Pac 12... 11... 10... 9... 8... 7...6...5...4... POOF!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Pinwheel1 said:
He is not wrong in doing so. But he did graduate from WSU. Seems like a conflict of interest.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if he's wrong or not. The PAC will still be the Pac-12 for the next 11 months, so saying the 12 members, thru the board, can't conduct business or have board meetings seems overly broad. My hunch would be that an appeals court would lift the injunction rather quickly, but I don't know if the PAC will appeal
 
I'm sure OSU will come out of this great with WSU leading the lawsuit in front of a WSU alum judge and WSU asking to be the one to hire a new Pac 12 commissioner that would be the deciding vote for when 1-1 ties happen between the two schools.
 
about the injunction:

the judge who granted the injunction is not a federal judge. He's a judge for the state of Washington, and LOL the only judge in the sparsely populated county. He is also a past president of the WSU Booster Club. OSU/WSU very clearly went venue shopping...which give the PAC an opportunity to have the lawsuit kicked

if the PAC departing 10 schools want to contest this, they'd probably start by filing to move the case to a federal court since the Pac-12 offices & facilities are in California, and the PAC-12 footprint covers 5 other states besides Washington. It might be really hard for an injunction granted by a state judge against a corporation in another state to withstand legal challenge

now I don't know if the 10 departing schools will fight this, but if they do, and especially if they get it moved to the federal courts, the case will take years. And time is not on the side of OSU/WSU. They need to be in a conference by next August, probably sooner, and their dreams of a reverse merger would probably die if the PAC was tied up in litigation

this looks a little like a hail mary by the Pac-2 to get the other 10 teams to settle
 
What is being printed in the news here in Phoenix is that the 10 schools that petitioned to leave have abandoned their rights to vote as members. Only OSU and WSU are voting members. They simply want to stop the schools leaving from changing the by laws, thus allowing them to raid the coffers and sell off assets that the league owns. I don’t see why anyone would think that USC or any of the other defectors should be able to put the conference in bankruptcy after stealing assets. The remaining teams should be able to dictate their own futures, not be stabbed in the back again by the defectors. But it only makes sense they would want to take back their knife, leave nothing behind I guess.
 
BIG Q said:
What is being printed in the news here in Phoenix is that the 10 schools that petitioned to leave have abandoned their rights to vote as members.
Click to expand...

well, that's just false.

There is nothing in the by-laws about intent. What is in the by-laws is that no team can file a notice of exit until August 1, 2024. Until that time, all teams are still members of the PAC-12, and the Pac-12 has 'current' business until next August. That's almost 11 months. OSU/WSU will be the only voting members after the exits. The idea that they are the only voting members now is fucking idiotic. Yes, they are the Pac-2 for future decisions but again, those future decisions don't start for 11 months.

If they were the only voting members, they could hold a board meeting between themselves and change the by-laws to:

* all media money paid to the conference for the current football season (2023) only goes to them
* OSU/WSU are exempt from repaying their share of the 50M Comcast debt they helped create
* OSU/WSU are exempt from all other debts which then fall to the 10 other teams
* they get ALL March Madness money
* the 10 exiting schools are liable for the 10 year facilities lease to house the Pac-12 Network the conference signed a couple of years ago, but OSU/WSU are exempt

this has become a legal dispute meaning that logical and fair are flushed down the crapper.

*******************************************************************

My take is that OSU/WSU were either a bit paranoid about the possibility of the other 10 teams being assholes, OR, they wanted to have a lever to compel a negotiated settlement. What they really want, and need, is clarity about current & future PAC revenue, assets, and liabilities. And that clarity needs to happen soon; as in the next 2-3 months.

