-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
This story moved fast with a lot of questionable "journalism". Both articles above are from fall 2023. This one is March 2024 has direct on the record quotes.
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/...exiting-pac-12
The $5Mx10 is basically the Comcast repayment. That was going to be withheld no matter what.
$1.5Mx10 is chump change at this level. It probably doesn't even pay the legal fees and staff buyouts.
PAC has no warchest. They're a financial basketcase.
That's $65m forfeited by departing schools this year, effectively as departure/exit fees. The departing schools also had to provide some guarantees regarding the PAC network/Comcast deal liabilities.
In addition, PAC has other assets, and will still collect some CFP and NCAA tourney credits that are significant for at least another 3-5 years.
They are playing with something in the ballpark of at least $200-400m, and have a lot of motivation to rebuild rather than get absorbed into MWC.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
That's $65m forfeited by departing schools this year, effectively as departure/exit fees. The departing schools also had to provide some guarantees regarding the PAC network/Comcast deal liabilities.
In addition, PAC has other assets, and will still collect some CFP and NCAA tourney credits that are significant for at least another 3-5 years.
They are playing with something in the ballpark of at least $200-400m, and have a lot of motivation to rebuild rather than get absorbed into MWC.
Does that cover the buyouts for schools to move from conferences that have as many (or more) tourney credits coming as the Pac12. Plus a TV contract that may be worth less. They have money but I don’t think it moves the needle as much when digging a little deeper. Could be wrong though.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Grizzled
Does that cover the buyouts for schools to move from conferences that have as many (or more) tourney credits coming as the Pac12. Plus a TV contract that may be worth less. They have money but I don’t think it moves the needle as much when digging a little deeper. Could be wrong though.
PAC wants to grab the best MWC schools and position themselves to be seen as the #5 FBS conference, which would give them the last CFP bid slot most years. It would become an uphill battle for any other G5 conference to get a CFP bid.
They have enough cash to assist with MWC buyouts, which might be paid back to PAC over a number of years. It will all come down to what package of schools PAC can assemble, and what the media rights deal looks like for that. I suspect they can top the MWC per school payout if they skim only the top schools/markets.
Again, rumors are flying about an announcement in next few months, so we'll know more by the time football season starts. These things always move a little slow with all the moving pieces. PAC 2 really didn't own/control their own conference until March, and there was no way for them to make any moves prior to that.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
That's $65m forfeited by departing schools this year, effectively as departure/exit fees. The departing schools also had to provide some guarantees regarding the PAC network/Comcast deal liabilities.
In addition, PAC has other assets, and will still collect some CFP and NCAA tourney credits that are significant for at least another 3-5 years.
They are playing with something in the ballpark of at least $200-400m, and have a lot of motivation to rebuild rather than get absorbed into MWC.
Why are you not getting this? PAC doesn't have exit fees and the 10 leaving schools didn't open their wallets out of the goodness of their hearts. Comcast was a known liability they knew they'd have to pay, along with several existing lawsuits like the Holiday Bowl.
$65M - already spent on Comcast, conf HQ downsizing, and legal fees.
CFP per school share is ~$7M each, which is already spent to the MWC for a FB schedule. (this drops to $360k in 2026, another disaster for them)
NCAAT credits are about $16M annually, but that's paid to the conference and they'll spend all of it on operations.
There's nothing there. How on earth are you turning the above $95M that's already spent into a $200-400M war chest?
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
PAC doesn't have exit fees ...
Truth, and worth repeating.
Other than jointly paying the last cable bill, the 10 gave the 2PAC a no-alimony divorce.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
PAC wants to grab the best MWC schools and position themselves to be seen as the #5 FBS conference, which would give them the last CFP bid slot most years. It would become an uphill battle for any other G5 conference to get a CFP bid.
They have enough cash to assist with MWC buyouts, which might be paid back to PAC over a number of years. It will all come down to what package of schools PAC can assemble, and what the media rights deal looks like for that. I suspect they can top the MWC per school payout if they skim only the top schools/markets.
