.
Iām talking about in between TV deals (and thus in between GORs). Both conferences have a GOR so you canāt easily leave during a TV deal, but only the Big 12 has exit fees on top of that. So if you believe you are ultimately Big Ten bound, thereās $40-100m dollars difference between the exit costs.
So the money advantage of the Big 12 has to exceed that amount, and more than likely by a significant amount to compensate for other factors that favor the Pac-12. (Though there are some other factors that favor the Big 12, their preference is clear.)
The only way I think to create that much distance between values is to take other teams from the Pac-12 first, so that the Pac-12 is so devalued and the Big 12 worth so much more that itās worth the cost. I think to create that distance we probably need to take at least two and probably four teams before they even consider jumping.
Unless we agree to waive the exit fee altogether, which would be a very bad idea and not something I believe the conference will consider given their history of what happens when they accommodate teams that want special treatment.
Your SMU buddy is simply repeating what Klaivkoff has been saying internally to conference members.
However, it seems everyone now knows he was over promising and those schools are not happy.
Instead, itās looking more realistically like $25 million or so per school or less (and mostly streaming at that).
To TRY keeping legacy members from jumping ship, theyāre likely thinking of offering $30 million or so to them, and $10 million for the newcomers.
Even that would require a $320 million deal, and from what Iāve heard, the current offer is between $270 million and $300 million.
That sentiment is completely understandable and, all things being equal, the Mustangs would not have been the Hotlineās first choice for Pac-12 expansion. (Houston was atop our list.)
(I only quote that because I will always have a soft spot for Wilner the way Wilner has had for us.)
The Pac-12 isnāt assessing the viability of Amazon as a means of content distribution based on Prime Videoās market position today. Itās evaluating Amazon for what that partnership would provide midway through the next cycle. Will streaming be more widely acceptable in the sports media realm in 2027-28 than it is now? Would technology evolve to the point that viewers did not need to close the app in order to channel surf?
Our advice is to assess SMU football the same way: Will the Mustangs have a stronger football brand late in the decade than they do now? Would an affiliation with the Pac-12 lead to improved recruiting, higher community interest, greater resources and more competitive success, to the point that the Mustangs gain traction in the massive Dallas market?
I think itās going to take both of them more than four years to deveop. The SMU one is a longer play since the TV contract will last only 5-7 years while SMU will be a member after. So if SMU takes 10 years to develop, thatās not ideal but itās not a wasted investment necessarily. The TV deal needs to pay off more quickly since it will reset.
I have no reason to believe ESPN is materially more interested in the Big 12, but because the conferences deployed different negotiating strategies, conclusions are difficult to draw.
ESPN was willing to renew its existing agreement with the Big 12 at a below-market valuation that worked for ESPN.The network very well might have done the same with the Pac-12. But instead of renewing its deal, the Pac-12 opted to take its inventory to the open market and explore new partners.
Thatās definitely a way of looking at it, I suppose. Possibly true, though the rumors of the Pac-12ās initial offer (from reasonably credible sources) were simply lower than that of the Big 12. Maybe theyād have gotten it higher, though.
Although Pac-12 presidents have a history of misguided decisions, weāre confident that the Aztecs and Mustangs would have the votes if the schools stick together and determine expansion is the proper course. [ā¦]
As a 10-team conference, the Pac-12 would have approximately 65 home football games available to its media partners each season. As a 12-team league, it would have approximately 78.
Where is the market for that much content?! Amazon doesnāt want the quantity (as Marchand says) then itās just ESPN. If ESPN is basically telling them āYou need to add teams so that we can put them on ESPN+ā then itās true they want volume but they want volume for the part they arenāt going to pay a lot of money for.
So either (a) ESPN will no longer even talk to the Pac-12 without 12 members (their value as a 10-team conference is that low) or (b) ESPN is willing to overpay for ESPN+ content. Thatā¦ seems unlikely. Especially when you consider that they presently have SMUās content on ESPN+ for $7m a year, locked in until 2033 or so.
The reality is that each conference will occupy second-tier status with ESPN, which will be all-in with the SEC starting in 2024 ā to the point that we will see SEC doubleheaders on ABC and ESPN in the prime viewing hours, with 30 minutes carved out for home videos of the Smart family reunion.
