With the BIG10 back and questions of when the PAC12 is going to play (with clear lack of visionary leadership evident) its very reasonable to think about the future

Credit to @coker_UDub for being on point or a lot of this

This will be long but my thoughts of future to follow

I’ve been a proponent for a while that the Big12 and PAC12 need to finally merge together as they share many of the same issues today and going forward

For most, the start is what a reorganized conference looks like

Reality is there are a few items that need to come first

First, the power brokers of both conferences need to align on what their shared issues today and in the future are ... essentially why the status quo is not an option

Once realizing that, they need to align on the vision, goals, and priorities for the conference

What are the issues:

1) Perception of conferences (CFB) is behind that of SEC, Big 10, and Clemson

2) Perception (CFB) leads to recruiting challenges in keeping local talent home (P12 = California; Big 12 = Texas and SEC)

3) Open mocking of cant win a national title (CFB)

4) P12 has well known issues with MBB (last national title in 1997) ... strongest programs can use strong step up in perception

5) Big12 hoops has strong reputation for quality but falls a bit flat compared to other conferences for attention

And fundamentally, what all of those issues have at the foundation is that both conferences have sizable gaps between the have’s and the have nots

The have nots don’t bring the brand name that demands respect ... and that hurts both in perception and bank accounts

Assuming that leads to power brokers agreeing that a combination makes sense, that leads to what are the guiding principles in establishing a new conference

This is a critical step in determining what the membership should look like

1) The P12 is the “Conference of Champions” ... it’s a great branding mechanism

Problem is that the conference right now is relying on a combination of the past and Olympic sports to make those claims

Fundamentally, the new conference needs to focus on winning championships

2) Key to winning is changing narratives with recruits in geographic footprint ... you simply cannot win championships without securing the best talent possible

Addressing what is prioritized by recruits will go a long way to solving the problems currently faced

3) Prioritizing media rights and visibility will be critical for a number of reasons

Players want to be on TV

Players want to play in front of large crowds

Players want to play against the best weekly ... it develops them for the next level

Additionally, with what almost assuredly will be coming in the future with respect to media rights for athletes ... creating opportunities whether it be through larger contracts, greater exposure for advertising, etc will be critical when it comes to recruiting

4) Size matters ... literally

Current geo footprint has 6 of top 15 MSAs based on 2019 estimates:

2. LA (13.2M people)
4. DFW (7.6M)
5. Houston (7.1M - shared w SEC))
10. Phoenix (4.9M)
12. San Francisco (4.7M)
15. Seattle (4.0M)

4 of next 10 also in the footprint

A combination presents a very appealing package to network executives looking for eyeballs

By consolidating not only do you increase the quality of the output (the games), potentially increase size of pie, and reduce number of ways pie is sliced

5) Finally, I suspect that there will be levels of academic and/or political considerations regarding the combination

I feel these are important to consider but need to have a grain of salt taken with them

Reality is we don’t know what things look like on flip side of COVID

With all that said, the best place IMO to start looking at what schools make the most sense starts by looking at Athletic Department revenues to measure health, reach, and visibility

Simply put, the more revenue the more people care (in general), the larger alumni base, etc

I leveraged the CAFI Database http://cafidatabase.knightcommission.org  to look at annual revenues for the Big12 and PAC12 schools from 2014-2018

The findings in many ways shouldn’t be earth shattering

Starting with the PAC12 ...

Big 12 Revenues (2018/5 Year Avg):

Texas = 219M (193M)
Oklahoma = 175M (149M)
Kansas = 106M (96M)
West Virginia = 103M (97M)
Texas Tech = 89M (84M)
Iowa St = 89M (79M)
Oklahoma St = 89M (98M)
Kansas St = 87M (80M)

TCU/Baylor are private and not available per source

Doing some research on TCU/Baylor

TCU is generally considered the 3rd richest program in Big 12 and their athletic department expenses are well behind Texas/Oklahoma but slightly higher than Kansas

Baylor’s spend is more consistent with being middle of the pack

The Big 12 numbers really highlight the gap between Texas/Oklahoma and the rest of the conference

Kansas pulls the conference in hoops

TCU is the new rich kid on the block and is kinda the Big 12’s Oregon in that they have a growing national brand

But the rest of the conference really it’s hard to isolate what any one of them brings to the table over the other

It highlights how much the Big 12 misses Nebraska (keep that in mind)

And geographically, if we are being honest West Virginia belongs in the ACC

PAC 12 Revenues (2018/5 Yr Avg)

UCLA = 131M (104M)
Washington = 131M (114M)
Oregon = 123M (136M)
Arizona St = 114M (94M)
Arizona = 96M (92M)
Utah = 91M (75M)
California = 91M (88M)
Colorado = 90M (79M)
Oregon St = 81M (72M)
Washington St = 65M (59M)

USC/Stanford are private

Stanford is the richest Athletic Department in PAC12 and a Forbes article this summer estimated $139M if revenues for 18-19 year with only $44M from football

From different sources I looked at I would put USC’s revenues in the $120M range

That fact is super interesting

Before going deeper into the current state of the P12, one thing that really stood out to me comparing B12 and P12 schools is the amount of revenue from ticket sales

In 2018, every Big12 school generated in excess of $15M in ticket revenues with the exception of Texas Tech)

And Tech makes sense because it’s the most geographically isolated

In the PAC12, only Washington, Oregon, Utah, and UCLA exceeded $15M (obviously USC would as well)

Washington led P12 at $29M ... Texas was at $67M and Oklahoma at $42M

Anyway, back to the PAC12 issues

1) Stanford has the richest Athletic Department but doesn’t care about football ... something that @Coker_UDub @Dennis_BDTW @Doogstone will count the ways that’s true

2) SC has always run the conference ... but UW and Oregon are richer now

3) Building on SC running the P12, it could be expanded to the core 4 California schools

Stanford = Doesn’t Care

USC = Broke (by their standards)

UCLA/Cal = pompous righteous asses that nobody knows what they are doing

The Cali schools are the definition of old and tired

Now more than ever, the leadership and vision of the PAC12 is at a clear void ... and we see this play out over and over and over

It puts Washington in an interesting spot to fill the void (with Oregon) ... they are the strongest schools at this point

Washington has historically aligned with the California schools ... when the PCC broke up in the late 50s, the resulting AAWU was the Cali schools + Washington

However, UW has always been the outsider ... the California schools needed UW but didn’t want UW to outshine them

Can Washington and Oregon unite with the Arizona schools to take over the leadership voice of the conference and take advantage of the California schools being at a tipping point?

The opportunity to seize power is there if united

What should be obvious looking at B12 and P12 revenue lists is how much lower Wazzu’s revenue is than everybody else

Simply put, Wazzu isn’t competitive and doesn’t materially bring anything to the table ... they essentially exist in a P5 conference by being subsidized by others

The impact of COVID to Wazzu’s Athletic Department I suspect will make their situation even more dire

Their best path forward is to move to the Mountain West and pressuring the NCAA to create a new championship level at what will be the current G5 level

It aligns Wazzu w/ peers