Clarity sure as hell won't happen if the entire PAC-12 shitshiree is locked up in the courts. Which I think points to the risk OSU/WSU are taking. Because if the other 10 schools decide to fight back and litigate fundamental issues, it could be years before the cases are settled. I don't think the exiting schools are going to be real aggressive, but I do believe they want their share of revenue generated over the next 11 months

the issue is that OSU/WSU want to squeeze every penny of possible revenue they can from the corpse of the Pac-12. And also keep the Pac brand alive. They will have two years until 2026 (which coincidentally is the same time the MWC GOR expires) to convince MWC schools to exit their conference, or disband it, and reform the PAC. But that can't happen if the PAC is enmeshed in litigation. And if that happens, OSU/WSU will be scrambling, hard, to schedule two years of football, basketball, baseball, and all other sports. And they will be getting exactly zero media dollars.

in other words, OSU/WSU want the past and current business of the PAC settled, financially, and legally. And they want it settled ASAP. This lawsuit may be a good idea, assuming it compels a settlement. But it could also be a really bad idea if it pisses off the other 10 schools enough to litigate
 
wizenheimer said:
well, that's just false.

There is nothing in the by-laws about intent. What is in the by-laws is that no team can file a notice of exit until August 1, 2024. Until that time, all teams are still members of the PAC-12, and the Pac-12 has 'current' business until next August. That's almost 11 months. OSU/WSU will be the only voting members after the exits. The idea that they are the only voting members now is fucking idiotic. Yes, they are the Pac-2 for future decisions but again, those future decisions don't start for 11 months.

If they were the only voting members, they could hold a board meeting between themselves and change the by-laws to:

* all media money paid to the conference for the current football season (2023) only goes to them
* OSU/WSU are exempt from repaying their share of the 50M Comcast debt they helped create
* OSU/WSU are exempt from all other debts which then fall to the 10 other teams
* they get ALL March Madness money
* the 10 exiting schools are liable for the 10 year facilities lease to house the Pac-12 Network the conference signed a couple of years ago, but OSU/WSU are exempt

this has become a legal dispute meaning that logical and fair are flushed down the crapper.

*******************************************************************

My take is that OSU/WSU were either a bit paranoid about the possibility of the other 10 teams being assholes, OR, they wanted to have a lever to compel a negotiated settlement. What they really want, and need, is clarity about current & future PAC revenue, assets, and liabilities. And that clarity needs to happen soon; as in the next 2-3 months.

Clarity sure as hell won't happen if the entire PAC-12 shitshiree is locked up in the courts. Which I think points to the risk OSU/WSU are taking. Because if the other 10 schools decide to fight back and litigate fundamental issues, it could be years before the cases are settled. I don't think the exiting schools are going to be real aggressive, but I do believe they want their share of revenue generated over the next 11 months

the issue is that OSU/WSU want to squeeze every penny of possible revenue they can from the corpse of the Pac-12. And also keep the Pac brand alive. They will have two years until 2026 (which coincidentally is the same time the MWC GOR expires) to convince MWC schools to exit their conference, or disband it, and reform the PAC. But that can't happen if the PAC is enmeshed in litigation. And if that happens, OSU/WSU will be scrambling, hard, to schedule two years of football, basketball, baseball, and all other sports. And they will be getting exactly zero media dollars.

in other words, OSU/WSU want the past and current business of the PAC settled, financially, and legally. And they want it settled ASAP. This lawsuit may be a good idea, assuming it compels a settlement. But it could also be a really bad idea if it pisses off the other 10 schools enough to litigate
Click to expand...
It's impressive you can write up so many opinions and speculative statements without having any real insight.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
It's impressive you can write up so many opinions and speculative statements without having any real insight.
Click to expand...

LOL...yeah, OK...now why don't you tell us all, again, about what Portland's best options for a Dame trade are. Pot/Kettle
 
Wizenheimer clearly did not listen to the hearing yesterday. That was as open and shut a presentation as there could be. Only 2 schools still sit on the conference board of directors - there's no argument to be made (successfully) to the contrary.
 
BlazerBeav said:
Wizenheimer clearly did not listen to the hearing yesterday. That was as open and shut a presentation as there could be. Only 2 schools still sit on the conference board of directors - there's no argument to be made (successfully) to the contrary.
Click to expand...

if that was the case, the judge would NOT have ruled that a 12-0 vote would not violate the TRO. He said 12-0, not 2-0
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the ruling yesterday pretty much tie everyone's hands?

The 10 departing schools can't come together and vote to change the distribution schedule and the 2 remaining schools also can't vote to modify revenue payouts.
 
Tince said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the ruling yesterday pretty much tie everyone's hands?

