Pac-12 expansion or implosion?
spacehayduke
Posts: 5,741 ✭✭✭✭✭
Apparently the Pac-12 (10) is making headway on the issues they have after the traitorous exit for YouCLAw and MooSC. They are working on media rights and potential expansion at the same time. The Commish, George Kliavkoff finally broke his silence this past week. You can read all about on johncanzano.com
He insists there will be no more schools leaving the Pac-10 but I am not sure. I would think that the strongest current sporting schools are talking to the Bigs 10 and 12 at least, that being Oregon, Washington, and Utah. Possibly either Arizona and Colorado as well. All of them bring another strong regional market share to the table.
The biggest problem I see with all of this is that no matter whom the Pac-10 tries to get in expansion, unless it can from the other Power 5 leagues, it will not meet with their academic goals. The Pac-12 was always based on taking the best larger academic universities (well except MooSC which is a smaller but still prestigious school) in the west, bringing them together academically and with sporting competitions. Those 12 schools all bring a strong to highest level of research and academics to the table compared to just about any other in the west. So that means, if they can't raid the other Power 5 schools, it is going to water down their reputation collectively in things not sports. So the Pac-10 is in a lose-lose situation for the most part IMO.
If 2 or more of the better sports universities leave, Pac-10 implodes. If they stick together and expand in the most likely way, they get schools of lesser academic, research, and likely, sport reputations. Kind of like the Big 12 taking UH, Cincinnati, UCF, and BYU, watering down academics/research but probably ok with sports for the most part. It is all about the revenue after all in sports these days and sadly.
So I am guessing you will see the Pac-10 implode rather than expand despite the Commish's words. The teams I worry most about are the Beavs and Wazoo. They are going to be left hanging.
It also begs the question of what universities are about these days? Certainly academics seem to be a low priority and it is more about revenue streams and the sports entertainment buisness. Too bad for the Pac-10.
Comments
Interesting post.
Society in general seems to be evolving in a direction that elevates "form" over "substance"; and that places greater and greater emphasis on "equality" [including the desirable "equal opportunity" and the undesirable "equal outcome" (which is inconsistent with human nature and which brings everyone, except those few in positions of power, down to a base level)].
How does the above reality manifest itself in education [K-12; and college] these days?
My understanding (from talking with alumni and university employees) about how things have been and are at UC Berkeley (one of the two supposed jewels of the UC system, along with UCLA) is that the arts, humanities and social science portion of the that university advocates for lowering academic performance standards and expectations; and that the hard science portion of that university does not advocate for lowering academic performance standards and expectations.
A lowering of academic performance standards and expectations would result in students who would not be able to meet higher performance standards and expectations passing courses and graduating (when they would be unable to do so if the performance standards and expectations were higher).
If the lowering of academic performance standards and expectations becomes universal throughout the US education system then the PAC-10 bringing other schools into the conference (that do not have the resume of the schools already in the conference) would not be a concern, provided that these other schools bring with them into the PAC-10 the resources, draw and support needed to generate the "Revenue" that the PAC-10 officials require from their members.
It may be that the business side of education in the US, plus the trend toward making sure everyone is equal in all things, will result in the PAC-10 expanding and continuing to exist as a conference whose members' primary goal is the continued generation of the largest revenue stream possible (including revenue generated by sports teams).
Education in the US today is a far cry from education in the US 40-50 years ago. Education in the US at all levels is a "business" that supports the economic livelihood of millions of persons. Some of the persons working in the education system make massive amounts of money and receive gold plated benefits both during their employment and in retirement. The cost of supporting the livelihood of those who work in education must be paid through the revenue generated by current operations. Tuition, books, room and board and other education expenses have skyrocketed.
When I went to a public college (from the fall of 1974 through the spring of 1978) my tuition was between $350.00 to $500.00 per semester. When I went to law school (fall 1978 through spring 1981) at a private law school my annual tuition was $3,600.00, $4,200.00 and $4,500.00 for the three years I attended ($12,300.00 total). The tuition costs today at the same law school for a three year program is probably $200,000.00 to $250,000.00. Much of the cost of post high school education today is covered by students taking out student loans (which put them into positions of life time debt because except under the most severe of circumstances student loan debt cannot be discharged in a Bankruptcy).
