Pac-12 Alignment, Revenue Sharing Details Emerge
On Thursday at 11:30 a.m., Larry Scott will announce the details of the new Pac-12 conference. Athletic directors from the 12 conference schools have been meeting since July in an effort to hammer out the major details of the conference ahead of Utah and Colorado joining the conference in 2011. The timing of the press conference -- immediately after the commissioners convene for a final vote -- suggests this is all a done deal.
Last week, divisional alignment took center-stage. ESPN's Ted Miller reported the conference athletic directors voted 7-5 in favor of a geographic alignment -- with Stanford and California joining the Northwest schools in the north. Conference commissioner Larry Scott needed to get a consensus and likely had to do some bargaining to gain support for his original plan -- a north/south split.
Haden obviously wants to preserve an annual game with Stanford and California. His 5-2-2 model, though, limits the number of visits to the rich recruiting grounds of Southern California for the Northwest schools. So you'd expect the Northwest presidents to counter with, "Fine, but equal revenue sharing then starts in 2012 with the new TV contracts."
If the split was going to be geographic, the Northwest schools wanted this alignment. Since none of the six teams in the north get a piece of LA, equal revenue sharing seemed like an obvious compromise. At the same time, all four California schools wanted to maintain their rivalries and play in the same division. You can see how this all turned into a headache.
Yesterday, we got word of how revenue sharing will work and what concessions were made in the negotiations. Read on for the details.
The Seattle Times' Bud Withers did an excellent job tracking down sources and nailing down the details of the revenue sharing plan that will be passed on Thursday morning. The big story is UCLA and USC will get a payoff -- to the tune of $2 million per year. The LA schools bring the most revenue into the conference, so it's logical they'd want a bigger piece of the pie. The rub, however, is that the payoff goes away as soon as the television contract hits a pre-determined threshold.
Sources familiar with the Pac-10's recent discussions over the expansion issues say the presidents will vote on a proposed $2 million-per-year payout apiece for USC and UCLA above the other 10 members of the new Pac-12 until the year that combined broadcast revenues reach a certain threshold. Then the 12 members would share equally.
What does it all mean? Nothing, in fact. In 2011, USC and UCLA will get their $2 million payoff while the rest of the conference shares revenue equally. In 2012, when the new TV contract goes into effect, the entire conference will share revenue equally. Larry Scott set the threshold for equal revenue sharing knowing full-well that he could hit the number in contract negotiations.
What we have is a one-year stop-gap to appease USC and UCLA. The members at the bottom of the pile -- specifically WSU -- will see a decent bump in 2011, before seeing a huge increase in revenue with the new TV contract and equal sharing in 2012. This, my friends, is a huge win.
Larry Scott, once again, showed his leadership in the months of negotiations. Orchestrating a payoff for the Southern California schools is almost purely symbolic on his part. It costs the rest of the conference schools about $400,000 in 2011, while also giving them an immediate increase that comes with splitting the pie equally right away -- outside of the payoff.
The other issue on the table is scheduling, which also appears to be finalized. The Northwest schools take a bit of a hit here in an effort to secure equal revenue sharing. I can't wrap my head around how it will work, but according to Miller, the California schools will have guaranteed games with each other every year.
It's also likely Bay Area schools, which wanted to be in the South division, will get guaranteed annual games with the L.A. schools. The popular perception is not having an annual game in Southern California will hurt the Northwest schools' recruiting.
The Northwest schools end up losing a guaranteed game against the Southern California schools each year asa result. Does it matter much? Personally, I don't feel it does. With equal revenue sharing being the other shoe, the Northwest schools get a bigger payday, allowing them to increase the bottom line in their athletic departments. Additionally, a new TV deal means wide-spread coverage throughout the conference footprint in the form of a conference network and better TV deal. The exposure will be there, even if in-person games are not.
It's a good day to be WSU -- and there's no question about it. A perennial bottom-feeder in the conference's archaic revenue sharing structure, the Cougars will now be on equal footing with the other 11 schools. Currently, the gap between USC -- the top revenue team -- and WSU is $8 million. In 2012, that all disappears with a modernized revenue sharing plan and a new TV contract.
Between a divisional alignment that works, a revenue sharing plan that is fair and a new TV contract, the WSU athletic department is in line for a huge payday. Bill Moos should be doing backflips.
30 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Bill Moos Should NOT be doing backflips
He is too old to even try those and too valuable to get hurt…
Cougar Football 2010: *FOCUSTENSITY!*
@JeffDCollier - PSN-Colltrain
I want him to do it just so I can see it happen.
by Brian Floyd on Oct 19, 2010 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions
I believe this might be a gif-able moment.
I think a moose, or a moos, backflip gif could be well used around here.
I have one Moos GIF.
I was saving it for when someone argued Moos can’t just make money appear but what the heck.

by Mark Sandritter on Oct 19, 2010 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions 6 recs
That is magical
Great work as always.
"I've choked bigger men than you! Goulet!" Robert Goulet aka Will Ferrell
I like it on the surface.