The 10 departing schools can't come together and vote to change the distribution schedule and the 2 remaining schools also can't vote to modify revenue payouts.
Click to expand...

seems to do exactly that unless there is a pre-vote agreement of 12-0. As I understand it the main focus of the scheduled meeting were some retention contracts, like for officials in the basketball season, administrators, Pac-12 Network facilities managers, etc. But obviously OSU/WSU were worried about the majority changing some bylaws that would have prevented 2-way splits on any revenue streams

really seems there should be room between both sides for a settlement that allows OSU/WSU some extra cash and retention of the PAC brand which would allow immediate clarity, and a 12-way split of most revenue generated by all 12 teams thru July 2024, after accounting for liabilities.
 
Last edited:
wizenheimer said:
seems to do exactly that unless there is a pre-vote agreement of 12-0. As I understand it the main focus of the scheduled meeting were some retention contracts, like for officials in the basketball season, administrators, Pac-12 Network facilities managers, etc. But obviously OSU/WSU were worried about the majority changing some bylaws that would have prevented 2-way splits on any revenue streams

really seems there should be room between both sides for a settlement that allows OSU/WSU some extra cash and retention of the PAC brand which would allow immediate clarity, and a 12-way split of most revenue generated by all 12 teams thru July 2024, after accounting for liabilities.
Click to expand...

Your settlement idea is far too reasonable and doesn't require a gross amount of legal fees, therefore it won't happen... at least not until more billable hours are stacked up!
 
Departing Pac-12 schools UCLA, USC, Oregon, and Colorado reportedly tried stunning move ahead of upcoming exit

Ahead of plans to exit the Pac-12 after his season, schools like UCLA, USC, Oregon, and Colorado reportedly wanted the conference to pay for their decisions to leave it.

The 2023 college football season is underway, and it very well could be the final one for the legendary West Coast conference the Pac-12. There has been no bigger story in college athletics over the last year than the league’s stunning downfall in this new era of super conferences.

Related: Oregon State and Washington State planning to rebuild Pac-12 by raiding Mountain West

It all started last year when, arguably, the conference’s two most iconic brands UCLA and USC announced that they would be taking their sports programs to the Big-10 starting in 2024. While those departures were a massive blow, no one expected it to set up what has become a mass exodus from the league ever since.

It took much longer than expected for the Pac-12 to finally find a new media rights deal for future seasons, however, when an agreed-upon proposal with AppleTV+ was shown to conference schools, it turned out to be a sign that it was time to move on to bigger and better leagues in the sport. Soon after, Colorado, Oregon, Utah, Arizona, and Arizona State revealed they were also leaving the conference after this season.

Exiting schools wanted Pac-12 to pay for fees to join other conferences


Oregon State and Washington State are now the only teams left in the Pac-12 beyond this season and the two schools have been doing all they can to keep the conference alive. That includes a recent restraining order to block a planned meeting of the conference board.

However, during the hearing where Oregon State and Washington State were granted the restraining order a stunning detail was revealed. The Athletic’s college football writer Nicole Auerbach reported “that the outgoing schools wanted to use Pac-12 money to cover part of their transition costs.”

It is a bold move considering those schools chose to leave the conference of their own accord so they can earn what they feel will be better payouts by being a part of conferences like the Big-10 and Big-12.

During the Monday hearing, the Pac-12 reportedly asked for interim protections that allow them to “keep its lights on and its critical employees in place,” as well as an agreement about how money is spent for daily and monthly needs as the conference stares down the barrel of this being its final season.
Click to expand...
 
Shaboid said:
Departing Pac-12 schools UCLA, USC, Oregon, and Colorado reportedly tried stunning move ahead of upcoming exit
Click to expand...

that's a really vague and unsupported assertion

what monies were they asking for? And where is the evidence those schools asked for those monies because they "wanted to pay for their moves" rather than because they felt they had earned that revenue? That departing schools were making claims on revenue I don't doubt. But this narrative they wanted that revenue to "pay for their" moves looks very much like a hyperbolic press release from one side of a high profile divorce

we need to know exactly what money is in dispute. And if those schools have a legitimate claim on that money, it doesn't matter one damn bit what they hope to spend it on. It's all the same AD budget

