PAC-10 EXPANSION: Texas declines
Whatever Dan Beebe was selling appears to have worked. The deal for the monstrous Pac-16 and lucrative money that came with it appears to be over.
A news conference is scheduled for tomorrow morning.
The money spent by ESPN unnamed TV network appears to have kept the Big 12 alive for now. ESPN An unnamed TV network was incredibly scared of Texas moving to a Pac-10 superconference and was willing to take a loss in order to prevent it.
Larry Scott went all out to lure the Big 12 schools as his plan A, and it nearly worked. The only thing that stopped it was ESPN an unnamed TV network looking out for its own interests.
For now, the Big 12 lives on, if at least temporarily. The league is severely weakened by the the loss of Nebraska and Colorado, both in athletics and academics. While the money from a new TV deal will help alleviate that, it still is putting a temporary fix on a permanent problem.
In the end, Texas wins. They get an unbalanced amount of money, their own network, and a free walk to the Big 12's BCS bid. I don't blame them for taking this deal one bit. There was more money in the Pac-10 superconference, but the Big 12 offers familiarity and an ability to dominate the landscape.
Larry Scott will go back to plan B, which a few months ago was the plan that excited everyone. Utah will likely get the invite to the Pac-10, the conference will cap it's membership at 12 for now, and we all get an upgraded TV contract. It may not be the big fish, but it works until the inevitable collapse of the Big 12.*
*All statements contained in this post are valid for 24 hours or until A&M/Oklahoma/OSU decide to walk from the Big 12.
32 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
who was excited
about Utah? I sure wasn’t. I hope A&M blows up the Beebe deal and Pac-16 is back on the table shortly.
NO!...
Come on UO/OSU/A&M, please walk. Please please please. I was so set on this happening…
-Brett Gleason
-Daily Evergreen Staff Sports Writer
I am nervous now.
Moos talked about this. If we add 2 teams and create 2 divisions this can be bad for us. If we are not in the California division this will hurt our recruiting and isolate us from that market. We will not have that presence that Moos was worried about.
member of CougCenter since 9/2/08
and there's almost no way
The CA schools agree to be split up. It could be, though, that the league stays at 11 (per Scott’s comments), and does a CCG with top 2 teams. Wouldn’t be full rotation, but would be less of a cut to CA teams for the Pacific Northwest schools.
At the least, I’d expect the league to wait a fair amount of time before doing anything (unless Texas gets re-opened). I’d be surprised if Scott had the votes to bring in Utah without Texas being part of the party (for exactly the reason you cited, among others), and it seems foolish to make a commitment in that direction without being certain that Texas won’t be an option.
UW WORST
There. I corrected it for you.
by Kyle Rancourt on Jun 14, 2010 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Why?
The two new markets give us better leverage for TV, so a lot more money, plus a championship game, so a lot more money…
Scheduling, even if we get cordoned off with UW, the Oregons, and the Bay Areas, assuming five division games and three other division games, we’d still play UCLA or USC every year and be down in LA every other year. I don’t know if having another non-con game helps though.
by johnnycougar on Jun 14, 2010 4:55 PM PDT up reply actions
I highly doubt the Cali schools
split into different divisions. So our trips to Cali will be greatly reduced, which is a big reason Moos and others were against expansion to a 12 team league.
If that is the case, I will agree with you
Extra trips to Salt Lake and Boulder don’t do anything for me.
by johnnycougar on Jun 14, 2010 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Maybe, after next year those Big12 schools will realize that joining the Pac10 is the way to go.
member of CougCenter since 9/2/08
Where is Dennis Dodds getting his information?
Fox basically decided the best place for Texas (and Fox) was the Big 12. As opposed to a Pac-16
Surprises coming when deal is announced — if it will be announced.
http://twitter.com/dennisdoddcbs
member of CougCenter since 9/2/08
If it is indeed Fox
Then that improves the Pac-10 chances for TV revenue in a bidding war between Fox and ESPN. It still sucks that the TV networks are deciding all of this. I know that was what it was about anyway, but them moving in before hand sucks even more.
It can't be Fox.
Fox would work with the Pac-10 to make their own network which would be so much more desirable if Texas is involved. The only one that would want to piss me off this much is ESPN. (I’m sure they did it for other reasons, but that’s the one I want to focus on…)
Wrong
Fox can take rights to both the Big 12 and Pac-10 now without having to get into a bidding war. Give me 10 minutes and I’ll explain why.
This is so deflating.
I’d gotten so excited. I’m almost unhappy about Colorado joining because it’s just part of what I hoped for instead of all.
I know how you feel...

CougCenter WSU's second main blog
by Craig Powers on Jun 14, 2010 5:49 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don't see how the other Big 12 schools laying down to help Texas helps them
How are they benefiting from any of this? There is no way staying in a 10 team league were Texas and maybe OU dominate is better for them than going to the Pac-10 and forming a mega-conference.
