Pac-10 expansion will get earnest consideration

[82CardsGrad]

It's apples to oranges because TV there is context, which is why I can't see the argument that "a TV market is a TV market". Unless there is some data that shows that Denver is a TV market that craves college sports, then I can't see the great addition the market makes. All data points to the opposite of that being true.

A small state like Kansas created "The Jayhawk Network" in order to broadcast every KU basketball game played not on national stations, even the exhibition games. ESPN Full Court carries all non-exhibition KU games as well, because desire to watch the programs drives ratings which in turn opens up the path for a revenue stream.

Is anyone arguing that KU wouldn't sell well in Kansas? Or for that matter, would USC sell well in Los Angeles??

I believe the argument here is regarding expansion of the Pac-10. Hence, where would the Pac-10 stand the best chance at maximizing the revenue potential via expansion.
Would KU sell well in Florida? Georgia? Texas?? Illinois?? Or any other state outside of Kansas??

 

[DWKB]

Isn't that the way its always been? Has that reality changed materially over the last 3-5 years?? Not sure what that data means in terms of the Pac-10 "dying"...

I guess it means continuing to be non competitive as a national brand. Having your basketball games air on FSN, having a problem getting viewers for football outside of USC.

 

[Gaddabout]

Guess it depends upon how you define "dying"... And why would the Pac-10 be "dying" any more or any less than any other non-SEC conference?? What about the ACC? Big East? Big 12? Why would the Pac-10 be in worse shape than any of those conferences now or at some point down the road??

Because the West has never been college crazy. Ultimately it comes down to local support, and but for four or five schools, it's just not there. In fact the West promulgates a culture of "I'll support you if you win," and that's not conducive to thriving in the highest altitudes of college sports.

If USC ever decided to leave the Pac-10 and become an independent, the whole conference would fall apart. It would be less than the ACC.

 

[82CardsGrad]

 

[DWKB]

Is anyone arguing that KU wouldn't sell well in Kansas? Or for that matter, would USC sell well in Los Angeles??

I believe the argument here is regarding expansion of the Pac-10. Hence, where would the Pac-10 stand the best chance at maximizing the revenue potential via expansion.
Would KU sell well in Florida? Georgia? Texas?? Illinois?? Or any other state outside of Kansas??

Yes, KU would. We're one of the best traveling fans in the nation. It's why the Orange Bowl chose us over Mizzou a couple of years ago. It's why ESPN Full Court carries every basketball game not aired nationally.

Another example is Nebraska and football. All Nebraska games not aired nationally are offered in PPV because their fans will pay.

Yet in Arkansas, where the whole state bleeds Razorback Red, there is no equivalent to "The Jayhawk Network" and many games go unaired, because Arkansas Fans don't really care as much about basketball as KU fans do. Therefore there is no market.

 

[DWKB]

Because the West has never been college crazy. Ultimately it comes down to local support, and but for four or five schools, it's just not there. In fact the West promulgates a culture of "I'll support you if you win," and that's not conducive to thriving in the highest altitudes of college sports.

If USC ever decided to leave the Pac-10 and become an independent, the whole conference would fall apart. It would be less than the ACC.

 

[DWKB]

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sp...ke-in-in-200708-this-chart-will-tell-you.html

First PAC-10 school shows up at #18, after 4 Big 12 teams, 6 Big 10 teams, and 6 SEC teams.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Because the West has never been college crazy. Ultimately it comes down to local support, and but for four or five schools, it's just not there. In fact the West promulgates a culture of "I'll support you if you win," and that's not conducive to thriving in the highest altitudes of college sports.

If USC ever decided to leave the Pac-10 and become an independent, the whole conference would fall apart. It would be less than the ACC.

I agree with this... I was looking at this from the perspective of this has always been the case. Nothing has changed to cause anyone to suggest that the Pac-10 is dying. Will it ever be a SEC? Of course not. But there will always be a Pac-10. USC, UCLA, ASU, UofA, Oregon, Washington... there not going anywhere.
The fact that the Pac-10 is seeking to add teams is, IMO a smart move and only further ensures that they are not "dying" and will be around for decades, centuries to come. But again, one has to remain extremely realistic here and accept all that you laid out above Gadd. The western region of the U.S. is so different than the midwest and east, particularly as it relates to school support. College sports and their centuries of history and family generational connections (because the midwest and east are not nearly as transient as is the West) is at a level many in the west can't comprehend, or frankly choose not to comprehend. That's just the way it is... Not bad nor good. Just different...