****************************************************************

some pretty stunning irony at work in Corvallis and Pullman. They have been screaming about how unfair it was that the Big-10 and Big-12 came in, raided the Pac-12, and left devastation and a dying conference in the wake. How the departing schools were badbadbad for only thinking of themselves and leaving OSU/WSU behind

but in the very article you mentioned, there's a link to an article outlining what OSU/WSU want to do:

upload_2023-9-13_9-55-53.png

https://sportsnaut.com/oregon-state-washington-state-rebuild-pac-12/




now, I don't blame them a bit for trying to join the party and look out what's best for themselves; to end up in the most advantageous position. Just like the other 10 schools have done. I also think those headlines might be misleading. I'd imagine if it happens ( a ton of obstacles in the way) it will be all 12 MWC schools making a Pac-14; and not leaving any schools behind. But that's not known at this point
 

Attachments

  • upload_2023-9-13_10-0-45.png
    upload_2023-9-13_10-0-45.png
    25.8 KB · Views: 3
Last edited:
Pac14 brand would be way better than using the Mountain west, so makes sense to have merger go that direction instead, even if effectively it's 90% of what the mountain west was last year and only 10% Pac.

Probably would get buy in from all MWC schools and media partners to do the switch.

I guess hickup could be that OSU WSU would want bigger than 1/14 slice at this time so that would be something they have to bargain for.

Are there any other California schools not in the MWC? Ideally would be good if "new pac14" could have at least one bay area and one LA area school.
 
MWC has Hawaii, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico (Vegas), and Idaho.

So I guess only Western state missing is Arizona.

Seems like best option for the Beavs is try to form this new pac/MWC, try to get a little bigger slice of pie or their own beaver streaming network revenue. Then over the next 5-10 years have the conference push like hell to promote that it's all west coast while Ducks Huskies LA recruits are having to agree to doing hundreds of flights a year to the East Coast.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
MWC has Hawaii, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico (Vegas), and Idaho.

So I guess only Western state missing is Arizona.

Seems like best option for the Beavs is try to form this new pac/MWC, try to get a little bigger slice of pie or their own beaver streaming network revenue. Then over the next 5-10 years have the conference push like hell to promote that it's all west coast while Ducks Huskies LA recruits are having to agree to doing hundreds of flights a year to the East Coast.
Click to expand...

Given that the Longhorn Network couldn't be profitable, I doubt a Beaver Network would be able to keep the lights on. Running and producing a network is tough business in a large market with a national brand, so attempting to pull one off in Corvallis would be reckless.
 
SharpesTriumph said:
Pac14 brand would be way better than using the Mountain west, so makes sense to have merger go that direction instead, even if effectively it's 90% of what the mountain west was last year and only 10% Pac.

Probably would get buy in from all MWC schools and media partners to do the switch.

I guess hickup could be that OSU WSU would want bigger than 1/14 slice at this time so that would be something they have to bargain for.

Are there any other California schools not in the MWC? Ideally would be good if "new pac14" could have at least one bay area and one LA area school.
Click to expand...

I'd hope OSU has learned their lesson by now that they're not in a position to be making demands for a bigger share than schools in much larger markets.

I think the MWC and OSU/WSU combining as one would be the most realistic best case scenario.
 
Tince said:
I think the MWC and OSU/WSU combining as one would be the most realistic best case scenario.
Click to expand...

that sure seems inevitable, one way or the other. Either a PAC or a MWC. I still think it would be difficult to re-form a PAC if the existing PAC was bogged down in litigation

I was under-estimating the pools of money that may be in dispute. This article talks about what the PAC generated from men's March Madness in 2021:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/03...-madness-be-worth-to-schools-and-conferences/

over 38M. I did the math for 2022 and it was 14M (7 units). That's 52M for just two years of a 6 year cycle. Even assuming it was an atypical 2 years, the 6 year MM pool could be 120-150M

and if a Pac-12 team plays in the Rose Bowl, the conference would receive 75-80M. Considering the strength of the Pac-12 in football, the conference could be generating another 150M in revenue

those aren't the only 2 sources of revenue, but they are the main components. Just from those 2 sources, the pool of money could be in the 250-300M range. That's 20-25M per school which probably means a settlement might be a lot harder to achieve. The bigger the reward, the bigger the argument

************************************************************

if this is the case, I will not be surprised, at all, if there is a filing by the PAC to have the dispute moved to federal court and maybe, the TRO lifted:

“In an interview Saturday, Jayathi Murthy, Oregon State’s president, asserted that her institution and Washington State should have the “sole right to make any decisions about the governance and assets of conference,” given that “the other 10 have elected to leave.”