As Iāve noted before, ESPN lost roughly the same amount of inventory from the Big Ten that they gained from the SEC+UT+OU. I think ABC is about to become SEC country, but ESPN still needs the content that ESPN needs. The ultimate motte of their motte and bailey is āUltimately both conferences are screwed, ultimately theyāre both in the same situationāā¦ itās not clear that thatās true. Thatās what weāre very much in the process of finding out right now. Itās possible for both to be below the SuperTwo but still be in very different places (the same way the AAC and Conference USA were both outside the P5, but not in the same way).
Our best guess is that college football will have three conferences by the mid-2030s: The Big Ten and SEC, each with 20 or 24 members, and a fully revamped Big 12 that spans the country and incorporates most, if not all of the remaining Power Five schools.
This is kind of a weird thing to say, because if you believe this you have to believe that every Pac-12 team should be angling for a spot in the conference thatās actually going to survive. Itās a no brainer regardless of the sizes of the respective TV contracts. More than anything else, you want to be in the conference that is going to survive if you only believe one is.
The problem is that theyāve been unable to make that happen.
It is what GK is telling SMU brass as well. That is why my buddy is so confident. He has a booster source that has gotten that info.
Well Kliavkoff has been nails so far amirite
ESPN/Amazon/FOX werenāt gonna give PAC12 390M-440M with USC/UCLA. And now your buddy think someone will give that money to PAC12 (minus USC/UCLA) with the additions of SDST and SMU. Weirdo.
This x 1million
From the smoo 24/7 ste:
ChipBrown247STAFF
Posted on 4 hrs, V I P, User Since 106 months ago, User Post Count: 35360
Greetings Pony Stampede. Just wanted to pass on that Iām hearing momentum appears to be building for SMU and San Diego State to be invited to join the Pac-12, which, of course, is losing USC and UCLA to the Big Ten beginning in 2024.
I was told Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoffās all-day meetings with SMU officials on the SMU campus Wednesday went well and that the Pac-12 presidents have authorized Kliavkoff to act in the best interests of the league as it pertains to the possible additions of SMU and San Diego State.
Nothing is done. Terms are still being discussed, but Iām hearing if terms can be agreed upon, an invitation for SMU to join the Pac-12 could be extended within a week.
Adding two schools is critical for the Pac-12 from an inventory standpoint in securing a new media rights agreement, which Iām hearing is likely to include a BIG streaming component, especially for football games aired on Friday nights.
The Pac-12 has long wanted to be in the Central Time Zone for better media visibility, and SMUās recent competitiveness in football (averaging eight wins the past four seasons) as well as its academic standing (No. 72 in U.S. News and World Report ranking, behind only No. 4 Stanford; No. 20 Cal-Berkeley; and No. 55 Washington in the Pac-12) make the Mustangs attractive, Iām told.
SMU officials are rightfully being tight-lipped about the situation.
One reporterās opinion. Show me the invitation document. Otherwise speculation.
We can go back and forth all day. If you think a web article is proof, then I donāt know what to say.
I guess you will have to accept articles about Houstonās invite to the SEC as proof.
Itās WIDELY reported Bro.
Iām sorry you arenāt willing to do a Google search and find out for yourself.
But I wonāt do your homework for you
Everyone else seems to know this EXCEPT you and that should tell you something.
Enjoy both being wrong AND being unable to accept correction if you wish.
The other question that was raised in the podcast was a recognition that a media bubble exists that will correct within this cycle. The window could possibly have closed on Kliakov.
Expansion indicates espn, geared towards volumes for espn+
Equally, the networks are preparing to bid on the college football playoffs, they have no incentive to unnecessarily drive up pac12 media rights value. Youād want to keep the curve as low as possible to stay in the game
One could easily compare an SMU home schedule in The PAC12 with the TCU home schedule in The Big 12.
For example TCU will host The Houston Cougars while SMU hosts the Wash. St. Cougars.
Baylor Bears vs Cal Bears.
How ābout Dem Beavers from Oregon? San Diego St. vs Okla. St?
The Ponies schedule would be a curiosity for a while, then fade away. No visiting fans at all.
Our Stadium will have a goodly number of visitors. And TV viewers.
This seems to be a sign of desperation.
Ā©Copyright 2017 Coogfans.com