 

[82CardsGrad]

I agree with this... I was looking at this from the perspective of this has always been the case. Nothing has changed to cause anyone to suggest that the Pac-10 is dying. Will it ever be a SEC? Of course not. But there will always be a Pac-10. USC, UCLA, ASU, UofA, Oregon, Washington... there not going anywhere.
The fact that the Pac-10 is seeking to add teams is, IMO a smart move and only further ensures that they are not "dying" and will be around for decades, centuries to come. But again, one has to remain extremely realistic here and accept all that you laid out above Gadd. The western region of the U.S. is so different than the midwest and east, particularly as it relates to school support. College sports and their centuries of history and family generational connections (because the midwest and east are not nearly as transient as is the West) is at a level many in the west can't comprehend, or frankly choose not to comprehend. That's just the way it is... Not bad nor good. Just different...

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sp...ke-in-in-200708-this-chart-will-tell-you.html

First PAC-10 school shows up at #18, after 4 Big 12 teams, 6 Big 10 teams, and 6 SEC teams.

We seem to agree...

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Guys, there is no "Denver market" for CU. Colorado doesn't show for college sports. They've got too many decent pro teams and too much outdoor activities to worry about CU. The only advantage would be former PAC-10 alumni that live in Colorado coming to or tuning in when CU plays their teams.

Folsom turns Red when CU plays NU and Coors turns Blue when CU plays KU. Otherwise there is nobody.

This is a moot point. The Coliseum turned red when Nebraska played USC and turns green every other year when ND comes to town. Doesn't mean that every conference in the county would love to have USC and the LA market if feasible.

Your point is only valid if we get could TV ratings from the metro Denver area for CU games.

 

[Gaddabout]

I agree with this... I was looking at this from the perspective of this has always been the case. Nothing has changed to cause anyone to suggest that the Pac-10 is dying. Will it ever be a SEC? Of course not. But there will always be a Pac-10. USC, UCLA, ASU, UofA, Oregon, Washington... there not going anywhere.
The fact that the Pac-10 is seeking to add teams is, IMO a smart move and only further ensures that they are not "dying" and will be around for decades, centuries to come. But again, one has to remain extremely realistic here and accept all that you laid out above Gadd. The western region of the U.S. is so different than the midwest and east, particularly as it relates to school support. College sports and their centuries of history and family generational connections (because the midwest and east are not nearly as transient as is the West) is at a level many in the west can't comprehend, or frankly choose not to comprehend. That's just the way it is... Not bad nor good. Just different...

Don't hold your breath on ASU/UA always being around. There's been talk from the BOR for a couple of years now that maybe the state should only have one sports program. Or maybe both programs should drop a level of competition. The BOR is not at all enthused at having their state institutions in the facilities war, and I think if the economy continues to sink, they'll be allowed to advance one of the above agendas I just mentioned.

UA has had the benefit of using Lute Olson to raise money. ASU's stable of wealthy boosters are tapped, and that includes the Fultons and the Barretts. With the athletic department now having a running deficit and probably needing to take from the school's general fund to balance the books, right now I wouldn't call ASU a good bet if push comes to shove with the BOR.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Yes, KU would. We're one of the best traveling fans in the nation. It's why the Orange Bowl chose us over Mizzou a couple of years ago. It's why ESPN Full Court carries every basketball game not aired nationally.

Another example is Nebraska and football. All Nebraska games not aired nationally are offered in PPV because their fans will pay.

Yet in Arkansas, where the whole state bleeds Razorback Red, there is no equivalent to "The Jayhawk Network" and many games go unaired, because Arkansas Fans don't really care as much about basketball as KU fans do. Therefore there is no market.

You missed my point... I am certain that for certain games, KU travels well. However, if the Big 12 were looking to expand, would it do so because they were convinced KU matchups would sell in other parts of the country from a TV perspective. I'll grant you that KU basketball just might, but that's it. Nobody in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc... will tune in to watch a KU football game.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Don't hold your breath on ASU/UA always being around. There's been talk from the BOR for a couple of years now that maybe the state should only have one sports program. Or maybe both programs should drop a level of competition. The BOR is not at all enthused at having their state institutions in the facilities war, and I think if the economy continues to sink, they'll be allowed to advance one of the above agendas I just mentioned.

We'd have to go much deeper into the tank economically for this to happen. When was the last time a BCS-level athletic department was essentially contracted?

 

[Gaddabout]

We'd have to go much deeper into the tank economically for this to happen. When was the last time a BCS-level athletic department was essentially contracted?

I'm not sure, but I get the impression the BOR wouldn't mind setting a precedent there.

They get cantankerous every time a new coach's contract comes before them. It would help if ASU got their financial act together and stopped firing coaches a year after they give them a long-term extension with expensive buyouts.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Don't hold your breath on ASU/UA always being around. There's been talk from the BOR for a couple of years now that maybe the state should only have one sports program. Or maybe both programs should drop a level of competition. The BOR is not at all enthused at having their state institutions in the facilities war, and I think if the economy continues to sink, they'll be allowed to advance one of the above agendas I just mentioned.

Gadd, you are way closer to this crap than I ever want to be. But really... all rhetoric aside, I have a hard time seing a day when either ASU or UA would not have a major sports program.... Anything is possible, but ASU just became the largest school in the nation in terms of enrollment, right? I dunno... I don't see it...

