Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question about PAC-10 strategy

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Question about PAC-10 strategy

    Question for my Ute amigos. I apologize if this has already been asked and answered. I have been on the road all week so my coverage of the related threads has been spotty.

    Quite a few of you are insisting that Utah to the PAC-10 is already a done deal, signed-sealed-and-delivered, bet-the-farm, metaphysical certitude. There is even a firm date set for the announcement (June 11th?). If that is truly the case, why would the PAC-10 be stating publicly that they are leaning towards remaining at ten schools and possibly arranging for a playoff game involving the current ten? If the negotiations and agreements are complete, this would seem to be a very odd move, and will look more bizarre when the public finds out this was all wrapped up by mid-March. What is the objective of the lies and misinformation? Am I missing something?
    "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
    "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
    "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
    Question for my Ute amigos. I apologize if this has already been asked and answered. I have been on the road all week so my coverage of the related threads has been spotty.

    Quite a few of you are insisting that Utah to the PAC-10 is already a done deal, signed-sealed-and-delivered, bet-the-farm, metaphysical certitude. There is even a firm date set for the announcement (June 11th?). If that is truly the case, why would the PAC-10 be stating publicly that they are leaning towards remaining at ten schools and possibly arranging for a playoff game involving the current ten? If the negotiations and agreements are complete, this would seem to be a very odd move, and will look more bizarre when the public finds out this was all wrapped up by mid-March. What is the objective of the lies and misinformation? Am I missing something?
    It ain't a done deal and hinges things outside the pac-tens control. Keep an eye on big ten expansion. That would bode well for the utes.

    Comment

    • #3
      Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
      Question for my Ute amigos. I apologize if this has already been asked and answered. I have been on the road all week so my coverage of the related threads has been spotty.

      Quite a few of you are insisting that Utah to the PAC-10 is already a done deal, signed-sealed-and-delivered, bet-the-farm, metaphysical certitude. There is even a firm date set for the announcement (June 11th?). If that is truly the case, why would the PAC-10 be stating publicly that they are leaning towards remaining at ten schools and possibly arranging for a playoff game involving the current ten? If the negotiations and agreements are complete, this would seem to be a very odd move, and will look more bizarre when the public finds out this was all wrapped up by mid-March. What is the objective of the lies and misinformation? Am I missing something?
      Both DDD and I brought this point up in the "Pac-10 expansion thread" last week and we were brutally beaten up via internet postings by a couple of Ute fans. Those that insist it is a done deal will have to comment. I for one have to come think that Pac-10 expansion isn't going to happen. I hope it does and I hope the Utes are a part of it but at the end of the day, I don't think it happens.
      "Take it to the Bank"

      Comment

      • #4
        Lebowski, I don't think the Pac 10 is saying all you are saying it is saying. I think it's saying nothing and what you're reading is fragmentary rumors.

        Also, if you've ever been involved in complicated mergers and such there is inevitably months of stuff behind the scenes before it's announced. When the announcement comes there is a deal subject to specified contingencies and the lawyers finalizing an agreement. This inevitably took a long time to achieve.
        When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.

        --Jonathan Swift

        Comment

        • #5
          Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
          Question for my Ute amigos. I apologize if this has already been asked and answered. I have been on the road all week so my coverage of the related threads has been spotty.

          Quite a few of you are insisting that Utah to the PAC-10 is already a done deal, signed-sealed-and-delivered, bet-the-farm, metaphysical certitude. There is even a firm date set for the announcement (June 11th?). If that is truly the case, why would the PAC-10 be stating publicly that they are leaning towards remaining at ten schools and possibly arranging for a playoff game involving the current ten? If the negotiations and agreements are complete, this would seem to be a very odd move, and will look more bizarre when the public finds out this was all wrapped up by mid-March. What is the objective of the lies and misinformation? Am I missing something?
          It's a rumor. Utah going to the PAC-10 ain't gonna happen. There aren't enough tv sets along the Wasatch Front for Utah or even BYU to get an invite to a BCS conference.
          "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill


          "I only know what I hear on the news." - Dear Leader

          Comment

          • #6
            Originally posted by il Padrino Ute View Post
            It's a rumor. Utah going to the PAC-10 ain't gonna happen. There aren't enough tv sets along the Wasatch Front for Utah or even BYU to get an invite to a BCS conference.
            That's something I've been wondering too. Why would the Pac-10 really want Utah. The money doesn't make sense and neither does the athletic program. Other than football and gymnastics, what does the U offer? There's no way the PAC-10 makes more money with Utah. If WSU wasn't in the PAC-10 today, they wouldn't be invited either.
            "To the man who only has a hammer, everything he encounters begins to look like a nail."
            —Abraham Maslow

