CU has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues

[hokiehead]

Here's what it would take:

Media Companies: "Hey, tOSU et al, we're kicking around a model that would require you and other elites to ditch the conference model for football but you'd make at least $20M more per year on media rights."

Schools: "Where do we sign?"

that would seemingly require Fox and ABC working together against the other media outlets. seems problematic legally, as well as financially, but I don't claim to be an expert in these things

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

thanks. sounds like you have some information that I haven't seen.

You haven't seen? Why the hell else would the Big 10 pick up UW, UO, USC, and UCLA? The Big10 was given a big fat TV deal under the premise they expand the footprint into the Pacific time zone. FOX explicitly targeted USC and UCLA for football inventory in the conference. Those additions make no sense for the Big 10 , but they very clearly make a lot of sense for FOX.

ESPN paid CU to move to the Big12. The Big12's TV contact explicitly provided pro rata for P5 additions to the conference. It only makes sense to do that if ESPN is in favor of further market consolidation.

The networks want to consolidate and control the inventory. 130 FBS teams in places that largely no one cares about is too many mouths to feed with too many overlapping markets and timezones. You now have basically a P4 with the ACC hanging on for deal life.

ESPN and FOX want a football product to pair with the NFL, they haven been trying for decades, see the XFL, USFL, AFL, etc. A 64-ish team College Football League gives them that.

 

[Not Sure]

Here's what it would take:

Media Companies: "Hey, tOSU et al, we're kicking around a model that would require you and other elites to ditch the conference model for football but you'd make at least $20M more per year on media rights."

Schools: "Where do we sign?"

As much as I hate (and I really do hate) to admit it, I believe it would require Notre Dame to start the process. ND gets schools like OSU, Michigan, USC, Texas and Alabama on board and then the whole thing happens in a way where the schools dictate terms to the networks, not the other way around. If those 6 schools are all on board, everybody else will fall in line very fast.

 

[hokiehead]

You haven't seen? Why the hell else would the Big 10 pick up UW, UO, USC, and UCLA? The Big10 was given a big fat TV deal under the premise they expand the footprint into the Pacific time zone. FOX explicitly targeted USC and UCLA for football inventory in the conference. Those additions make no sense for the Big 10 , but they very clearly make a lot of sense for FOX.

ESPN paid CU to move to the Big12. The Big12's TV contact explicitly provided pro rata for P5 additions to the conference. It only makes sense to do that if ESPN is in favor of further market consolidation.

The networks want to consolidate and control the inventory. 130 FBS teams in places that largely no one cares about is too many mouths to feed with too many overlapping markets and timezones. You now have basically a P4 with the ACC hanging on for deal life.

ESPN and FOX want a football product to pair with the NFL, they haven been trying for decades, see the XFL, USFL, AFL, etc. A 64-ish team College Football League gives them that.

re: why the hell would the B1G...?
Fox was interested in picking up new properties not already in a conference affiliated w/ Fox. that doesn't mean they have interest, much less a viable path forward, to consolidating with the SEC

re: the XII... similar thoughts... ESPN has a contract w/ the XII. they're interested in the XII picking up properties not already in a conference they're engaged with. that doesn't mean the XII has a viable path forward to consolidating with the SEC and B1G (although I'm sure the member schools have strong interest)

I'm following realignment carefully, but not seeing the motivation for the SEC and B1G to consolidate with each other. I see motivation for them to cherry pick certain schools from the XII and the ACC, but that's a far cry from the consolidation you and Nik are talking about.

 

[Buffnik]

re: why the hell would the B1G...?
Fox was interested in picking up new properties not already in a conference affiliated w/ Fox. that doesn't mean they have interest, much less a viable path forward, to consolidating with the SEC

re: the XII... similar thoughts... ESPN has a contract w/ the XII. they're interested in the XII picking up properties not already in a conference they're engaged with. that doesn't mean the XII has a viable path forward to consolidating with the SEC and B1G (although I'm sure the member schools have strong interest)

I'm following realignment carefully, but not seeing the motivation for the SEC and B1G to consolidate with each other. I see motivation for them to cherry pick certain schools from the XII and the ACC, but that's a far cry from the consolidation you and Nik are talking about.

Their interest is not acquiring new properties.

Their interest is in maximizing the number of games they can broadcast which feel big to the average viewer nationwide while not paying for a bunch of fluff.

 

[hokiehead]

Their interest is not acquiring new properties.

Their interest is in maximizing the number of games they can broadcast which feel big to the average viewer nationwide while not paying for a bunch of fluff.

