Bear Down Wildcats

arizonawildcats wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 8:19 pm It's insane that Kliavkoff would use a professor in the first place. $50 million had no basis in reality even if it came from Stanford. Amateur hour.

The negotiating tactic employed here when we didn't have any leverage just screams academics. What kills me is I'm sure most of these universities, if not all of them, have competent business schools. Hell we know Eller is more than competent for one. How could none of the presidents turn to their business departments on how to handle this. I'm fine with consulting your economics department for obvious reasons, but obviously making deals involving such high amounts of dollars are more than mere economics to get done.

Absolute bozos.

Also how weak of a man is Kliavkoff to allow himself to be railroaded by one university president and one econ professor. He had numbers comparable to what ESPN was putting in front of him and instead of going with a logical retort of say asking for 5-7 million more per school, you allow them to influence you to ask for $15 million per school more? Amateur hour all the way.

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 3:07 pm

BBQ wildcat wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 2:23 pm

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 12:16 pm I thought it was a ucla professor

Not logical, because this was well after USC and UCLA had already committed to the B1G. So it is extremely doubtful that the remaining 10 presidents would rely on something from a school that had already left.

I looked through the LA Times story. It does not give then name of the school or the professor.

You are right though, that doesn't makes sense. My comment was from reading tweets with headlines from the article. They were talking about blocking UCLA along with the professor so my mind went there at first.

The strong rumor is that it was Crow, which I can't wrap my head around how Stanford/Cal/etc. would defer to an econ professor from ASU on numbers, but yet this is the Pac-12 we're talking about here.

Very innovative.

AZCatGirl wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 9:19 pm It's crap like this that makes it hard for me to feel sorry for the demise of the Pac. These dumbasses had it coming.

Hubris

If the BIG and SEC are going to ransack the BIG12 it's NOT gonna be for getting in the way of the playoffs. The good thing about the BIG12 is that they dont have a USC or Texas that can bring them down by selfishly controlling the strings.

That's going to be some serious frequent flyer miles for Stanford and Cal.

KillerKlown wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 5:09 pm If the BIG and SEC are going to ransack the BIG12 it's NOT gonna be for getting in the way of the playoffs. The good thing about the BIG12 is that they dont have a USC or Texas that can bring them down by selfishly controlling the strings.

The Big and SEC are not ransacking the Big 12 because they don’t want any school in the Big 12 except maybe Arizona asu and Colorado down the line

This threat certainly points to the fact that we must continue to invest heavy In football. Basketball may have helped us be attractive to the 12 but this next round or realignment will be all about football and it’s competitive ability.

Oh god NO!

We're getting the band back together!

I want the Cats to play Big 12 schools, not be relegated to a mostly a watered down Pac-12 schedule.

Stanford would come in kicking and screaming. Elitism Vs truck stop U’s. Not sure who will hate it more? The 12 schools or Furd

No doubt ESPIN wants to keep NotreDame as far away from the B1G as possible and we All know the ACC is done

azcat49 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2023 11:39 am Stanford would come in kicking and screaming. Elitism Vs truck stop U’s. Not sure who will hate it more? The 12 schools or Furd

No doubt ESPIN wants to keep NotreDame as far away from the B1G as possible and we All know the ACC is done

How can you say the ACC is done when they have no way out unless espn allows it until 2036

Don’t know how but it will be extinct by the next round

UAEebs86 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2023 11:17 am We're getting the band back together!

azcat49 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2023 11:57 am Don’t know how but it will be extinct by the next round

Maybe. Depends on espn's ultimate plan and how they are doing financially when that time comes.

I would not be surprised to see the next round actually be less money per school. Same with salaries in the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL. Not saying it will or predicting it at this time, but lots of changes are coming.

I saw someone claiming Yormark has a plan for taking ACC schools. IF the ACC breaks up the SEC and Big Ten will take all the best ones. Taking the best scraps remaining is not a plan

Agreed on the 12. The Big 2 is looking to control football and the TV money. We need to be solid in football at that point or risk being left out.

azcat49 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2023 1:25 pm Agreed on the 12. The Big 2 is looking to control football and the TV money. We need to be solid in football at that point or risk being left out.

On a podcast this week Moreno said that Arizona is far more attractive than fans make it seem

I think that had to be said of our latest movement. We get to that next round and they are going to want competitive football schools that draw viewers.

These networks are not going to pay for those schools to play directional schools anymore. They want an NFL level playing field for their dollar.