            Comment

            • #7
              Originally posted by WashingtonCoug View Post
              That's something I've been wondering too. Why would the Pac-10 really want Utah. The money doesn't make sense and neither does the athletic program. Other than football and gymnastics, what does the U offer? There's no way the PAC-10 makes more money with Utah. If WSU wasn't in the PAC-10 today, they wouldn't be invited either.
              Yep. The only incentive for the PAC-10 to expand is to generate enough money to make it worth the effort. The Wasatch Front can't help in that regard.
              "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill


              "I only know what I hear on the news." - Dear Leader

              Comment

              • #8
                I've received a couple of tips that the June 11 rumor was started by a few Cougar fans, and Utes have been the ones taking it to the next level(s) ever since. (Think of other pranks like Jerseygate...)

                Comment

                • #9
                  Originally posted by Fiyero View Post
                  I've received a couple of tips that the June 11 rumor was started by a few Cougar fans, and Utes have been the ones taking it to the next level(s) ever since. (Think of other pranks like Jerseygate...)
                  I think it's funny; I've thought it was an internet production. I've never expected June 11 was necessarily the day. It would be really funny though if it happened on June 11.
                  When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.

                  --Jonathan Swift

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    For all those that say Utah and Colorado to the pac-12 doesnt make sense financially here is how the tv contracts work currently

                    from the mercury news :

                    But here’s what I do know about the structure of these TV contracts:

                    The bulk of the revenue from the ESPN/ABC deal, for example, is divided equally among the 10 schools.

                    They know ahead of time that they’re getting X amount per year for the life of the deal and can factor that into their budgets. And each school is guaranteed a minimum number of appearances, many of which are set in the spring.

                    But the networks also have the options to pick up games that aren’t on the spring schedule. For instance: Let’s say nobody chose ahead of time to show Stanford-Oregon (Nov. 7), but it turns out to be an important game.

                    If ESPN decides in late October that it wants to show the Cardinal and Ducks, each school would receive an additional payment — I think it’s a few hundred thousand — that would not have to be shared with the other eight teams.

                    Those payments come from the portion of the TV contract that is not distributed equally among the schools. The better you are, the more games get picked up in-season, and the six-figure checks roll in.

                    So it’s a two-tiered broadcast/payment system:

                    The primary games, which are determined in the spring, and the big pot that’s split 10 ways … and the secondary games, which are picked up during the season, and the smaller pot that goes to the teams that get the extra TV games.
                    So most of the revenue is split evenly between the members. Dividing the pie by 12 would require a 20% gain in revenue to make it revenue neutral. Lets say that their yearly revenue is 60 million in tv contracts. adding two members would mean that they would have to increase 12 million dollars to make it neutral. Currently the SEC and the big 12 get 12-15million for their championship games. Couldn't the pac-10 do similar? that doesnt mention two new bowl games at a million a pop plus any new revenue from more teams in the ncaa tourney.

                    Now throw in their own network and they can really make some money. I would bet this is why they want two extra teams.

                    *NOTE TO TRIPLET DADDY: NONE OF THIS IS COMPLETELY VERIFIED. THIS IS MOSTLY MY OPINION. I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE PAC-10 OFFICE OR HAVE THEIR EAR. I'M THROWING OUT AN ARGUMENT ON WHY THE PAC-10 MIGHT WANT TO EXPAND. UTAH TO THE PAC-10 IS STILL A RUMOR. I BELIEVE IT WILL HAPPEN. AS ALWAYS BECAUSE ITS A RUMOR THINGS CAN CHANGE.
                    "Be a philosopher. A man can compromise to gain a point. It has become apparent that a man can, within limits, follow his inclinations within the arms of the Church if he does so discreetly." - The Walking Drum

                    "And here’s what life comes down to—not how many years you live, but how many of those years are filled with bullshit that doesn’t amount to anything to satisfy the requirements of some dickhead you’ll never get the pleasure of punching in the face." – Adam Carolla

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post
                      I think it's funny; I've thought it was an internet production. I've never expected June 11 was necessarily the day. It would be really funny though if it happened on June 11.
                      The rumormongers should have gone with July 11th. You know, a sort of homage to Ute students' prospective employment.
                      Prepare to put mustard on those words, for you will soon be consuming them, along with this slice of humble pie that comes direct from the oven of shame set at gas mark “egg on your face”! -- Moss

                      There are three rules that I live by: never get less than twelve hours sleep; never play cards with a guy who has the same first name as a city; and never get involved with a woman with a tattoo of a dagger on her body. Now you stick to that, and everything else is cream cheese. --Coach Finstock

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                        Question for my Ute amigos. I apologize if this has already been asked and answered. I have been on the road all week so my coverage of the related threads has been spotty.

