|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 12, 2024 22:04:22 GMT -8
...to keep losing in their new conferences.
Look at UCLA. They're 1-5, and are looking at a possible 2-10 season. Against the BIG 10 schools they're not going to be competitive any time soon, if ever. So how long can the school afford to be the doormat for the BIG 10? How far down can attendance go, how far down can merch sales go, etc, before the added travel costs become prohibitive and the Athletic Department starts losing money on an annual basis?
How sustainable is it for UCLA, CAL, etc, to become perennial bottom feeders? At what point does the Athletic Departments of these schools become insolvent? Stanford's got a ton of money, so they can afford to be doormats, but state schools? UCLA and CAL have to answer to people outside the school if their Athletic Departments generate a rather large debt.
If they do start running annual deficits and create a massive departmental debt what would the solution be? Moving back to the PAC? Dropping football? They do have people in positions of power above the school to answer to.
Or do you think they'll get bailed out in some way?
I'm actually enjoying watching the former PAC schools struggle. It's what they deserve.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aztec Since 88 on Oct 12, 2024 22:08:52 GMT -8
The 70 million or so that UCLA gets each year from joining the B10, will allow them to suck in the B10 for awhile. Cal on the other hand i am not sure how long they can last.
|
|
|
|
Post by northparkaztec on Oct 12, 2024 22:17:07 GMT -8
You raise a good point seemingly missed. If we understand economic expansion cycles to be driven by the 18-yr cycle, and the biggest bubble since 2008 being now private equity. How sustainable is this arrangement, when afaik it's driven by private equity? What happens in the coming 1-2 years when all these guys want their capital returned? Big reason why tbe new Pac2 offer seems sketchy, IF they're offer is P/E-based. ...to keep losing in their new conferences. Look at UCLA. They're 1-5, and are looking at a possible 2-10 season. Against the BIG 10 schools they're not going to be competitive any time soon, if ever. So how long can the school afford to be the doormat for the BIG 10? How far down can attendance go, how far down can merch sales go, etc, before the added travel costs become prohibitive and the Athletic Department starts losing money on an annual basis? How sustainable is it for UCLA, CAL, etc, to become perennial bottom feeders? At what point does the Athletic Departments of these schools become insolvent? Stanford's got a ton of money, so they can afford to be doormats, but state schools? UCLA and CAL have to answer to people outside the school if their Athletic Departments generate a rather large debt. If they do start running annual deficits and create a massive departmental debt what would the solution be? Moving back to the PAC? Dropping football? They do have people in positions of power above the school to answer to. Or do you think they'll get bailed out in some way? I'm actually enjoying watching the former PAC schools struggle. It's what they deserve. |
|
|
|
Post by LostAztec on Oct 13, 2024 8:14:59 GMT -8
P4 wannabe problems.
The B1G and XII Schools are drying their tears with all those dollar bills. Calimony and Stanford's deep pockets will keep the BB and FB programs going for at least two decades.
I believe the West Coast Schools will rethink many of their Olys and place them in a Western Conference within a decade.