I don't disagree with that one bit -- we're talking a difference between end goals and intermediate steps

 

[hokiehead]

Their interest is not acquiring new properties.

Their interest is in maximizing the number of games they can broadcast which feel big to the average viewer nationwide while not paying for a bunch of fluff.

dwelling on this further, it occurs to me that to fill their slate with "viewer perceived 'big' games", the shortest path is contraction of the P2.

if the networks are really calling all the shots, I would think that Fox would've told the B1G to give the boot to schools like Northwestern, Illinois and Rutgers.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

dwelling on this further, it occurs to me that to fill their slate with "viewer perceived 'big' games", the shortest path is contraction of the P2.

if the networks are really calling all the shots, I would think that Fox would've told the B1G to give the boot to schools like Northwestern, Illinois and Rutgers.

They eventually will, IMO. I don’t see 64. I see 48 or so across the country, making sure every time zone and major population center is covered.

 

[4BienemyTDs]

They eventually will, IMO. I don’t see 64. I see 48 or so across the country, making sure every time zone and major population center is covered.

The Conferences are non-profit collectives of the schools, correct?
The Schools run/own the conference, correct?
The Conferences are just a means to organize and coordinate, so that can be replicated in a new Org
The existing Conferences can still run the other sports, not including Basketball because it too can be moved into a new Org, hopefully ran by Yormack
I think that the magic number is preferably 48, but I think it will actually be 72 (All current P4 Teams + Notre Dame and possibly Tulsa) because throwing people out is not gonna happen.
Might end up with EIGHT 9-Team Divisions with Division Winners + 4 wild cards to get to the 12 teams. for the playoffs
I agree that Notre Dame would be a perfect trigger.
This new ORG Must be controlled, organized, and monitored by the schools

 

[Buffnik]

dwelling on this further, it occurs to me that to fill their slate with "viewer perceived 'big' games", the shortest path is contraction of the P2.

if the networks are really calling all the shots, I would think that Fox would've told the B1G to give the boot to schools like Northwestern, Illinois and Rutgers.

Yep.

USC or Oregon or UCLA or Washington at Wisconsin = Big Game broadcast

Indiana or Purdue or Northwestern or Rutgers or Illinois at Wisconsin = low ratings, regional interest

 

[Alfred91]

So the problem I see with a national league model is the CFP contract. The networks are going to negotiate that, and the conferences are going to sign off on it.

Then, if the networks want a national league, it's going to take blowing up those conferences. That's going to make this legal squabble between the Pac-2 and the outgoing 10 look like small potatoes.

 

[Buffnik]

So the problem I see with a national league model is the CFP contract. The networks are going to negotiate that, and the conferences are going to sign off on it.

Then, if the networks want a national league, it's going to take blowing up those conferences. That's going to make this legal squabble between the Pac-2 and the outgoing 10 look like small potatoes.

It would likely be a group of schools breaking off from the NCAA for football.

 

[Alfred91]

It would likely be a group of schools breaking off from the NCAA for football.

I understand that, but ESPN et al isn't going to pay for a CFP full of also ran schools while also paying for a superleague.

A very telling signal will be how long the next CFP contract will be for. There will be no superleague pushed by the networks as long as there's a CFP contract in effect.

I still think the most likely possibility is an outside force trying to be the middleman, to scoop up the selected schools and then dictate to the networks a la the NFL. That still necessitates a whole bunch of lawsuits though, potentially even involving the networks suing schools.

Chaos would reign and I'm here for it.

 

[You Assholes]

I'm always disappointed in myself when I click on this thread

 

[hokiehead]

I understand that, but ESPN et al isn't going to pay for a CFP full of also ran schools while also paying for a superleague.

A very telling signal will be how long the next CFP contract will be for. There will be no superleague pushed by the networks as long as there's a CFP contract in effect.

I still think the most likely possibility is an outside force trying to be the middleman, to scoop up the selected schools and then dictate to the networks a la the NFL. That still necessitates a whole bunch of lawsuits though, potentially even involving the networks suing schools.

Chaos would reign and I'm here for it.

if..... that happens, I believe the CFP, LLC has a very good chance of being that "outside force"

 

[Not Sure]

I'm always disappointed in myself when I click on this thread

Welcome to the “we are all disappointed in you” club.

 

[Big Jim]

I'm always disappointed in myself when I click on this thread

 

[skibum]

I'm always disappointed in myself when I click on this thread

I thought that was just your average Wednesday.