Again, rumors are flying about an announcement in next few months, so we'll know more by the time football season starts. These things always move a little slow with all the moving pieces. PAC 2 really didn't own/control their own conference until March, and there was no way for them to make any moves prior to that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
Why are you not getting this? PAC doesn't have exit fees and the 10 leaving schools didn't open their wallets out of the goodness of their hearts. Comcast was a known liability they knew they'd have to pay, along with several existing lawsuits like the Holiday Bowl.
$65M - already spent on Comcast, conf HQ downsizing, and legal fees.
CFP per school share is ~$7M each, which is already spent to the MWC for a FB schedule. (this drops to $360k in 2026, another disaster for them)
NCAAT credits are about $16M annually, but that's paid to the conference and they'll spend all of it on operations.
There's nothing there. How on earth are you turning the above $95M that's already spent into a $200-400M war chest?
The 2 of you are on completely different pages with massively different numbers being stated. Where in the heck does anyone find a definitive answer?
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GCWaters
Yowzah! Good find GCW.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
runtheoption
The 2 of you are on completely different pages with massively different numbers being stated. Where in the heck does anyone find a definitive answer?
In the post right above yours and by reading the links
They drop down to a high G5 level ($60 M from $90+) which they will obviously feel deeply, but that has no bearing on their desire or ability to rebuild the top western 'G5' in the shape they want it. Remains to be seen if is viable. Exit fees are always negotiable and Gloria has a soft spot for the PAC
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
In the post right above yours and by reading the links
They drop down to a high G5 level ($60 M from $90+) which they will obviously feel deeply, but that has no bearing on their desire or ability to rebuild the top western 'G5' in the shape they want it. Remains to be seen if is viable. Exit fees are always negotiable and Gloria has a soft spot for the PAC
2PAC ain't your daddy's PAC. Even $60M could be optimistic.
And I don't see the MWC front range schools (Wyo, UNM, USU) being amenable to discounted exit fees because they will be 'left behind' in that scenario and are watching the 'left behind' 2PAC's strife.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GCWaters
Yeah, the various numbers aren't hard to find, can't understand how people still insist on fantasy warchests.
Even that tweet has problems though. He's still giving $100M in Rose Bowl payouts. The RB signed on as a permanent CFP game and all that money went to the increased CFP pot. Giving it to PAC is double dipping. He also has only $50M for 2 years conference operations.
https://pac-12.com/article/2024/05/2...ancial-results
Quote:
For 2022-2023, the Pac-12 Conference reported revenues of $494M and net operating expenses of $58M. Pac-12 Networks reported revenues of $110M and net operating expenses of $83M. A summary of consolidated results is set forth below.
Last fiscal year they spent $140M on operating expenses. That's going to substantially drop as they shrink, but hard to see it going to only $25M/yr. They had almost $7M just in legal fees, and that isn't going down with the rapidly evolving mess in the courts.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GCWaters
That is an interesting take indeed. But, may not be the full picture.
- most people seem to be ballpark in agreement on the left side of that chart.
- the right hand side has an estimated $50m PAC operations cost (which would surely shrink if it was only two schools). Believe there have already been massive layoffs within PAC operations, and they would certainly slim down to look more like MWC in cost structure.
- the other major expenditure is assuming continued conference payouts at the prior rate while using only the minimal CW/Fox media deal the PAC 2 negotiated for themselves alone.
I do think there is a very high probability the PAC 2 have to cut their own programs and expenditures significantly, no matter what. That would be true if they play under either the PAC or MWC banner. I also believe the media revenues in that chart would be higher if they rebuild with the right schools.
All of this does put pressure on PAC2 to both make cuts and move quickly if they wish to rebuild.
From PAC 2 perspective, they have to look at 3 years from now, are they better off in a rebuilt PAC or as a member of MWC.