|
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Oct 13, 2024 9:48:19 GMT -8
The only school that can compete in their new conferences are USC and Oregon. They are committed to big boy football. The other schools will be bottom dwellers for a while. The travel is going to kill the west coast schools. I love to see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 13, 2024 9:58:09 GMT -8
P4 wannabe problems. The B1G and XII Schools are drying their tears with all those dollar bills. Calimony and Stanford's deep pockets will keep the BB and FB programs going for at least two decades. I believe the West Coast Schools will rethink many of their Olys and place them in a Western Conference within a decade. Cal does not have deep pockets. Their Athletic Department is tens of millions of dollars in debt, and they have a budget deficit. They're in big trouble, financially. Being in the ACC is making it worse, not better, with all the additional travel costs. Plus, with a losing record and playing against teams their students and the locals don't care about, attendance is in the toilet and is going to stay there. Cal is in big trouble. UCLA isn't in as much trouble, but they've got serious issues. Will their boosters tolerate being bottom feeders in the BIG 10? Because that's what they're going to be for the next few years at least. Yeah, they've got more money coming in from the BIG 10, but will that make up for lousy attendance, low merch sales, and reduced donations from boosters? The jury is out on Utah, Arizona, and Arizona State. USC is now a middle of the pack team in the BIG 10 rather than one of the top two in the PAC. Oops. The only schools that seem to be happy with their change is Oregon and Colorado. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Oct 13, 2024 11:21:30 GMT -8
P4 wannabe problems. The B1G and XII Schools are drying their tears with all those dollar bills. Calimony and Stanford's deep pockets will keep the BB and FB programs going for at least two decades. I believe the West Coast Schools will rethink many of their Olys and place them in a Western Conference within a decade. Cal has serious debt problems and won't even start to pay the principal on their stadium loan until 2034. The $10M they get from UCLA is only promised for 3 years and doesn't even cover the addition expenses for travel mitigation in the ACC, where they are getting a 1/3rd share until 2032. That is not sustainable. Sanford can afford it but even they will have to make a decision on whether they can afford to keep all the sports they are playing. Cal is desperately hoping for a B1G invite and, if that doesn't come, I think they have to crawl back to the PAC. Thing is, I expect BIG schools are regretting the additional travel they brought in and won't add more western schools because of it. The SEC didn't do that and they will likely get better seeding in the CFB because they won't have the issues of "bad losses" due to travel that the B1G has. I think, should either Cal or Stanford wish to leave the ACC they will waive the exit fee. Imagine Clemson or FSU being in contention for a top seed only to lose on the road to either Bay Area school because of traveling 3K miles? UCLA FB will die in the B1G, they will never be competitive and their attendance will drop to embarrassing levels. Even when they were ranked most of the year a few seasons back, they had to give tickets away for free to get people to come to games and they only averaged some 43K tickets distributed that year, which looks terrible in the 90K Rose Bowl. No worry, though, they only have to play in the Rose Bowl until 2042. Their BB will suffer as well because travel is doubled in BB. Look for Cronin to leave for another B1G school in the next couple of years. I have to say, I do enjoy the idea of UCLA being put in their place and watching their teams suffer in the new conference. Oregon sounds like they would have stayed in the PAC until UDub decided to leave. Of course, that may be because Knight didn't want to piss people off and send them to Adidas or Under Armour. Oregon will do fine as long as they have Phil Knight's money but he is up there in years. UDub is going to struggle and I wonder if, when they look back in 2030, they will decide that moving to the B1G never made economic sense. They are getting just a 50% share of B1G media rights and I'm not sure there will be a B1G anymore when time comes for renewal. However, I think UDub makes the cut into the P1 conference just based on market, but they would limp in. USC will be fine in the B1G because of their market and money. But how will they adjust to not getting their way all the time in their new conference? They didn't want to add UDub or Oregon and they were told to sit down and be quiet. They care only about football but they are just 3-3 right now. |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 13, 2024 11:54:48 GMT -8
My bet is CAL comes back, and if they do Stanford may have no choice but to come back with them.
UCLA isn't in as dire a situation as CAL, but it could become dire if they continue to be a 2-4 win team each year.
And the PAC will gladly take them all back. Well, maybe. There may be some price to pay for helping to blow up the conference (kind of like the price we had to pay to go crawling back to the MWC afte the Big East deal blew up).
|
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Oct 13, 2024 13:59:59 GMT -8
My bet is CAL comes back, and if they do Stanford may have no choice but to come back with them. UCLA isn't in as dire a situation as CAL, but it could become dire if they continue to be a 2-4 win team each year. And the PAC will gladly take them all back. Well, maybe. There may be some price to pay for helping to blow up the conference (kind of like the price we had to pay to go crawling back to the MWC afte the Big East deal blew up). That’s why it’s important to keep the conference lean so there is room for more schools if they want to come back. |
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Oct 13, 2024 16:06:15 GMT -8
College Football is a major Business for most of the Power Schools
For many of the schools it is also an ego situation and do not think they want to swallow their pride to return to the PAC
The only way they would is if the money does not turn out to be what they need it to be
have also not heard what the story is for the non Football teams with all the travel
will be interesting to what the TV is going to be for the former PAC schools later in the season when some are eliminated from being in the playoffs ?