                        Quite a few of you are insisting that Utah to the PAC-10 is already a done deal, signed-sealed-and-delivered, bet-the-farm, metaphysical certitude. There is even a firm date set for the announcement (June 11th?). If that is truly the case, why would the PAC-10 be stating publicly that they are leaning towards remaining at ten schools and possibly arranging for a playoff game involving the current ten? If the negotiations and agreements are complete, this would seem to be a very odd move, and will look more bizarre when the public finds out this was all wrapped up by mid-March. What is the objective of the lies and misinformation? Am I missing something?
                        My belief is that they are waiting on colorado to work things out on their end. I think the pac-10 has come to both schools and said we want you to be in our conference. Colorado is now trying to figure out what they have to do to move.
                        "Be a philosopher. A man can compromise to gain a point. It has become apparent that a man can, within limits, follow his inclinations within the arms of the Church if he does so discreetly." - The Walking Drum

                        "And here’s what life comes down to—not how many years you live, but how many of those years are filled with bullshit that doesn’t amount to anything to satisfy the requirements of some dickhead you’ll never get the pleasure of punching in the face." – Adam Carolla

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Mormon Red Death View Post
                          For all those that say Utah and Colorado to the pac-12 doesnt make sense financially here is how the tv contracts work currently

                          from the mercury news :



                          So most of the revenue is split evenly between the members. Dividing the pie by 12 would require a 20% gain in revenue to make it revenue neutral. Lets say that their yearly revenue is 60 million in tv contracts. adding two members would mean that they would have to increase 12 million dollars to make it neutral. Currently the SEC and the big 12 get 12-15million for their championship games. Couldn't the pac-10 do similar? that doesnt mention two new bowl games at a million a pop plus any new revenue from more teams in the ncaa tourney.

                          Now throw in their own network and they can really make some money. I would bet this is why they want two extra teams.

                          *NOTE TO TRIPLET DADDY: NONE OF THIS IS COMPLETELY VERIFIED. THIS IS MOSTLY MY OPINION. I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE PAC-10 OFFICE OR HAVE THEIR EAR. I'M THROWING OUT AN ARGUMENT ON WHY THE PAC-10 MIGHT WANT TO EXPAND. UTAH TO THE PAC-10 IS STILL A RUMOR. I BELIEVE IT WILL HAPPEN. AS ALWAYS BECAUSE ITS A RUMOR THINGS CAN CHANGE.
                          I agree with your analysis. This would explain why the P10 president just said a week or so ago that he is looking more at adding a championship game without expansion...all the extra money without splitting the pie with 2 extra schools.

                          obviously you agree with both me and the P10 president that from a financial standpoint, adding a championship game would be much more lucrative without expansion. so it seems we are on the same page. hooray!

                          All this will play out June 11. stay tuned.
                          Fitter. Happier. More Productive.
                          sigpic

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Post
                            I agree with your analysis. This would explain why the P10 president just said a week or so ago that he is looking more at adding a championship game without expansion...all the extra money without splitting the pie with 2 extra schools.

                            obviously you agree with both me and the P10 president that from a financial standpoint, adding a championship game would be much more lucrative without expansion. so it seems we are on the same page. hooray!

                            All this will play out June 11. stay tuned.
                            except that the big 10+1 tried this already and they were told no. Why would the ncaa let the pac-10 when they refused big 10.
                            "Be a philosopher. A man can compromise to gain a point. It has become apparent that a man can, within limits, follow his inclinations within the arms of the Church if he does so discreetly." - The Walking Drum

                            "And here’s what life comes down to—not how many years you live, but how many of those years are filled with bullshit that doesn’t amount to anything to satisfy the requirements of some dickhead you’ll never get the pleasure of punching in the face." – Adam Carolla

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Post
                              I agree with your analysis. This would explain why the P10 president just said a week or so ago that he is looking more at adding a championship game without expansion...all the extra money without splitting the pie with 2 extra schools.

                              obviously you agree with both me and the P10 president that from a financial standpoint, adding a championship game would be much more lucrative without expansion. so it seems we are on the same page. hooray!

                              All this will play out June 11. stay tuned.
                              link? Is this the logic gap quote?
                              When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.

                              --Jonathan Swift

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X