All of the messaging from the conference and nearby reporters/media is that they are making a full press effort to rebuild quick. Maybe that succeeds, maybe it won't. Will all depend if they can land a better television/network deal with the right set of cherry picked schools. Note it doesn't have to be as good as what PAC had previously, just better than what MWC can offer, on an average per school basis.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
PAC Ops costs are likely overstated but still significant.
Cutting conference payouts is directly impacting the Athletics budgets of the remaining 2PAC, nearly guaranteeing cuts.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
From PAC 2 perspective, they have to look at 3 years from now, are they better off in a rebuilt PAC or as a member of MWC.
Like I've mused, they'd better be on good terms with Gloria Nevarez. A rebuild is a massive price and the BXII likely isn't calling.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
……
-Also keep an eye on the Pac2. Reporters in that region have said a Pac2 rebuild is more likely than a Mountain West merger if Oregon State and Washington State can’t get into the P4. If that happens, it could create a pathway to the FBS for MVFC/Big Sky powers. Or … the MWC gets poached by the Pac2, it then poaches CUSA, and CUSA grabs more southern FCS teams. But if you’re a Montana/Montana State/Idaho/Sac State/UC Davis/NDSU/SDSU fan who wants to go FBS, the cleanest path may be a Pac2 rebuild with G5 teams……
https://herosports.com/fcs-mailbag-d...ttlement-bzbz/
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
https://nevadasportsnet.com/newslett...te-equity-cash
I am not sure how it would work but a very interesting idea for G5 conferences'
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MWC
I can see it now. The Menards Missouri Valley Football Conference! #money. Just think of all the money NDSU can raise by putting a Proseed patch on the jerseys.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
runtheoption
Just so people can get their talking points right, the NCAA is helping to engineer what is shaping up to be an internal split. Any suggestion that the power conferences are 'leaving the NCAA' is ludicrous. Rather, the NCAA is bending over backwards to accommodate them
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
Just so people can get their talking points right, the NCAA is helping to engineer what is shaping up to be an internal split. Any suggestion that the power conferences are 'leaving the NCAA' is ludicrous. Rather, the NCAA is bending over backwards to accommodate them
Remember the NCAA is the member schools. So it's not the office staff in Indy doing this to the schools. The schools are doing it to themselves. The big schools of the NCAA are looking to create more separation and autonomy from the smaller schools. The CFP is a separate organization, but it's made up of members who are also part of the NCAA. I could see something similar happening with the bigger schools. There is too much wrapped up in the NCAA for these schools to completely separate. The rules alone would be a big reason. They would have to create and maintain their own rules or follow what the NCAA does without any representation on the rules committee (similar to what NAIA does). I don't see that happening. So I would see them becoming a separate membership entity within the NCAA before separating from the NCAA.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IndyBison
Remember the NCAA is the member schools. So it's not the office staff in Indy doing this to the schools. The schools are doing it to themselves. The big schools of the NCAA are looking to create more separation and autonomy from the smaller schools. The CFP is a separate organization, but it's made up of members who are also part of the NCAA. I could see something similar happening with the bigger schools. There is too much wrapped up in the NCAA for these schools to completely separate. The rules alone would be a big reason. They would have to create and maintain their own rules or follow what the NCAA does without any representation on the rules committee (similar to what NAIA does). I don't see that happening. So I would see them becoming a separate membership entity within the NCAA before separating from the NCAA.
Yes. Drives me nuts when I hear people still spouting 'P4 will leave the NCAA' nonsense. Brian Shawn did this just last week on 1660. It’s not going to happen
Some reputable posts on csnbbs claiming that the MAC is in the process of 'kicking the tires' on NDSU, fwiw
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
Yes. Drives me nuts when I hear people still spouting 'P4 will leave the NCAA' nonsense. Brian Shawn did this just last week on 1660. It’s not going to happen
Some reputable posts on csnbbs claiming that the MAC is in the process of 'kicking the tires' on NDSU, fwiw
One that wasn't started by El Lako Chapo?