Something tells me Larry Scott is not done, through this whole thing he actually seems to be doing everything right and being very proactive about everything, I have a feeling he will not be happy with this and will be working very hard now to convince schools like Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and maybe even Kansas and Missouri that it would be better for them to come over to the Pac-10 (I think working on Kansas really Missouri about leaving the Big 12 might work as they both seem to have been shafted in all this expansion talk by their own conference) and then basically forces Texas to come as well. I just don’t see these schools staying in a conference that allows the best team to get double the money they will get will benefit them at all.
by spokanecougar on Jun 14, 2010 5:09 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Got to play on that greed
If we can convince Tech or OK State to come to us for the money, the Big XII will be no more and Texas might ask us to join again. We don’t have to get the big boys (Texas or Oklahoma) to commit first, just need to leave them with no other choice.
I agree that Larry Scott has been very shrewd so far and that he’s probably not done yet. I’m not giving up!
by johnnycougar on Jun 14, 2010 5:19 PM PDT up reply actions
From UW fan prospective
As a die hard purple and gold Husky fan I hope this all ends soon with Utah joining the new PAC 10. As fun as the last few days have been, my head is spinning. As good as it sounded having Texas, Oklahoma, and the rest of the Big XII n the PAC, in hindsight, especially consider the arrogance displayed by Texas the last week or so, it may very well be best for all them to stay where they are. It’s very possible that down the road our conference would have developed the same problems that engulfed the Big XII in the first place. I mean really, we all that USC was bad, or even us, Texas takes the cream. Colorado and Utah are good fits, much better than the football factories under consideration, and will make the conference much better. I can see you all’s point about how this may or may not harm WSU. If we don’t add Utah or go to twelve, than what was the point of adding Colorado last week. What do we really gain. Adding a Denver market, a market that CU doesn’t really have a hold over (a very pro sports team kind of town), won’t really add to our TV deal either. The only way the conference comes out ahead is if we add a 12th team. You got to have 12 teams to have a conference title game, and there’s to much money on the line not to have that title game. A conference title game gives the conference increase exposure, especially in November and December. Maybe we can get more than one BCS bid from time to time. The combines SLC and Denver market would be the 3rd largest in the conference. I see your point about recruiting; although, it really doesn’t effect UW that much. I would think that a California kid not going to one of the big schools is just as likely to go to WSU as they would Utah or Colorado. WSU is still the west coast, not out in the Rocky Mountains some where, and still in the conference. Who knows, the increase exposure in the Rocky Mountain states might open up recruiting markets that have more of the type of kids WSU tends to recruit. Just my thoughts, here’s hoping it works for everyone, even you guys.
It really is just all about the potential revenue for us
We’re operating at such a disadvantage from the rest of the conference right now. Perhaps some of that changes with increased fundraising, but it’s not going to be a $10 million to $15 million change.
This sucks. I sure hope it doesn't stay at 11.
I don’t see the odd number being great for WSU.
We already suffer from the “its in the middle of nowhere” and “everybody hates making the trip to Pullman”. Now add the “well WSU is going to be bounced within a year or two from the Pac”, and I find recruiting that much more difficult.
I think we all spoke way too soon on Larry Scott masterfully piecing this together. It looks like he (and the other 4 non-Texas B12 schools) were worked over by Texas. I can’t believe that those 4 other teams are going to let Texas have so much control especially now there is no Nebraska to help even out the voices. I will be interested in seeing if the numbers really do come-out to be that benefiicial for an Okla St or even Texas Tech.
by LeaveItToWeaver on Jun 14, 2010 5:17 PM PDT reply actions
If the people running those schools consider it at all,
They will realize that they are making a big mistake. How can you possibly expect to succeed in a conference where 1-2 teams hold all the chips? I still say Scott should push the Oklahoma schools to join the Pac.
by displacedcoug on Jun 14, 2010 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions
I still don't think this is all over
But even if it is, I don’t think anyone was worked over by Texas. I think everyone was worked over by ESPN. I’m pretty sure nobody anticipated them taking a huge loss to preserve status quo.
Missouri an option?
Are any of the Big 12 schools still fair play for Scott or did they now tie themselves into this deal/agreement? If so I would think since Texas, OU and A+M are getting the “bulk” of the money anyways, it might be easiest to pick off Missouri. I mean I don’t want them, but I also don’t want Utah. We basically need another spot and St. Louis market is just as big SLC. But atleast with taking Missouri you cripple the Big 12 and then you go to the Oklahoma schools. I would never agree to take just the Oklahoma schools, there is no money in that.
I agree with Nuss though, this has ESPN written all over it. Texas was just being Texas and going where the money was and you can’t blame them for allowing other schools within their conference to hand-feed them championships.
On a more sad note – Texas fans have officially entered the status of the “Boston Red Sox nation” for me. A team that was once relatively easy to root for and get behind their fans when they faced the big powers-to-be (USC / New York Yankees), but now they are running with the “we’re good and we know it status” a little too strong. Just listening to the Texas fans on their board right now gave me a headache. One K-State poster came over and basically said thanks for keeping the conference together. Their response? “Now where are those Kansas, Missouri, Baylor fans at? They owe us a thank you as well.”
by LeaveItToWeaver on Jun 14, 2010 6:19 PM PDT up reply actions
And to be fair
A lot of the Texas guys aren’t happy with this. The move to the Pac-10 is better for both money and academics for UT. They absolutely won in this situation, but they couldn’t lose. They could’ve really won by moving to the Pac-10.

by 

