Have not followed the Big 12 to see what is going on there but think already it has boiled down to BIG vs SEC
|
|
|
|
Post by jdaztec on Oct 13, 2024 16:21:41 GMT -8
It will be telling whether The Pac just adds one more football school or maybe 4 ? If they stay lean it could be to not only have less mouths to feed but also the possibility for the return of higher quality teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Oct 13, 2024 19:10:21 GMT -8
This thread is very close to what MW fans are saying about the PAC 12 bolters.
|
|
|
|
Post by jp92grad on Oct 13, 2024 19:19:22 GMT -8
Would think the Big12 would pickoff a UCLA, CAL, ASU, UU ....... before the NPac would get them.
|
|
|
|
Post by LostAztec on Oct 13, 2024 19:28:00 GMT -8
Would think the Big12 would pickoff a UCLA, CAL, ASU, UU ....... before the NPac would get them. Calimony will be a candidate to come back around 2030. The others.......never.....as in ever. |
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Oct 14, 2024 3:19:13 GMT -8
Would think the Big12 would pickoff a UCLA, CAL, ASU, UU ....... before the NPac would get them. Well, ASU & UU are already in the Big12 |
|
|
|
Post by fisherville on Oct 14, 2024 4:08:12 GMT -8
The programs are not in a bad place cause of the conference they are in
|
|
|
|
Post by moctezumaii on Oct 14, 2024 4:29:20 GMT -8
My bet is CAL comes back, and if they do Stanford may have no choice but to come back with them. UCLA isn't in as dire a situation as CAL, but it could become dire if they continue to be a 2-4 win team each year. And the PAC will gladly take them all back. Well, maybe. There may be some price to pay for helping to blow up the conference (kind of like the price we had to pay to go crawling back to the MWC afte the Big East deal blew up). My bet is Cal terminates the football program before they rejoin the PAC. A typical Cal student could give a rat's ass about 'cro-magnon, toxic masculinity' sports like football and for much of organized/traditional sports in general; it ain't their jam. The people who do still care about Cal football and trad sports are aging and dying off. For that matter, IMO, it's only a matter of time until California bans football with helmets and pads for CTE/safety reasons. I would not be surprised for that banning to happen within the next 10 years. |
|
|
|
Post by greysuit on Oct 14, 2024 11:04:45 GMT -8
The 70 million or so that UCLA gets each year from joining the B10, will allow them to suck in the B10 for awhile. Cal on the other hand i am not sure how long they can last. Cal and Standford getting 30% shares and having to do most of the travel will be tough. UCLA will be fine, Vanderbilt has been at the bottom of the SEC for decades, they seem to be fine. College teams get the same rights payment regardless of how competitive they are. UCLA has always been cheap with football in favor of investing in the Olympic sports (which they tend to dominate in) so this is nothing new. |
|
|
|
Post by greysuit on Oct 14, 2024 11:08:42 GMT -8
My bet is CAL comes back, and if they do Stanford may have no choice but to come back with them. UCLA isn't in as dire a situation as CAL, but it could become dire if they continue to be a 2-4 win team each year. And the PAC will gladly take them all back. Well, maybe. There may be some price to pay for helping to blow up the conference (kind of like the price we had to pay to go crawling back to the MWC afte the Big East deal blew up). They signed the ACC GOR so they can't comeback until 2035 unless something major happens like the ACC falling apart. ESPN would have to let them out of the contract, which they have no incentive to do since they are only paying them 30% of the value. The panic move to the ACC will really come back to haunt them. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecx on Oct 14, 2024 11:17:17 GMT -8
This thread is very close to what MW fans are saying about the PAC 12 bolters. Difference is PAC12 makes geographic sense. Cal/Stanford to the ACC makes no geographic sense. If it was the SEC or Big10, geography doesn't matter. For the ACC ..... |
|