We just need to be diligent in continuing to fund the football program and do our best to lock in Fisch when it’s time. We are fortunate he was the right guy coming off the Sumlin disaster

Football is by far king, especially when it comes to TV money. But basketball is profitable too, especially March Madness. The one thing the BIG12 has with the 16 members is some basketball blue bloods like Kansas and Arizona, plus recent successful programs like Baylor and Houston.

If the B1G and SEC want to lock the BIG12 out of the playoffs, the BIG12 can tell them they need to scrap March Madness too. It would be a lose-lose for all involved. A sort of Mutually Assured Destruction, as all schools would lose out.

The future is still very cloudy and lots of moves to be played in the realignment game. But I don't see the NFL model with just two conferences coming to fruition at this point. The SEC is happy staying regional, and may never expand west. And the BIG12 has leverage with basketball.

Key sentence is, at this point. We are talking 7 years from now. SEC will select some of the prime ACC football kingpins and that will enough for them.

The SEC commissioner has already gone on record saying he would change the NCAA tourney and eliminate the cindarella’s. The money escalation is going to rule the roost unfortunately

azcat49 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2023 5:07 pm Key sentence is, at this point. We are talking 7 years from now. SEC will select some of the prime ACC football kingpins and that will enough for them.

The SEC commissioner has already gone on record saying he would change the NCAA tourney and eliminate the cindarella’s. The money escalation is going to rule the roost unfortunately

Purdue fans sigh with relief.

U.P. Zona Fan wrote: ↑Fri Aug 25, 2023 12:52 am

azcat49 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2023 5:07 pm Key sentence is, at this point. We are talking 7 years from now. SEC will select some of the prime ACC football kingpins and that will enough for them.

The SEC commissioner has already gone on record saying he would change the NCAA tourney and eliminate the cindarella’s. The money escalation is going to rule the roost unfortunately

Purdue fans sigh with relief.

Arizona fans give Purdue fans a knowing look.

I hope the ACC gets this done. We don't need to be stuck with these two again.

Chicat wrote: ↑Fri Aug 25, 2023 5:11 am

U.P. Zona Fan wrote: ↑Fri Aug 25, 2023 12:52 am

azcat49 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2023 5:07 pm Key sentence is, at this point. We are talking 7 years from now. SEC will select some of the prime ACC football kingpins and that will enough for them.

The SEC commissioner has already gone on record saying he would change the NCAA tourney and eliminate the cindarella’s. The money escalation is going to rule the roost unfortunately

Purdue fans sigh with relief.

Arizona fans give Purdue fans a knowing look.

I'm not sure which is worse, their last few years or the fact that we are the only team to lose to a 15 twice. Man if Purdue is a 3 seed this year, they will be picked by so many to get upset. But they are probably a 1 seed, a 2 if things don't go as well as projected.

Playing in California often is a good thing

AZCatGirl wrote: ↑Fri Aug 25, 2023 7:29 pm I hope the ACC gets this done. We don't need to be stuck with these two again.

The fly in the ointment should be that they bring nothing to any major conference except a ton of travel.

KillerKlown wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2023 11:02 am Oh god NO!

I can confirm this. Big 12 did actually offer Furd/Cal after the 4 corners joined, but were immediately turned down. If the ACC deal doesn't happen for Furd/Cal then you can bet that as long as Furd can hold its nose in regards to being in a conference with BYU (their main issue) out of pure survival, that Furd/Cal will join the Big 12. I sure wouldn't expect anything of value athletic-wise out of either program of course, but ESPN wants it to happen. The interesting part is FOX wouldn't pay their share to add either program, so they'd be getting a lesser share than the rest of the Big12 unless Yormark can sell that extra content to another provider like Amazon.

A) @PHXCATS: I can tell you that the SEC has no interest in any Big 12 schools. To think we do is folly on your part. You and your current conference mates must do everything you can to make your product valuable. It must be able to stand on its own merits, because there are no schools in the Big 12 which can help the SEC schools make more money. IF we do expand, it will be to protect our borders (notably from the B1G) by adding Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina, etc.

2) @ChooChooCat: Your account doesn't hold water. Big 12 schools are not going to add those for which Fox doesn't pay a share. They are not going to make themselves poorer for the sake of more travel. Also, it doesn't seem reasonable that the Big 12 offered Cal & Stanford and were turned down. Cal & Stanford are in no position to turn anyone down.

Capital Tiger wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 7:08 am A) @PHXCATS: I can tell you that the SEC has no interest in any Big 12 schools. To think we do is folly on your part. You and your current conference mates must do everything you can to make your product valuable. It must be able to stand on its own merits, because there are no schools in the Big 12 which can help the SEC schools make more money. IF we do expand, it will be to protect our borders (notably from the B1G) by adding Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina, etc.