The conference calendar stretches thru next August. Yet OSU/WSU want sole control over business that all 12 schools are conducting and revenue that all 12 schools are generating. Now, it could just be negotiating 101; but if that's what OSU/WSU are fighting for then the other 10 schools will almost certainly fight back
 


this was the published agenda of the full board meeting the judge prohibited, But obviously, unless prohibited by the bylaws, the board could have moved to other business
 
So some of the Pac 12 teams want part of the money already generated by appearances made in bowl games and the Men's hoop tournaments and WSU and OSU want to keep all of it for a league that may not survive?

Pay off the debts, split the money between the teams, have the PAC 12 brand independently appraised, and put up the rights and trademarks for sale to all colleges and leagues. There is some branding confusion between the Big 10 and Big 12 to the casual fan so the Pac 12 brand being available does have value to a conference like the Big 12.

Then OSU and WSU would have a fair share of the money and could join a revamped Big 12. Big 12 could rename itself to something like the SlyCollegeSportsConference (not a serious name, just can't think of something good, lol) with a Big 8 and Pac 8 division.

If, for example, the Big 12 buys the rights to the Pac 12, OSU and WSU could still decide to join the Mountain West and the money earned from the sale of the rights could then be split between all the teams.

By treating the Pac 12 as a brand it could make it attractive for purchase by the SEC or Big 10 to hold for future league mergers or expansions because there will be future mergers and expansions.
 
wizenheimer said:
that sure seems inevitable, one way or the other. Either a PAC or a MWC. I still think it would be difficult to re-form a PAC if the existing PAC was bogged down in litigation

I was under-estimating the pools of money that may be in dispute. This article talks about what the PAC generated from men's March Madness in 2021:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/03...-madness-be-worth-to-schools-and-conferences/

over 38M. I did the math for 2022 and it was 14M (7 units). That's 52M for just two years of a 6 year cycle. Even assuming it was an atypical 2 years, the 6 year MM pool could be 120-150M

and if a Pac-12 team plays in the Rose Bowl, the conference would receive 75-80M. Considering the strength of the Pac-12 in football, the conference could be generating another 150M in revenue

those aren't the only 2 sources of revenue, but they are the main components. Just from those 2 sources, the pool of money could be in the 250-300M range. That's 20-25M per school which probably means a settlement might be a lot harder to achieve. The bigger the reward, the bigger the argument

************************************************************

if this is the case, I will not be surprised, at all, if there is a filing by the PAC to have the dispute moved to federal court and maybe, the TRO lifted:

“In an interview Saturday, Jayathi Murthy, Oregon State’s president, asserted that her institution and Washington State should have the “sole right to make any decisions about the governance and assets of conference,” given that “the other 10 have elected to leave.”

The conference calendar stretches thru next August. Yet OSU/WSU want sole control over business that all 12 schools are conducting and revenue that all 12 schools are generating. Now, it could just be negotiating 101; but if that's what OSU/WSU are fighting for then the other 10 schools will almost certainly fight back
Click to expand...

When USC/UCLA announced they would leave they lost their conference votes. So there is a precedent for OSU/WSU to push for the same with the now 10 schools that have announced they will leave.

Makes sense for OSU/WSU to push for most or nearly all of that money to pay off any required PAC liability or expenses, and afterwards stay with the members of the conference. Not saying they will ultimately get to keep it all, but theres a very logical argument that schools leaving forfeit their claim to those future PAC disbursements.

Now what is likely to happen probably needs some very good attorneys and accountants to do a detailed review of the bylaws, other conference and university agreements, applicable laws and relevant court cases. Highly doubt we get an unbiased factual good analysis of this reporting without somebodies agenda being pushed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top