Education in the US today is a far cry from education in the US 40-50 years ago. Education in the US at all levels is a "business" that supports the economic livelihood of millions of persons.
And I couldn't disagree more strongly. We've had three children move through your "business" in the past few years and the level of what they are doing puts studies from the 1970's to shame. Maybe you haven't been in contact with any students at that level recently, I have no way of knowing, but I have seen what they're doing at major midwestern universities.
To that end, the money that sports bring into schools is quite large and quite necessary, education would suffer without it.
Maywood.
How can you disagree that education is not a business that supports the economic livelihood of millions of persons?
This business is to educate persons. It does so at all levels, with some of the things being done today being amazing (and beyond what anyone could imagine decades ago).
Societal advancement across the spectrum of human activities is progressing at an ever increasing rate. Doing so requires revenue. The required revenue will be generated by those who run the education system from more and more sources, including sports.
I've been alarmed ever since SC and UCLA announced their desire to leave several months ago.
As a Cal grad, it has really hurt our recruiting.
I don't believe the PAC will survive. Furthermore, it seems the colleges are being carved up by the networks based on broadcast possibilities. What puzzles me is why any super conference would would want Utah, Udub or the Ducks playing in Ewww-Gene. No TV market share in those towns or national following.
For most of the schools, this is very untrue. U Houston for example, has been running deficits of $20 to 40 million per year for athletics and mostly for supporting the football team. Where has that money come from to make up the athletic dept. deficits? Some of it came from classroom/facilities maintenance, some from the general budget that would have gone to educational and research programs. But the pres believes UH has to be great in football to make a strong university so she accepts reduction in budget that would enhance academic activities to get there............
PNW is a big market share now - UO is aligned with Nike and has a strong market, equal to the best sports facilities in the land thanks to Phil Knight. Track Town USA, on and on. All 3 of those schools are excellent academically, in research (meaning alot of external funding), and sports. Easy to see why Big 10 or Big 12 would be interested IMO.
SpaceHD
While I don't disagree with your statement, let me say this.
The population in the US is north of 330 million. Very few of those live in Washington, Oregon or Utah. Most of the college sports interest is in the Midwest and the South.
No one outside of Washington could tell you where Kent, Tacoma, or Yakima are on a map. Udub might be in a cosmopolitan city but few outside of town care. Just because Amazon or MS are based there doesn't mean SEC people care.
BYU takes the TV market in Utah. Utah might be a good team but no national following. Not a team people follow.
Mr Phil is nearing the twilight years of his generosity. Univ Oregon as a school is WAY down the list. Check US News & World Report rankings.
IMHO, remaining PAC schools just don't generate revenue on par with other BIG programs and time zones are going to be a serious problem.
I'm concerned.
@streeter said:
Right now most of the markets to expand in are full. For example, Texas has about a dozen major universities with a pop. of 30 million so that is a few million per U of fan base in Texas, although TAMU and UT Austin dominate that base with Baylor, TCU, and Texas Tech most of the rest. Yet lowly UH made it into the Big-12 to expand their league market, that with the TAMU and UT fan based dominating the Houston market LOL. Oregon and Washington are 4.2 and 7.5 million in pop., with effectively only UO and Udub as the 2 marquee schools. If Pac-10 fails and those 2 go to the Big-12 for example, that is 12 million in people market share (plus all of the alumni across the US that show up at all away games for the schools) with high level brands already in place. That is about is a good as it can get in this era of NCAA althletic leagues desiring in increase market share these days. The other 2 schools, Beavs and Wazoo, will likely go to lesser conferences with little market share.
To understand what Oregon brings to the table via Knight and Nike and Track Town USA, the athletic department at UO has once run close to a $100 million excess over yearly operating expenses recently, although that has been unusual. No other university has an athletic dept. that is close in terms of profit for a year of a big windfall like that. Just a few university athletic depts. in the US even break even. Those that do have to have a huge and committed market/fan base that spends money to do so. PNW with those 2 schools thus represents a very serious market for expansion in a power 4 league that goes way beyond the borders of the 2 states. Any power 4 league looking to expand their market share will be drooling to get those 2 schools as it it pretty much the only thing left to grab (except maybe the SF area but it is debatable if UCBerk and Stanford have/has the largest market share there). Utah is debatable but it is the marquee school in that state, not BYU.