2) @ChooChooCat: Your account doesn't hold water. Big 12 schools are not going to add those for which Fox doesn't pay a share. They are not going to make themselves poorer for the sake of more travel. Also, it doesn't seem reasonable that the Big 12 offered Cal & Stanford and were turned down. Cal & Stanford are in no position to turn anyone down.

The other schools are not impacted by this. Stanford/Cal would take an ESPN share of the TV money only unless of course another network steps to the table and pays for the extra content. If you don't think Stanford/Cal would turn up their noses to a conference with numerous religious universities and lackluster academic schools then you don't know Stanford/Cal. Every time the Pac-12 didn't expand for its own betterment came due to the pushing from Stanford/Cal to not do so (outside of the USC president sabotaging the most recent one). In the end they may have no choice, but to accept the golden parachute being offered to them by the Big12, but they're not going to do it with a smile on their face. Their top two choices have been the B1G and the ACC and there's a reason for that.

ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 7:21 am

Capital Tiger wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 7:08 am A) @PHXCATS: I can tell you that the SEC has no interest in any Big 12 schools. To think we do is folly on your part. You and your current conference mates must do everything you can to make your product valuable. It must be able to stand on its own merits, because there are no schools in the Big 12 which can help the SEC schools make more money. IF we do expand, it will be to protect our borders (notably from the B1G) by adding Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina, etc.

2) @ChooChooCat: Your account doesn't hold water. Big 12 schools are not going to add those for which Fox doesn't pay a share. They are not going to make themselves poorer for the sake of more travel. Also, it doesn't seem reasonable that the Big 12 offered Cal & Stanford and were turned down. Cal & Stanford are in no position to turn anyone down.

The other schools are not impacted by this. Stanford/Cal would take an ESPN share of the TV money only unless of course another network steps to the table and pays for the extra content. If you don't think Stanford/Cal would turn up their noses to a conference with numerous religious universities and lackluster academic schools then you don't know Stanford/Cal. Every time the Pac-12 didn't expand for its own betterment came due to the pushing from Stanford/Cal to not do so (outside of the USC president sabotaging the most recent one). In the end they may have no choice, but to accept the golden parachute being offered to them by the Big12, but they're not going to do it with a smile on their face. Their top two choices have been the B1G and the ACC and there's a reason for that.

Another network cannot step in and take the "extra" content. ESPN owns the television rights of the Big 12. That's not how it works.

I believe you on the history of Stanford/Cal. But it seems quite unreasonable in this case.

Capital Tiger wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 8:04 am

ChooChooCat wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 7:21 am

Capital Tiger wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 7:08 am A) @PHXCATS: I can tell you that the SEC has no interest in any Big 12 schools. To think we do is folly on your part. You and your current conference mates must do everything you can to make your product valuable. It must be able to stand on its own merits, because there are no schools in the Big 12 which can help the SEC schools make more money. IF we do expand, it will be to protect our borders (notably from the B1G) by adding Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina, etc.

2) @ChooChooCat: Your account doesn't hold water. Big 12 schools are not going to add those for which Fox doesn't pay a share. They are not going to make themselves poorer for the sake of more travel. Also, it doesn't seem reasonable that the Big 12 offered Cal & Stanford and were turned down. Cal & Stanford are in no position to turn anyone down.

The other schools are not impacted by this. Stanford/Cal would take an ESPN share of the TV money only unless of course another network steps to the table and pays for the extra content. If you don't think Stanford/Cal would turn up their noses to a conference with numerous religious universities and lackluster academic schools then you don't know Stanford/Cal. Every time the Pac-12 didn't expand for its own betterment came due to the pushing from Stanford/Cal to not do so (outside of the USC president sabotaging the most recent one). In the end they may have no choice, but to accept the golden parachute being offered to them by the Big12, but they're not going to do it with a smile on their face. Their top two choices have been the B1G and the ACC and there's a reason for that.

Another network cannot step in and take the "extra" content. ESPN owns the television rights of the Big 12. That's not how it works.

I believe you on the history of Stanford/Cal. But it seems quite unreasonable in this case.

ESPN and FOX own the teleivision rights of the Big 12. ESPN is willing to pay their part which is $20 million for Stanford/Cal. FOX is not willing to pay their part of around $12 million to add them, they're done. So that means there is extra content available for purchase as ESPN isn't paying for all of inventory that comes with 2 extra teams and FOX isn't paying for any of it. This would be similar to the deal with ACC games on the CW.