But the major question I still have is on the Cali schools schedules. Haden said he wants a 5-2-2 so they are guaranteed to play the NoCal schools every year. If this happens, every other team plays in LA every year, except the 4 NW schools. This could be very bad for the NW schools and give the newbies a leg up. I understand where the Cali schools are coming from and why they would want to keep playing each other every year, but this would be bad for us. I think you could guarantee them one constant crossover, like USC/Stanford and Cal/UCLA, but two would not be a good thing.
I added that to it because I'd forgotten
It’s really not that big a deal. Between more money and more TV exposure, I don’t think losing out on a guaranteed SoCal game is a big deal — at least for WSU.
by Brian Floyd on Oct 19, 2010 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree at the current time.
Our current coaching staff doesn’t rely on the LA area that much for recruiting, not nearly as much as the other 3 NW schools. But someday it may become a bigger issue for WSU. I do agree the new TV deal will make it easier to sell families that they can still see their sons play though. The part I don’t like, is it gives Utah and Colorado (and everyone else for that matter) a bit of a jump over the NW schools being able to sell an anual trip home to SoCal recruits. May not be a big issue, but I think it could cause friction. Of course add 4 more schools in a few years and go to the Pac-16 and it will all be a mute point then.
And that's the other part of it.
Nobody thinks the Pac-12 is permanent. At some point it’ll become 16 and that will be that.
I really don’t know how much of an impact two “home” games over a career effect a recruit. I don’t feel it’s as big a deal as it’s been made out to be.
by Brian Floyd on Oct 19, 2010 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, I really don't know either
Some of the coaches like Riley have said that is a big part of their pitch to SoCal recruits. I really can’t see 2 trips home rather than 4 making that big of a difference, but then I am not an 18 year old kid being asked to leave LA for the NW either.
I really don't believe >12 team major football conferences will happen
It’s too much of a logistical mess, and you end up with two divisions less connected than the Pac 10 and Mountain West.
Based on what I saw this summer
I say that it definitely WILL happen. I mean, the payoffs by these conferences on the brink of destruction can only last so long.
Cougar999 version 2.0. Now with a shorter name!
I don't think the alignment will hurt recruiting
If anything it will help. Boise St. plays once a year in California because San Jose St. and Fresno St. are in their conference and BSU has 38 players from California on their roster, which is pretty much 1/3 of their roster.
"I've choked bigger men than you! Goulet!" Robert Goulet aka Will Ferrell
I don't think the 5-2-2
will happen that is why the pay off is happening. I understand Haden and the Cali rivalries, but they need the rest of the Pac10 as much as we need them. I totally understand the Cali schools perspective, but they can’t have their cake and eat it to. They know that we need the recruiting grounds in Cali in order to stay competitive. The Cali schools need the rest of the Pac10 conference or else the Pac10 would just turn into the Mountain West or the WAC. Equal revenue sharing with the TV deal is the only way to go. We don’t want to be like the stupid Big12. The Big 10 and SEC have a good system worked out. Is someone thinks they deserve more money and don’t like what they are getting then try going independent like BYU. USC might be the only one who could do that in our conference.
"I've choked bigger men than you! Goulet!" Robert Goulet aka Will Ferrell
scheduling
seems like it’s up in the air. is it straight divisions / no protected games? a 5-2-2? “pod scheduling” (which would presumably mean 3 groups of 4 teams each)? something else?
really not clear yet, does anyone know for sure if we’re getting it on the thurs. press conference?
I find this info on Greg Hansen's article to be interesting
The league’s new administration isn’t able to cut USC or UCLA a special dispensation. USC’s sense of entitlement began more than 50 years ago when it said it would not play football in Pullman, Wash. And so it didn’t.
The Trojans didn’t play in Pullman from 1958 to 1984. Over 27 years, USC played a total of four road games against the Cougars, but all were in Spokane and Seattle. What’s more, in the ’70s, USC was somehow able to limit its appearances in Corvallis, Ore., playing at Oregon State only in 1972, 1977 and 1979.
Sounds about Par for the Course.
"I've choked bigger men than you! Goulet!" Robert Goulet aka Will Ferrell
How could USC not want to visit
the fertile recruiting grounds of the Palouse?
Cougar999 version 2.0. Now with a shorter name!
Allergic to Lentil
"The rent is too damn high!" Jimmy McMillan
by SoCalCoug on Oct 19, 2010 2:11 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
They're missing out on the next John Elway
Cougar Football 2010: *FOCUSTENSITY!*
@JeffDCollier - PSN-Colltrain
I like it.
I was more interested in Utah and Colorado as division rivals, but that’s an unimportant thing in the grand scheme. Certainly I wouldn’t trade the money for the schools I’m more interested in.
It’s going to be weird getting use to this.
If we had been grouped with Utah and Colorado.
You might as well have called us the Neo-Big 12 north. This is much better.
The K is special
Having California and Stanford with the NW schools make the conference much more balance; although, the argument can be made the the northern division will be a much tougher division as the PAC 12 get underway. Oregon and Stanford are very strong, Oregon State has been consistently good, California can be good on any given weekend, Washington’s improvement is picking up steam, and WAZZU is showing life.
It's all cyclical
I think it’s a pretty even split in terms of historical perfromance.
by Jeff Nusser on Oct 22, 2010 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Yep
this seems like a win for everyone.
--Dave
Addicted to Quack, your friendly, neighborhood Oregon Ducks blog

by 