 

[You Assholes]

I thought that was just your average Wednesday.

It's extra

 

[BerkeleyBuff]

That’s a terrible list that screams they bracing for many current members leaving, including maybe some to the Big 12, IMO. If Clemson and FSU find a way out to the SEC, I don’t see Miami, UNC, Louisville, Duke, Pitt and Virginia schools agreeing to stay and backfilling with those programs.

Any four of Lousville/ Miami/ Va Tech/ Pitt/ NC State/ Georgia Tech/ Duke would make for a nice way to fill out the Big 12's eastern wing.

 

[skibum]

Any four of Lousville/ Miami/ Va Tech/ Pitt/ NC State/ Georgia Tech/ Duke would make for a nice way to fill out the Big 12's eastern wing.

The right 4 would make the B12 undisputed king of mbb.

 

[hokiehead]

In a court filing last month in the fight for control of the Pac-12, commissioner George Kliavkoff indicated he had no position on the composition of the conference’s governing board. Whether board seats should be limited to the two remaining schools, Washington State and Oregon State, or available to the 10 outgoing members, as well, was an issue for the universities to settle, Kliavkoff stated in his court declaration.

But that’s not what he said this summer in a different legal entanglement.

Weeks before the Pac-12’s collapse, Kliavkoff issued a sworn statement to San Francisco Superior Court in which he stated that UCLA and USC had, in fact, already relinquished their board positions after announcing they would be joining the Big Ten.

The statement, unearthed Wednesday evening by the Hotline, is one of dozens of filings in a lawsuit brought by two former Pac-12 executives who were terminated for their roles in the Comcast overpayment scandal.

In the first section of his declaration to the court, which was filed July 12, Kliavkoff states his job title and responsibilities:

“I am the Commissioner for Defendant Pac-12 Conference and have held this position since July 1, 2021. I report to the Pac-12 Conference Board of Directors, comprised of the Chancellor or President of each member institution.“


The second sentence is accompanied by the following annotation:

“The University of California, Los Angeles, and University of Southern California, are no longer among the member institutions represented on the Board of Directors.”


The declaration is nine pages long and concludes, “I declare under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the United States of America and the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.”

It is signed by Kliavkoff.

A source called the development potentially “significant” in the lawsuit brought by Washington State and Oregon State against the conference over control of the governing board.

It shows Kliavkoff, under penalty of perjury, acknowledging that announced departures to other conferences trigger removal from the Pac-12’s board — exactly the point Washington State and Oregon State are arguing in their lawsuit.

The two schools left behind in the realignment game contend the 10 outbound members gave what conference bylaws call “notice of withdrawal” upon announcing their moves to new leagues.

As a result, the Cougars and Beavers believe they should be the only remaining members of the board. The lawsuit filed Sept. 11 against the Pac-12 attempts to gain judicial clarity on the matter.

The stakes are high. If Washington State and Oregon State control the board, they control the Pac-12’s assets, including NCAA Tournament revenue worth tens of millions of dollars over time.

The money could be used to fund their athletic departments or rebuild the conference (with Mountain West teams) after the 10 universities depart next summer.

A temporary restraining order issued Sept. 11 by Whitman County (Wash.) judge Gary Libey prevents the Pac-12 board from meeting until the makeup of the governing body can be determined. Libey scheduled a hearing on the matter for Nov. 14.

Additionally, the two sides (the ‘Pac-2’ and the ‘Pac-10’) agreed to enter mediation and began talks earlier this month.

Kliavkoff’s sworn statement in the Comcast case came in the middle of July, two weeks before Colorado announced its departure for the Big 12 and three weeks before five additional schools agreed to leave.

At that point, USC president Carol Folt and UCLA chancellor Gene Block had long since been removed from the board of directors. The Pac-12 took that significant step in the summer of 2022, after the L.A. schools accepted Big Ten invitations.

The conference used the same policy with Colorado on July 27, after chancellor Phil DiStefano informed Kliavkoff via text message that the Buffaloes would be joining the Big 12.

The next day, Pac-12 general counsel Scott Petersmeyer sent Colorado’s legal officer a letter that included the following:

“Chancellor DiStefano provided CU’s written notice of withdrawal to Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff on July 27, 2023. Under Section CB 2-3 of the Pac-12’s Constitution and Bylaws, Chancellor DiStefano and CU’s representation on the Pac-12’s Board of Directors automatically ceases effective immediately, and CU no longer has the right to vote on any matter before the Board.”