They turned down the Big12 to try one last ditch at the B1G, which has failed, and to pursue membership with the ACC, which is pending. Those conferences have membership that more "align" with Stanford/Cal's belief system. You have to understand they don't think like rational universities that remotely prioritize athletics in any way would. They may have no choice but to join the Big12 in the end as they are in debt in regards to athletics and need to pay it off somehow, but Big12 would be a last resort.

Capital Tiger wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 7:08 am A) @PHXCATS: I can tell you that the SEC has no interest in any Big 12 schools. To think we do is folly on your part. You and your current conference mates must do everything you can to make your product valuable. It must be able to stand on its own merits, because there are no schools in the Big 12 which can help the SEC schools make more money. IF we do expand, it will be to protect our borders (notably from the B1G) by adding Florida State, Clemson, North Carolina, etc.

What are you talking about? Seriously? I never said the SEC has interest in any current Big 12 teams. I have said the whole time the reason the Big 12 is stable is because no one wants those schools. The Big 12 is just good enough to draw some ratings and has good basketball but is shitty enough that the Big Ten and SEC wants nothing to do with any of the current schools. That can change potentially in the future but as of now no. The Big 12 is stable because no one else wants their schools. Said this for months so no idea where you came up with this bs

What are you talking about? Seriously? I never said the SEC has interest in any current Big 12 teams.

Oh let me see...

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2023 6:05 am

KillerKlown wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 5:09 pm If the BIG and SEC are going to ransack the BIG12 it's NOT gonna be for getting in the way of the playoffs. The good thing about the BIG12 is that they dont have a USC or Texas that can bring them down by selfishly controlling the strings.

The Big and SEC are not ransacking the Big 12 because they don’t want any school in the Big 12 except maybe Arizona asu and Colorado down the line

I'd say you say right here that the SEC might be interested in Arizona. I am telling you that this is not the case now, nor will it be in the foreseeable future.

Capital Tiger wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 10:32 am

What are you talking about? Seriously? I never said the SEC has interest in any current Big 12 teams.

Oh let me see...

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2023 6:05 am

KillerKlown wrote: ↑Wed Aug 23, 2023 5:09 pm If the BIG and SEC are going to ransack the BIG12 it's NOT gonna be for getting in the way of the playoffs. The good thing about the BIG12 is that they dont have a USC or Texas that can bring them down by selfishly controlling the strings.

The Big and SEC are not ransacking the Big 12 because they don’t want any school in the Big 12 except maybe Arizona asu and Colorado down the line

I'd say you say right here that the SEC might be interested in Arizona. I am telling you that this is not the case now, nor will it be in the foreseeable future.

The Big Ten is far more likely than the SEC but notice how I said down the line. You know what that means right?

My guess is though is in 15 years we go back to completely regional conferences for every sport but football and football is its own thing with 4 different levels with promotions and relegation in those levels

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 10:54 am The Big Ten is far more likely than the SEC but notice how I said down the line. You know what that means right?

My guess is though is in 15 years we go back to completely regional conferences for every sport but football and football is its own thing with 4 different levels with promotions and relegation in those levels

What I am saying is that no matter how far you draw the line, it is inconceivable that the SEC would ever invite Arizona.

And while your promotion and relegation theory sounds attractive, please tell me what incentive LSU might have to ever enter into an agreement where they might be lowered a level due to results on the field. Remember, no one is in charge of NCAA football. Each team (and conference) solely looks out for the good of it's own. Therefore, LSU has no incentive to join a league whose structure might help Arizona, but at it's own detriment.

It's far more likely that the top 25 to 35 teams break away to form their own super division and all others are left behind.

The networks would love to see a NFL model in college. That requires likely 32 teams minimum to fill all the content required. Maybe more, since college football has four game windows in Sat, versus only three for the NFL on Sun.

But the NFL model requires two conferences with teams on both coasts to fill all windows. With the B1G with the top 4 west coast schools, there is no teams the SEC will want out west. Nor will ESPN be likely to pay SEC money when they can get 4th window content at BIG12 prices.

I also don't see schools wanting to split sports up. Men's basketball is profitable. And if the BIG12 were to shut out of college football playoffs, for example, they could mess up March Madness and pull out. This would cause SEC and B1G schools to lose money. As stated before, the BIG12 being a great basketball conference gives them leverage. And splitting football away from other sports, including basketball, is a bit of Mutually Assured Destruction.