 

[82CardsGrad]

I'm not sure, but I get the impression the BOR wouldn't mind setting a precedent there.

They get cantankerous every time a new coach's contract comes before them.

I can see them settling for less in terms of coaching quality, versus shuttering an entire sports program...

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

I'm not sure, but I get the impression the BOR wouldn't mind setting a precedent there.

They get cantankerous every time a new coach's contract comes before them.

Yeah, but ultimately as long as an AD is self-sustaining there's really not much they can do about it except bitch and moan. UA is supposedly going to make it through in the black by the skin of their teeth this year, can't imagine things would be much better for ASU.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Gadd, you are way closer to this crap than I ever want to be. But really... all rhetoric aside, I have a hard time seing a day when either ASU or UA would not have a major sports program.... Anything is possible, but ASU just became the largest school in the nation in terms of enrollment, right? I dunno... I don't see it...

I think what Gadd is referring to is simply joining ASU and UA into one really big university with separate campuses and then having one athletic department. It's definitely possible but not anytime soon.

 

[82CardsGrad]

I think what Gadd is referring to is simply joining ASU and UA into one really big university with separate campuses and then having one athletic department. It's definitely possible but not anytime soon.

Ah.... hmm.... hadn't thought about that. Interesting idea...

 

[Gaddabout]

I think what Gadd is referring to is simply joining ASU and UA into one really big university with separate campuses and then having one athletic department. It's definitely possible but not anytime soon.

That was one ambitious plan, yes.

 

[DWKB]

This is a moot point. The Coliseum turned red when Nebraska played USC and turns green every other year when ND comes to town. Doesn't mean that every conference in the county would love to have USC and the LA market if feasible.

Your point is only valid if we get could TV ratings from the metro Denver area for CU games.

See the chart that I posted. USC was 19th with over $76M in revenue. Colorado was 43rd with $52.6M.

It seems a better comparison would be ASU (which was 42) and the Phoenix Market. Question: How many of you all in Phoenix would tune into Big 12 games if ASU became part of that conference? How many in Phoenix as a whole (counting more than those just posting on a sports message board)?

 

[82CardsGrad]

See the chart that I posted. USC was 19th with over $76M in revenue. Colorado was 43rd with $52.6M.

It seems a better comparison would be ASU (which was 42) and the Phoenix Market. Question: How many of you all in Phoenix would tune into Big 12 games if ASU became part of that conference? How many in Phoenix as a whole (counting more than those just posting on a sports message board)?

Not many... However, it seems that the Pac-10 is betting that there will be a meaningful number of viewers in the Denver market who would tune in to see CU play USC and/or UCLA. Same for TCU.
Again, this is being brought about because the Pac-10 is looking to expand. The Pac-10 is fighting a tough battle due to geographics. As we've all agreed, the west is simply a different place when it comes to college sports... But, if they are to expand, CU and TCU represent their best options... with a wink to UNLV of course.

 

[Gaddabout]

See the chart that I posted. USC was 19th with over $76M in revenue. Colorado was 43rd with $52.6M.

It seems a better comparison would be ASU (which was 42) and the Phoenix Market. Question: How many of you all in Phoenix would tune into Big 12 games if ASU became part of that conference? How many in Phoenix as a whole (counting more than those just posting on a sports message board)?

A lot of that has had to do with the awful leadership from the Pac-10 and Tom Hansen. It's been very conservative, very anti-change. The Pac-10 has been stuck in 1978 mode since ... 1978. They fought the BCS with the Rose Bowl. They are late-comers to virtually every big change in major sports. They've been behind the revenue 8-ball because of it.

Just look at the bowl game alignments. The SEC has been, by far, the best managed sports entity in college sports. They take a little bit of leverage and turn it into bank. The SEC was never THAT much stronger than the rest of the country in the 80s. They've made every program stronger through great management, early adapters of change, and revenue sharing.

 

[Gaddabout]

Gadd, you are way closer to this crap than I ever want to be. But really... all rhetoric aside, I have a hard time seing a day when either ASU or UA would not have a major sports program.... Anything is possible, but ASU just became the largest school in the nation in terms of enrollment, right? I dunno... I don't see it...

The enrollment number is a mirage when it comes to raising money from alums. One thing to keep in mind is only about 5,000 live on campus. Those are the kids who are the ones who will end up supporting the school. Not the other 55,000 re-entry students, community college transfers, and night school folks. Those kids (and parents) have zero emotional investment in the cultural life at ASU.

 

[82CardsGrad]

The enrollment number is a mirage when it comes to raising money from alums. One thing to keep in mind is only about 5,000 live on campus. Those are the kids who are the ones who will end up supporting the school. Not the other 55,000 re-entry students, community college transfers, and night school folks. Those kids (and parents) have zero emotional investment in the cultural life at ASU.

Agreed...