Eight
Member
They do have a new commissioner though. Larry Scott is gone.
agreed which brings hope, but will the presidents listen or are they stuck in the past?
They do have a new commissioner though. Larry Scott is gone.
The new guy appears to barely be able to spell Pac 12... Not impressed so far.
The new guy appears to barely be able to spell Pac 12... Not impressed so far.
laugh when i read "diverse groups" with the pac
if there is one thing kfc knows it’s diversity.
if there is one thing kfc knows it’s diversity.
I think most of us are able to compartmentalize and think about more than one thing at a time. No need to hijack the discussion.it’d be the ultimate irony if the liberal policies of TCU that kfc hates ends up being what saves football. I don’t think some of you could stand it.
Where's WV & ISU?Maybe, but not adding anyone from the B12, wouldn't bury it in my opinion. You would struggle to convince me that a hypothetical conference of:
Ok St
TCU
UCF
Baylor
Boise
Cinci
Memphis
Tech
KSU
UH
USF
KU
is not as good as the current Pac-12, top to bottom, the last 4-5 years. Same for the ACC and Big 10, but to a lesser extent. Sure, you don't have the brands of USC, UCLA, Washington and Oregon, but the conference above would draw way more tv money than what the current AAC brings in.
Oops. Even better.Where's WV & ISU?
Right, now we don't need UH & USF.Oops. Even better.
it’d be the ultimate irony if the liberal policies of TCU that kfc hates ends up being what saves football. I don’t think some of you could stand it.
Maybe, but not adding anyone from the B12, wouldn't bury it in my opinion. You would struggle to convince me that a hypothetical conference of:
Ok St
TCU
UCF
Baylor
Boise
Cinci
Memphis
Tech
KSU
UH
USF
KU
is not as good as the current Pac-12, top to bottom, the last 4-5 years. Same for the ACC and Big 10, but to a lesser extent. Sure, you don't have the brands of USC, UCLA, Washington and Oregon, but the conference above would draw way more tv money than what the current AAC brings in.
Right, now we don't need UH & USF.
Personally I would add one more team, anybody but BYU or another Texas team to get to 9 teams. Ride out the BIG12 contract, use the basketball credits, and be ready to scoop up the Washington States and Georgia Techs that will be available.
Right, now we don't need UH & USF.
Personally I would add one more team, anybody but BYU or another Texas team to get to 9 teams. Ride out the BIG12 contract, use the basketball credits, and be ready to scoop up the Washington States and Georgia Techs that will be available.
If you are ESPN, would you rather:
- Incentivize the PAC 12 to go to 16-18 in the CT zone and pay the premium for that, plus buy/license the Pac Network into ESPN+ (same deal offered years ago, but lower terms), which means Fox is boxed out after the Big Ten deal, OR
- Incentivize the Big 12 to stay together with its current members + a few adds... Likely Cincinnati, Houston, UCF, and maybe (prepare yourself) UCONN or BYU... This path means you are going to pass on the PAC 12 A-tier rights and let FOX go it alone, probably, and maybe just get some basketball and other content for ESPN+. Fox would likely buy the Pac Network, streamline it into 1-2 channels, and fold it into its rights negotiations with cable operators.
This is a large, looming question. One route is likely much more expensive for ESPN but is more of a big bet that could pay off long term + completes your CFB roster. The other is cheaper by far, and thus will likely have a higher ROI, but could have long-term impacts that are undesirable as a rights holder.