Capital Tiger wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 11:13 am

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 10:54 am The Big Ten is far more likely than the SEC but notice how I said down the line. You know what that means right?

My guess is though is in 15 years we go back to completely regional conferences for every sport but football and football is its own thing with 4 different levels with promotions and relegation in those levels

What I am saying is that no matter how far you draw the line, it is inconceivable that the SEC would ever invite Arizona.

And while your promotion and relegation theory sounds attractive, please tell me what incentive LSU might have to ever enter into an agreement where they might be lowered a level due to results on the field. Remember, no one is in charge of NCAA football. Each team (and conference) solely looks out for the good of it's own. Therefore, LSU has no incentive to join a league whose structure might help Arizona, but at it's own detriment.

It's far more likely that the top 25 to 35 teams break away to form their own super division and all others are left behind.

There's nothing you can say that will change his mind. We've been telling him no way this happens and everytime he brings up 10 or 20 years from now like he's Nostradamus.
Having 40 team leagues is a negative for the original teams already in that conference.

Capital Tiger wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 11:13 am

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 10:54 am The Big Ten is far more likely than the SEC but notice how I said down the line. You know what that means right?

My guess is though is in 15 years we go back to completely regional conferences for every sport but football and football is its own thing with 4 different levels with promotions and relegation in those levels

What I am saying is that no matter how far you draw the line, it is inconceivable that the SEC would ever invite Arizona.

And while your promotion and relegation theory sounds attractive, please tell me what incentive LSU might have to ever enter into an agreement where they might be lowered a level due to results on the field. Remember, no one is in charge of NCAA football. Each team (and conference) solely looks out for the good of it's own. Therefore, LSU has no incentive to join a league whose structure might help Arizona, but at it's own detriment.

It's far more likely that the top 25 to 35 teams break away to form their own super division and all others are left behind.

Money and the tv networks dictate all of this, LSU doesn’t

There is some talk of conferences being irrelevant and n the next round and like you said Cap Tiger, a large pool of teams driven by a single commissioner and the TV networks bidding singularly(one league instead of multiple conferences) for the TV rights

Lots of talk that teams like a Wake Forest, Northwestern and other small market teams being left out of that super league

Would AZ be a part of that, who knows? We need to keep investing heavily in our program as this next 7 years might decide the long term fate of many athletic departments, including ours

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 11:48 am

Capital Tiger wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 11:13 am

PHXCATS wrote: ↑Sat Aug 26, 2023 10:54 am The Big Ten is far more likely than the SEC but notice how I said down the line. You know what that means right?

My guess is though is in 15 years we go back to completely regional conferences for every sport but football and football is its own thing with 4 different levels with promotions and relegation in those levels

What I am saying is that no matter how far you draw the line, it is inconceivable that the SEC would ever invite Arizona.

And while your promotion and relegation theory sounds attractive, please tell me what incentive LSU might have to ever enter into an agreement where they might be lowered a level due to results on the field. Remember, no one is in charge of NCAA football. Each team (and conference) solely looks out for the good of it's own. Therefore, LSU has no incentive to join a league whose structure might help Arizona, but at it's own detriment.

It's far more likely that the top 25 to 35 teams break away to form their own super division and all others are left behind.

Money and the tv networks dictate all of this, LSU doesn’t

My man. I'm using LSU as an example.

Put it this way: Why would the TV network agree to a model which might demote one of its most valuable (aka - most well supported and viewed) teams in favor of one who isn't as valuable. LSU, Alabama, Ohio State, Michigan, USC all fit the former description and Arizona, Colorado, Texas Tech, NC State fit the latter.

Meet the man who thinks he ‘screwed up’ college football with a Supreme Court win

Andrew Coats, the lawyer who convinced the Supreme Court in 1984 to allow universities to maximize football revenue, leading to a sweeping upheaval today, looks back with regret on the landmark case he successfully argued.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/co ... rcna101266

Backs up what Choo said earlier:

C'mon ACC im pushing for ya. Get this deal done!

I would like to see Cal and Stanford in the Big12. Keep those west coast rivalries going.

So which school is it this time pushing their bs?

KillerKlown wrote: ↑Sun Aug 27, 2023 10:18 am So which school is it this time pushing their bs?

OSU if this guy is any indication:

If there is anything I learned through all this it's that OSU and WSU fans are a bunch of whiny bitches and hypocrites. Hey dumb fuck beaver fans your larry scott dick sucking president is one of the reasons for the conference collapse. And wsu and their fake news spreading bs trying to muddy the waters. Their like the school versions of Wilner and Canzano. Both irrelevant.