Posted by Butter on December 13, 18 at 22:04:13:
In Reply to: Re: Big12 posted by BayDevil on December 13, 18 at 21:06:26:
I still believe ASU's recruiting region is principally AZ, SoCal and the West in general. Playing in Kansas, OK, TX, etc., would require a significant shift. CTG really struggled to implement this shift.
UT gets a disproportionate slice of the pie - why? because it demanded it. UT believes it is the reason why the Big 12 exists.
USC, in contrast, has not done this - and in fact, it was USC who demanded that ASU and U4 be added to the PAC 8.
I am not sure fans in Arizona will ever be as enthusiastic as fans in the south, or even the midwest. Changing conferences won't cause Sun Devil fans to show up.
I think we stay put.
But I think Larry Scott has been a massive "fail". he has done a terrific job promoting himself, and keeping the support of the "Group of CEOs", as the recent series of articles in the Oregon paper described.
Everyone laments about the failure to get a deal with DirectTV. But had Scott not agreed to a MFN provision with the other carriers, then he could have entered into a deal with DirectTV. Of course, he would have had to agree to short term deals with the carriers, and be subject to re-negotiations every few years - but with a broader market footprint, the ratings would have likely improved with time. As it is, NetFlix is now surpassing cable in number of subscribers, and Dish has created Sling TV. the market continues to change and evolve, and yet Larry Scott is still thinking in terms of 2012.
I think it is/was Jon Wilmer who just pointed out that OSU is really getting screwed, and desperately needs cash - and when compared with the SEC, OSU may fall into "permanent noncompetitiveness", due to the revenue disparity. At this rate, the PAC 12 will fall out of Power 5 and into the mosh pit with the WAC, Conf USA, etc. The trend lines don't lie. the discrepancy is getting worse.
My point is that the PAC 12 should be a good place, but Scott is simply lining his pocket, with very poor results. Why Crow, et. al, can allow this to continue is inexplicable.
Post a Followup