Smoke your cigars and enjoy the band while you can....

[catzacker]

If UT couldn't reach an agreement with the Pac-12 and "stayed" or tried to make the conference work, would MU go to the Pac-12 if invited? And how pissed would KU fans be if that happened?

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/09/19/pac-12-expansion-the-latest-on-texas-revenue-sharing-and-16-team-division-alignment/

Pac-12 expansion: The latest on Texas, revenue sharing and 16-team division alignment
Posted by Jon Wilner on September 19th, 2011 at 12:46 am | Categorized as Arizona football, Arizona State football, Cal football, Colorado football, Larry Scott, Oklahoma football, Oregon football, Oregon State football, Pac-12 Conference, Pac-12 football, Stanford football, UCLA football, USC football, Utah football, Washington football, Washington State football

Talked to several sources this weekend about Texas joining the Pac-12 and the future of the Longhorn Network.

Let’s get right to it.

*** Texas-to-the-Pac is not happening in the next 24 or 36 hours, folks. It could be a week, or weeks.

There are far too many issues still to be worked out, many of them involving UT’s ultimate willingness to make the concessions necessary to join the Pac-12.

Despite what you may have read, the school and the conference are “nowhere near any agreement,” according to one source.

(That doesn’t mean a deal won’t be reached, only that there are several layers to the negotiations and it could take time.)


*** The Austin-American Statesman reported that Texas could join the Pac-12 and keep the Longhorn Network, essentially with its own revenue model:

The Longhorns would be able to keep all of their revenue from the network if that amount is greater than one-sixteenth of what the entire Pac-12 receives for its third-tier rights. However, if one-sixteenth of the money the Pac-12 receives from third-tier rights ends up being a larger amount, the schools would divide the revenue evenly and everybody would receive the same amount, the source said.

That is, at its very best, misleading.

For one thing, the Longhorn Network would have to be folded into the Pac-12 regional model — it wouldn’t exist as a separate entity.

What’s more, there is no chance that any school will have more than 1/16th of the revenue that comes from the conference’s first, second or third-tier rights. NO CHANCE.

We’re more likely to see USC give up football and join the Big West.

Remember, the Pac-12 CEOs would like to have Texas, but they are not desperate to have Texas.

They have all the leverage.

Now … Would UT and ESPN have to work something out in regard to the $300 million Longhorn Network? Probably. A contract like that doesn’t simply get ripped up.

(Quick aside: Based on what media industry sources have told me about revenue projections for the league’s third-tier rights, they would trounce what Texas stands to make off TLN over time.)

*** Yes, yes, 100 times yes: The Pac-12 would add the Oklahoma schools and become a 14-team conference even if Texas follows a different path.

And if the number is 14, there’s a very good chance the conference would use the Zipper model for division alignment (i.e., split the natural rivals).

The league will not — I repeat: will not — pair USC and Oklahoma in the same division.

*** There’s a lot of confusion and concern about the division alignment in a 16-team league.

In particular, the Arizona schools, Utah and Colorado don’t want to be in the eastern division — they don’t want to get cut off from Los Angeles.

Here’s my educated guess as to how the conference would handle the situation:

1. Divide the 16 teams into pods of four: the Northwest schools, the California schools, the Mountain schools and the Texas/Oklahoma schools (or the Kansas/Oklahoma schools).

You’d play the three teams in your pod every year and two teams from each of the other three pods to form the nine-game league schedule.

2. Pair two sets of  pods to create one eight-team division and two sets of pods to create another eight-team division.

3. Keep the pods together for two years to provide home-and-home scheduling, and then switch the pod pairings.

In other words, the California schools could be paired with the Mountain schools in a division for two years, and then the California schools could be paired with the Northwest schools in a division for two years … and so on.

It’s critical to remember that — as with the 12-school negotiations last fall on divisions, scheduling and revenue sharing —  commissioner Larry Scott’s goal would be to find a Pac-16 infrastructure that satisfies everyone … even if it doesn’t thrill anyone.

*** Last point: I’ve read and heard a lot about whether Scott has the CEO support to expand or is getting significant push-back from a handful of presidents and chancellors. (Nine votes are needed to approve new members.)

Bottom line: If Scott needs the votes, he’ll have the votes.

[michigancat]

Remember, the Pac-12 CEOs would like to have Texas, but they are not desperate to have Texas.

They have all the leverage.

Could the Pac 12 be bluffing when they say they'd expand w/o Texas? 

[catzacker]

Remember, the Pac-12 CEOs would like to have Texas, but they are not desperate to have Texas.

They have all the leverage.

Could the Pac 12 be bluffing when they say they'd expand w/o Texas?  

that thought did cross my mind.  but it was quickly erased with the thought of playing in Laramie.  Beautiful country up there.

Also, something I just noticed in Wilner's article...he says

1. Divide the 16 teams into pods of four: the Northwest schools, the California schools, the Mountain schools and the Texas/Oklahoma schools (or the Kansas/Oklahoma schools).

Kansas schools?  maybe just a misprint, but    

[KITNfury]

The major leagues will stop at whatever number before adding us. It's either some bullshit compilation league of Big 12/Big East leftovers that legally can retain AQ status or down to some shitty mid major conference (that we'll end up being middle of the road in too).  SEC/PAC/ACC/Big 10 (that one's for you fatty) will never happen for KSU.

