If the money is similar to the B12, along with the Arizona schools, Cal, Stanford & CU, I would be in favor of Utah going back to the PAC.
The media money will not be similar to BIG12. My guess It will be $15 - $18 mil per school.
That’s my guess as well. But, if the AZ schools, along with the Bay Area schools & CU are involved the money may be pretty good.
It’s interesting they took both Fresno and CSU over UNLV. Better basketball history, up and coming in football (recent success) and Vegas seems to be a coveted sports town these days.
I don’t think Colorad9 has any thoughts at all of ever going west again. I think they are happy to be back with the folks they left when they came to the PAC12.
If they are lucky. Might be more like $12-15M
UNLV doesn’t exactly have a stellar reputation
If it means going back without byu-p, I’ll take the $15 million a year and be happy about it.
Meaning a couple of very large boosters. But yeah.
They should add UNLV and New Mexico.
Gambling and shiny rocks. Can’t beat it.
This would be really funny if it wasn’t so sad.
Cal and Stanford go back?
I doubt it
It’s a natural fit and would cut their travel cost by at least 80%
Can’t see any schools serious about being in the looming Super Structure that seems inevitable raising their stock by running back to the new MWC2.
This seems like a desperate shot at hope by a small group who want to stay relevant. It’s sad. A once proud conference repurposed like this but I see zero chance that the big football name schools run back. TV money isn’t there. A future in the (betting on it) 64 team super conference in 3-5 years won’t be found there. Gotta shine in the B12 or ACC if you want one of the few remaining tickets on that bus.
If I’m wrong…well it certainly won’t be the first time but I got a feeling. As for Stanford and Cal? Not convinced they are a factor in much at this point so not much concern either way.
I’m a BYU alum who just quickly joined to respond to this thread. I hopped on here curious about what Utah thought about the Pac-12 movement.
I too find the Pac-12 changes odd. I’m definitely rooting for those teams to get as many opportunities as possible. Really I think they are just leveraging the Pac-12 brand name and I’m surprised they aren’t just quickly getting to a dozen total teams pulled from the Mountain West.
But I’m also wondering what you believe the economics of the 64 super conference would look like. For example, would all 64 teams get the same amount of TV money? It’s unlikely big brands would accept performance based pay unless the “performance” was based on some time of TV share. Right now 68 teams are in the so called P4 conferences. And the biggest teams make the most TV money (with just a few exceptions) under the current arrangement. Do you believe that there would be even more TV money in total if there were a 64 team conference? Like Ohio State would be making more than they currently are and so would Kansas? I don’t see why ESPN and FOX would pay even more for the essentially the same product they have now.
How about if you lowered the superconference to 48 teams or 32 teams? Does a concentration of more talent in fewer games maximize revenue? I can’t see how 16 or 24 games per week makes more money for ESPN and FOX. You make a dozen or two dozen games officially irrelevant, and eliminate the chance of upsets. That fifth bid for the G5 for now keeps many teams “in contention.”
I expect that as 2031 approaches there will be some realignment, but I see breaking of contracts unlikely.
Other than some teams moving as that date approaches , the only thing that I think breaks the current arrangement in any meaningful way is the emergence of some sort of collective bargaining where football players unionize and set league minimum pay - in which case only a few dozen teams would be able to afford to compete in the league. The best 2000 college football players at that point would be capturing their full market value, which is probably the most just system for something that is otherwise likely so dangerous and profitable.
I don’t see that happening. The SEC and B1G will ensure they get the most money & playoff spots.
Agreed. Which is why I think the current arrangement is more likely to continue on. Even possibly surviving a players union with some hybrid of union and non union teams.
Just my opinion (many may disagree of course) but I would like in a few years see Utah back in a western “division/conference” with strong teams including fairly close schools one can drive to including Utah, BYU, USC, UCLA, Arizona, ASU, and perhaps Oregon and Washington. Maybe have a couple of teams in other divisions (same league) on the schedule each year.
Travel is going to be very tiresome and a burden on athletes the way things are going.
But going to be whatever $$$$$$ and TV networks want rather than what is best for the students, athletes, and fans.