A week later, Oregon and Washington left for the Big Ten; Arizona, Arizona State and Utah bolted for the Big 12; and the conference collapsed. Only Stanford, Cal, Washington State and Oregon State remained.

In early September, the Bay Area schools accepted invitations from the ACC, leaving just the Beavers and Cougars.

Kliavkoff then attempted to call a meeting of all the presidents and chancellors, including those representing USC and UCLA — this, despite his sworn statement two months earlier that the L.A. school had been removed from the board.

Washington State president Kirk Schulz and Oregon State president Jayathi Murthy disputed the notion that the outbound schools continued to hold board seats.

They argued that public announcements of new conference affiliations by the outbound 10 constituted a “notice of withdrawal” that triggered removal from the board.

But in a letter to Schulz and Murthy before they filed the Sept. 11 lawsuit, Kliavkoff rejected the conclusion that the 10 schools had relinquished their board positions:

“Your suggestion that ten of the Conference’s 12 members have ‘withdrawn’ from the Conference within the meaning of the Bylaws is mistaken. Not one member school has signaled any intention — or actually attempted — to leave Conference play at any time prior to the end of the current fiscal year on July 31, 2024, or to take back and exploit their media rights.
In a court filing last month in the fight for control of the Pac-12, commissioner George Kliavkoff indicated he had no position on the composition of the conference’s governing board. Whether board seats should be limited to the two remaining schools, Washington State and Oregon State, or available to the 10 outgoing members, as well, was an issue for the universities to settle, Kliavkoff stated in his court declaration.

But that’s not what he said this summer in a different legal entanglement.

Weeks before the Pac-12’s collapse, Kliavkoff issued a sworn statement to San Francisco Superior Court in which he stated that UCLA and USC had, in fact, already relinquished their board positions after announcing they would be joining the Big Ten.

The statement, unearthed Wednesday evening by the Hotline, is one of dozens of filings in a lawsuit brought by two former Pac-12 executives who were terminated for their roles in the Comcast overpayment scandal.

In the first section of his declaration to the court, which was filed July 12, Kliavkoff states his job title and responsibilities:

“I am the Commissioner for Defendant Pac-12 Conference and have held this position since July 1, 2021. I report to the Pac-12 Conference Board of Directors, comprised of the Chancellor or President of each member institution.“


The second sentence is accompanied by the following annotation:

“The University of California, Los Angeles, and University of Southern California, are no longer among the member institutions represented on the Board of Directors.”


The declaration is nine pages long and concludes, “I declare under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the United States of America and the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.”

It is signed by Kliavkoff.

A source called the development potentially “significant” in the lawsuit brought by Washington State and Oregon State against the conference over control of the governing board.

It shows Kliavkoff, under penalty of perjury, acknowledging that announced departures to other conferences trigger removal from the Pac-12’s board — exactly the point Washington State and Oregon State are arguing in their lawsuit.

The two schools left behind in the realignment game contend the 10 outbound members gave what conference bylaws call “notice of withdrawal” upon announcing their moves to new leagues.

As a result, the Cougars and Beavers believe they should be the only remaining members of the board. The lawsuit filed Sept. 11 against the Pac-12 attempts to gain judicial clarity on the matter.

The stakes are high. If Washington State and Oregon State control the board, they control the Pac-12’s assets, including NCAA Tournament revenue worth tens of millions of dollars over time.

The money could be used to fund their athletic departments or rebuild the conference (with Mountain West teams) after the 10 universities depart next summer.

A temporary restraining order issued Sept. 11 by Whitman County (Wash.) judge Gary Libey prevents the Pac-12 board from meeting until the makeup of the governing body can be determined. Libey scheduled a hearing on the matter for Nov. 14.

Additionally, the two sides (the ‘Pac-2’ and the ‘Pac-10’) agreed to enter mediation and began talks earlier this month.

Kliavkoff’s sworn statement in the Comcast case came in the middle of July, two weeks before Colorado announced its departure for the Big 12 and three weeks before five additional schools agreed to leave.

At that point, USC president Carol Folt and UCLA chancellor Gene Block had long since been removed from the board of directors. The Pac-12 took that significant step in the summer of 2022, after the L.A. schools accepted Big Ten invitations.

The conference used the same policy with Colorado on July 27, after chancellor Phil DiStefano informed Kliavkoff via text message that the Buffaloes would be joining the Big 12.