[michigancat]

Remember, the Pac-12 CEOs would like to have Texas, but they are not desperate to have Texas.

They have all the leverage.

Could the Pac 12 be bluffing when they say they'd expand w/o Texas?  

that thought did cross my mind.  but it was quickly erased with the thought of playing in Laramie.  Beautiful country up there.

Also, something I just noticed in Wilner's article...he says

1. Divide the 16 teams into pods of four: the Northwest schools, the California schools, the Mountain schools and the Texas/Oklahoma schools (or the Kansas/Oklahoma schools).

Kansas schools?  maybe just a misprint, but    

he's been consistently dropping that quite a bit.

[wetwillie]

Mizzou to the pac is about as likely as ksu to the big 10. 

["storm"nut]

If the Pac 12 does no end up getting OU/OSU and Texas/Tech. OU and Texas starting working to save the Big 12, again. Pac 12 comes in with an offer for K-State and ku, should we take it?

[kitten_mittons]

If the Pac 12 does end of getting OU/OSU and Texas/Tech. they starting working to save the Big 12, again. Pac 12 comes in with an offer for K-State and ku, should we take it?

Please edit this so we know what you are saying.  TIA.

["storm"nut]

If the Pac 12 does end of getting OU/OSU and Texas/Tech. they starting working to save the Big 12, again. Pac 12 comes in with an offer for K-State and ku, should we take it?

Please edit this so we know what you are saying.  TIA.

Yea that was classic BBS by me. Try it now.

[michigancat]

The Pac 14 w/o Texas is not a stable league. Assuming everyone is going 16, what's to keep the SEC from adding the Oklahoma schools when they realize they might get stuck with KU/MU/KSU?

[fr@ck me]

If the Pac 12 does no end up getting OU/OSU and Texas/Tech. OU and Texas starting working to save the Big 12, again. Pac 12 comes in with an offer for K-State and ku, should we take it?

yes   

[SkinnyBenny]

Today was a shitty day to wake up to.  Gonna go listen to "Gallows Pole" now.   

[kcchiefdav]

The Pac 14 w/o Texas is not a stable league. Assuming everyone is going 16, what's to keep the SEC from adding the Oklahoma schools when they realize they might get stuck with KU/MU/KSU?

OU doesn't want to go to the SEC. The SEC is basically a bunch of schools that are exactly like OU. Everyone is trying to make upward moves to join schools that are perceived as better than them. Also, OU's football schedule would be 10x harder in the SEC than in the Pac or Big XII

[SkinnyBenny]

I don't know anything about the whoozits and whatzits of the law or whatever, but wouldn't a 64-team breakoff that excludes other teams from even having a shot at the national championship be ridiculously illegal somehow?  Anti-trust or something?  We need to talk about that.  There'd have to be a way to get at least one of the Left Behind conference teams into the playoff mix to avoid massive lawsuits, right?

And even if it's not illegal, it's still sucky.  This sucks.  And it's mean to the little guys.

[michigancat]

Interesting read from a Pitt perspective:

http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=515398

[steve dave]

It's pretty amazing that we will have all lived through the very best times in KState sports history and the very worst.  We can say we were there when KSU DOD'd all over everyone and then we were there when KSU was dumped into Conference USA never to matter again.  

[Saulbadguy]

What does EERhole have to say about all this?

["storm"nut]

It's pretty amazing that we will have all lived through the very best times in KState sports history and the very worst.  We can say we were there when KSU DOD'd all over everyone and then we were there when KSU was dumped into Conference USA never to matter again.  

 

You could not type that with a straight face, could you SD

[kso_FAN]

It's pretty amazing that we will have all lived through the very best times in KState sports history and the very worst.  We can say we were there when KSU DOD'd all over everyone and then we were there when KSU was dumped into Conference USA never to matter again.  

"(insert grandson's name here), I was in St. Louis when K-State was an overtime away from playing for the national championship in football. Those were the days.... Anyway, we're almost to Ft Collins, this rivalry has really taken off the last few years. When a trip for the league champion to the iPad 8 Bowl in San Francisco is on the line to play the #4 team from the Pac 16 it really gets your blood boiling."

[Pete]

kbohls kbohls
Pac-12 would look at Kan, KState, if Texas doesn't work out; OklaState on big rise at statesman.com/sports/9-thing… via @statesman

[michigancat]

kbohls kbohls
Pac-12 would look at Kan, KState, if Texas doesn't work out; OklaState on big rise at statesman.com/sports/9-thing… via @statesman

[Ira Hayes]

With Pitt and SU to ACC and UT, TT, OU, OSU to PAC appearing certain, the only plausible scenario for the way this will end is:

Rutgers and UConn to ACC

WVU, Cincy, Louisville to SEC

KSU, KU, MU, ISU to big 10

Baylor and S. Fla get left out.

Those are your four 16 team super conferences.  And that actually does a decent job with regard to geography and historical rivalries.

[SkinnyBenny]

WOULD TAKE.


Won't take.  Because it won't happen.   

[EllToPay]

kbohls kbohls
Pac-12 would look at Kan, KState, if Texas doesn't work out; OklaState on big rise at statesman.com/sports/9-thing… via @statesman

:popscollar:

[catzacker]

kbohls kbohls
Pac-12 would look at Kan, KState, if Texas doesn't work out; OklaState on big rise at statesman.com/sports/9-thing… via @statesman

leverage/posturing by scott.