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
The schools arent going to get rid of the ncaa. They still need some lackies to be administrators.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
Yes. Drives me nuts when I hear people still spouting 'P4 will leave the NCAA' nonsense. Brian Shawn did this just last week on 1660. It’s not going to happen
Some reputable posts on csnbbs claiming that the MAC is in the process of 'kicking the tires' on NDSU, fwiw
The P4 have arguably already left the NCAA on things that matter. The entire FBS post season is separate. The NCAA's total revenue last year was around $1.3B. The new 12 team CFP pays around $1.3B directly to the FBS conferences, plus well over $100M for the other bowl games. The FBS post season is literally worth more than everything else combined and is separate.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
taper
The P4 have arguably already left the NCAA on things that matter. The entire FBS post season is separate. The NCAA's total revenue last year was around $1.3B. The new 12 team CFP pays around $1.3B directly to the FBS conferences, plus well over $100M for the other bowl games. The FBS post season is literally worth more than everything else combined and is separate.
Not so much left the NCAA. Just some members created a separate organization to create a playoff system. Just like bowl games, they were granted permission from the rest of the NCAA members to do this. There are many more non-FBS schools than FBS schools, but in many issues they succumb to the need and wants of the bigger schools because they still rely on them for their revenu. I do expect to see segments of teams within the NCAA the operate at different levels.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IndyBison
Not so much left the NCAA. Just some members created a separate organization to create a playoff system. Just like bowl games, they were granted permission from the rest of the NCAA members to do this. There are many more non-FBS schools than FBS schools, but in many issues they succumb to the need and wants of the bigger schools because they still rely on them for their revenu. I do expect to see segments of teams within the NCAA the operate at different levels.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
Feels like a distinction without a difference. The P4 are autonomous, can already set their own rules, and control all the real FBS revenue. They dish out some crumbs to G5, and even smaller crumbs to FCS.
The only questions that remain are: 1) Will P4 fully separate from G5 in some fashion, wearing NCAA label or not, and 2) will they extend this separation to other sports like Basketball, either thru creating a new NCAA division or another mechanism.
Its possible they may feel it unnecessary as long as they continue to gobble up the vast majority of postseason appearances. Saw an article today where it noted the P4 are increasingly dominating even minor sports like baseball, softball, and Golf now.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Whelp, looks like the P4 split is occurring as a new subdivision under NCAA label.
G5 will be left behind with FCS.
https://www.aol.com/sports/future-co...121652533.html
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
Yeah, I think your previous post nails it. The P4 will stay in the NCAA as an autonomous subdivision, but in reality they'll be calling the shots for everyone, at least until someone presents a big enough challenge to slow them down or stop them.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GCWaters
Yeah, I think your previous post nails it. The P4 will stay in the NCAA as an autonomous subdivision, but in reality they'll be calling the shots for everyone, at least until someone presents a big enough challenge to slow them down or stop them.
Pretty clear the P4 are the kings now, who will be locking the gates to keep out the rabble. Everyone else will be paupers who feed the kings with fresh talent. I fully expect that as part of the new subdivisions, G5 will lose all participation in CFP, thus all the recent talk about creating their own playoffs.
The good news in all this I suppose is that G5 will be the new FCS, and once the dust settles it should become easier for us to join that group in some fashion. ML saw this coming, and its playing out like he predicted.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BigHorns
Pretty clear the P4 are the kings now, who will be locking the gates to keep out the rabble. Everyone else will be paupers who feed the kings with fresh talent. I fully expect that as part of the new subdivisions, G5 will lose all participation in CFP, thus all the recent talk about creating their own playoffs.
The good news in all this I suppose is that G5 will be the new FCS, and once the dust settles it should become easier for us to join that group in some fashion. ML saw this coming, and its playing out like he predicted.