The next day, Pac-12 general counsel Scott Petersmeyer sent Colorado’s legal officer a letter that included the following:

“Chancellor DiStefano provided CU’s written notice of withdrawal to Pac-12 Commissioner George Kliavkoff on July 27, 2023. Under Section CB 2-3 of the Pac-12’s Constitution and Bylaws, Chancellor DiStefano and CU’s representation on the Pac-12’s Board of Directors automatically ceases effective immediately, and CU no longer has the right to vote on any matter before the Board.”

A week later, Oregon and Washington left for the Big Ten; Arizona, Arizona State and Utah bolted for the Big 12; and the conference collapsed. Only Stanford, Cal, Washington State and Oregon State remained.

In early September, the Bay Area schools accepted invitations from the ACC, leaving just the Beavers and Cougars.

Kliavkoff then attempted to call a meeting of all the presidents and chancellors, including those representing USC and UCLA — this, despite his sworn statement two months earlier that the L.A. school had been removed from the board.

Washington State president Kirk Schulz and Oregon State president Jayathi Murthy disputed the notion that the outbound schools continued to hold board seats.

They argued that public announcements of new conference affiliations by the outbound 10 constituted a “notice of withdrawal” that triggered removal from the board.

But in a letter to Schulz and Murthy before they filed the Sept. 11 lawsuit, Kliavkoff rejected the conclusion that the 10 schools had relinquished their board positions:

“Your suggestion that ten of the Conference’s 12 members have ‘withdrawn’ from the Conference within the meaning of the Bylaws is mistaken. Not one member school has signaled any intention — or actually attempted — to leave Conference play at any time prior to the end of the current fiscal year on July 31, 2024, or to take back and exploit their media rights.

link

 

[BuffsNYC]

link

Wilner is a dumbass.

Announcing that “the University of California, Los Angeles, and University of Southern California, are no longer among the member institutions represented on the Board of Directors.” Is not "acknowledging that announced departures to other conferences trigger removal from the Pac-12’s board," especially not when he writes in the same article that UCLA and USC "relinquished their board positions after announcing they would be joining the Big Ten."

Relinquish: 3. transitive. To give up, resign, surrender (a possession, right, etc.).

 

[hokiehead]

Wilner is a dumbass.

Announcing that “the University of California, Los Angeles, and University of Southern California, are no longer among the member institutions represented on the Board of Directors.” Is not "acknowledging that announced departures to other conferences trigger removal from the Pac-12’s board," especially not when he writes in the same article that UCLA and USC "relinquished their board positions after announcing they would be joining the Big Ten."

Relinquish: 3. transitive. To give up, resign, surrender (a possession, right, etc.).

agree, that's a leap in logic suggesting he missed the nuance.

However, think it's significant that, after DiStefano's text message that the Pac 12 that we're going to the XII, the general counsel for the Pac responded with notice CU was no longer on the board, citing the Pac 12 constitution. this seems to indicate that up until that event, the Pac 12 was reading their own rules the same way WSU and OSU are now.

 

[Creebuzz]

The conference has dissolved. Residual assets should be divided equally. Or if not, remaining liabilities should be assigned to the remaining two. OSU and WSU seem to want to divide assets by two and liabilities by 12.

 

[hokiehead]

The conference has dissolved. Residual assets should be divided equally. Or if not, remaining liabilities should be assigned to the remaining two. OSU and WSU seem to want to divide assets by two and liabilities by 12.

I don't believe that's correct -- it would require a vote to dissolve by Pac 12 board members, which never happened. OSU and WSU explicitly stated they wanted the TRO to stop GK from calling a meeting where that could happen

 

[BerkeleyBuff]

The right 4 would make the B12 undisputed king of mbb.

I actually think the Big XII is already there. Go for football viewership first.

 

[hokiehead]

I really can’t imagine it’s not defined. Usually “notice” requires, at least, a formal letter stating the sender’s intent to do something. Publicly saying something isn’t usually legal notice.

link

 

[PAC MAN]

The conference has dissolved. Residual assets should be divided equally. Or if not, remaining liabilities should be assigned to the remaining two. OSU and WSU seem to want to divide assets by two and liabilities by 12.

The dissolution has not happened yet.

OSU & WSU is evaluating whether the P12's assets outweigh the liabilities before attempting that reverse merger with the MWC. If that does not turn out to be the best option, OSU & WSU will look for a new conference in addition to the P12 being dissolved. I think that is resolved one way or the other next month.

 

[Go Buffs]

Must admit, I have ignored this thread. But just tuned in to the Houston versus West Virginia game. Empty seats everywhere. And who the **** cares about these teams? Puke. I have no interest in every team in the B12. What have we done here? I guess we had no choice.