Don’t let them play FCS teams anymore, make them beat up on each other and G5. I mean this in all seriousness. The SEC loves their creampuff games, and so do the P2 clingers like MN
I’m saying this under the assumption that ML is smart enough to get us to the second level, the 'new FCS' as you call it. He sure as hell better be …
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
Don’t let them play FCS teams anymore, make them beat up on each other and G5. I mean this in all seriousness. The SEC loves their creampuff games, and so do the P2 clingers like MN
I’m saying this under the assumption that ML is smart enough to get us to the second level, the 'new FCS' as you call it. He sure as hell better be …
That would hurt FCS teams who depend on those paydays.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bisonp
That would hurt FCS teams who depend on those paydays.
Correct, but such schools should not be playing D1 FB in the current landscape as just defined by the NCAA. They need to drop FB or drop down
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
Correct, but such schools should not be playing D1 FB in the current landscape as just defined by the NCAA. They need to drop FB or drop down
Megadittos.
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
Correct, but such schools should not be playing D1 FB in the current landscape as just defined by the NCAA. They need to drop FB or drop down
If the schools lose the money from the games, they will suffer financially. If those levels lose the funding provided by the NCAA revenue to underwrite the cost of the championships, I'm not sure if they survive. The lower levels of college sports exist because of the financial support they get from the P4.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IndyBison
If the schools lose the money from the games, they will suffer financially. If those levels lose the funding provided by the NCAA revenue to underwrite the cost of the championships, I'm not sure if they survive. The lower levels of college sports exist because of the financial support they get from the P4.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
That’s the point though. We’re talking about a reset. Create a general revenue stream like they have for the NCAAT to help these schools, but if the P2 are going to take all the marbles and expect us to watch, they should be forced to play all FBS schedules. Better entertainment
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
That’s the point though. We’re talking about a reset. Create a general revenue stream like they have for the NCAAT to help these schools, but if the P2 are going to take all the marbles and expect us to watch, they should be forced to play all FBS schedules. Better entertainment
They won't be able to generate enough money to cover what they are getting from teams on money games or the money to cover the cost of championships. 85 of the 90 NCAA championship at S1, D2, and D3 lose money. Many of those sports and levels go away if they lose the P4 money, mostly from March Madness which generates 85% of NCAA revenue.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IndyBison
They won't be able to generate enough money to cover what they are getting from teams on money games or the money to cover the cost of championships. 85 of the 90 NCAA championship at S1, D2, and D3 lose money. Many of those sports and levels go away if they lose the P4 money, mostly from March Madness which generates 85% of NCAA revenue.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
No, I’m saying just give them the money without the games or give them more tournament money. No difference. Then they get their share, and we don’t have the boring blowouts. I’m not talking about NDSU level here, but then NDSU hardly gets these games anyways. They are typically chosen to be a W
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
WhoRepsTheLurker
No, I’m saying just give them the money without the games or give them more tournament money. No difference. Then they get their share, and we don’t have the boring blowouts. I’m not talking about NDSU level here, but then NDSU hardly gets these games anyways. They are typically chosen to be a W
The moves being made by the P5 schools are to keep more of the money they are generating now. If this continues, they will not be sharing that money.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
-
Re: A new and better FBS thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IndyBison
They won't be able to generate enough money to cover what they are getting from teams on money games or the money to cover the cost of championships. 85 of the 90 NCAA championship at S1, D2, and D3 lose money. Many of those sports and levels go away if they lose the P4 money, mostly from March Madness which generates 85% of NCAA revenue.
Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk
The thing is, that is precisely where this is headed. P2 don't want to subsidize everyone else, they want to maximize their own revenue streams. They are already pushing to fill an expanded NCAA basketball tournament with more P4 teams, and remove/eliminate some of the autobids. It will not be shocking if basketball is the next sport to become subdivided in conference tiers.
Greed at the top will kill college sports at many schools.
NIL + free agency style transfers has opened pandoras box, and removed any hope of equality in college sports.
No way to put the genie back in the bottle now unless congress somehow manages to regulate it in a reasonable fashion.
P2 may go further yet and cannibalize/absorb the top B12/ACC teams. Some predict only the top 30-40 survive as a mini NFL. They will do all they can to take the vast majority of available media money and timeslots with them.
