Just some conference news on the MWC strategic plan if anyone is interested..
Last edited:
MWC Strategic Plan
- Thread starter Meister_Rebel
- Start date
Thank you. I fixed it. Not sure what I did but, I should have double checked it.
Hey Rebels. Meister, thanks for posting this link over on my Board. Of course, no one has commented yet except me, but we will see.
Read the article and the plan itself. Nice document. I worked on a couple of Strategic Plan committees at a couple of my Higher Ed stops. Really anxious to get past this lame duck year and getting down to looking at the Pac-2's future.
I wonder if Pac2/MWC merger speed up the process from two years to one year.
Longer this takes the more muddied the waters get.
It's going to get very complicated for sure. The Pac-2 get to make the first move in September 2024 when they have to decide if they will continue the football agreement for the second year. I think they will because it will only be the first few months of actually being the Pac-2 and they have to see dust settle with their financials without the other ten schools. They will probably play a waiting game with CAL and Stanford to see if they would return. Stanford has the financial resources to stay in the ACC but I'm not sure CAL can see where it profits them when it has to send all sports teams across country. CAL may be the first to break.
If CAL returns the Pac-2 may be emboldened to just build rather than merge. The exit fees are rising in the MWC and it will be difficult for most MWC schools to come up with +20 million dollars to leave. Perhaps the Pac-2 will have enough money to where they can afford to perhaps pay 50% of a MWC schools exit fees once the scheduling agreement expires. No one knows right now what will happen. It may work out for the Pac-2 and it may weaken the MWC.
Muddy waters as you say and uncertain times coming in the MWC.
The 'smart' play. Merge with MWC. Save the money vs paying buyouts.
Rebuilding while probably more palatable,doesn't make a ton of sense.
Why pay UNLV, SDSU, FRESNO etc money to join you when you can simply join them.
Mountain west should dissolve.
Kick out Hawaii and San Jose st. Maybe Reno. Reno is interesting with building a new arena and commitment to basketball now.
Create a new pac 12.
Leave the door open for Stanford and Cal.
Do whatever you can to get Gonzaga.
Be the premiere basketball conference of the west.
Kick out Hawaii and San Jose st. Maybe Reno. Reno is interesting with building a new arena and commitment to basketball now.
Create a new pac 12.
Leave the door open for Stanford and Cal.
Do whatever you can to get Gonzaga.
Be the premiere basketball conference of the west.
I thought the process was only slow at first because of the lawsuits. When those cleared, I was expecting things to speed up, but they haven’t.
I’m curious if its because Wazzu/ Oregon St. are holding out for some reason, or if its the MW who are trying to keep things together.
Wash st. and Oregon st will wait to the last minute. They’re hoping Stanford and Cal come back. It’s very unlikely, unless someone with common sense and understands sports gets a leadership role at those institutions.
I wonder what will happen in regards to the exit deal for Cal, Stanford, and SMU? Since Cal and Stanford only get a partial media deal and SMU gets nothing, it could get really messy in the courts if the ACC tries to hold those three schools hostage with an exit fee. It is starting to look more and more like those three schools are pulling an SDSU move, where they jumped before making sure they had a safe landing zone.
I guess it depends on how many schools they purge. If they decide to go bigger, if they take out enough schools then the fees will become a non issue in the league dissolves.
You do run the risk that the remaining schools decide to rebuild a la what rhe PAC 2 may do themselves. But it would be much more difficult for them.
But if you want to rebuild, you want to make your intentions known as far in advance as possible. Just because potential exit fees just increase the longer you wait.
The only way that will work is if Boise State agrees to give up the additional cash they receive every year. I would think the Pac2 would take at least 8 of the MWC teams, who could easily vote to remove the penalty, but they will need to take a minimum of 9 in order to dissolve the exit fee, so if the Pac2 wants to merge the MWC teams, then at least 9 programs would need to be accepted.
As a side note, it is funny that the exit fee for the PAC12 is only $10 million compared to that of the MWC. The conference was so badly run, and so arrogant, that they never protected themselves against poaching of their conference by other conferences.
Short term memory of the Pac12 didn't take into consideration that they poached a bunch of teams in the past: Arizona and Arizona State from the WAC; Colorado from the Big12; Utah from the MWC. The stupidity of the Pac12 leadership is fully responsible for their collapse to the Pac2. No doubt all of the current leadership of the Pac2 will soon be gone, with the hope that the MWC leadership takes over, but that will not be known until in the future.
On the other side is the ACC with a $572 million buyout, which no doubt will end up in a long and drawn out court battle.
Short term memory of the Pac12 didn't take into consideration that they poached a bunch of teams in the past: Arizona and Arizona State from the WAC; Colorado from the Big12; Utah from the MWC. The stupidity of the Pac12 leadership is fully responsible for their collapse to the Pac2. No doubt all of the current leadership of the Pac2 will soon be gone, with the hope that the MWC leadership takes over, but that will not be known until in the future.
On the other side is the ACC with a $572 million buyout, which no doubt will end up in a long and drawn out court battle.
I think the Pac-2 is waiting until the "ten" are officially gone so they can then see where all the financial dust settles. The 12 still have income coming this year and some of it will be distributed among all 12. There are other things that I don't know have been settled like the money owed to Comcast and the lawsuit by the two financial officers that were fired because of that Comcast money handling. I'm sure the MWC wants to wait and see where that all ends up as well. We shouldn't jump into a conference that has unsettled business. The Pac-12 was a large organization with several hundred employees. They have a media studio and leased property that all have to be figured out before a merger. A lot of house cleaning needs to be done.
While all that is going on the MWC will have to begin media negotiations within the year. I believe the MWC Strategic Plan will have us looking at the Linear TV package as well as any Streaming options. Apple wants to jump into the market and it may be perfect time for us to get into some of that money. I'm not a fan of going all in on Streaming but hopefully we can put together the right balance of media.
While all that is going on the MWC will have to begin media negotiations within the year. I believe the MWC Strategic Plan will have us looking at the Linear TV package as well as any Streaming options. Apple wants to jump into the market and it may be perfect time for us to get into some of that money. I'm not a fan of going all in on Streaming but hopefully we can put together the right balance of media.
I definitely agree on the balance and not being all in on streaming. I missed my first NFL playoff game in probably 40+ years because I refuse to pay for streaming for a game. Based on ratings I wasn’t alone on that.
While I may not be a fan of paid TV, it looks like it hasn't hurt the NFL at all:
How is the NFL doing in ratings?
The NFL is eating TV as its ratings soar 7% to the second-highest ever, averaging 17.9 million homes. The NFL is the giant in the room. NFL regular-season games averaged 17.9 million viewers, tied for the second highest since averages were first tracked in 1995.Jan 10, 2024
2023 NFL playoffs set all-time viewership records
This year's NFL playoffs averaged 38.5 million viewers (TV+Digital) for the Wild Card, Divisional and Conference Championship rounds -- the most-watched playoffs ever (records date back to 1988).
Record NFL TV Ratings Means A Future Where Only The Big Can Thrive
It is no secret that the NFL has been on a TV ratings tear this year. The NBA and NHL have also enjoyed ratings increases.
www.forbes.com
The Rams Dolphins game had 23 million viewers while the others had 30+ and theWhile I may not be a fan of paid TV, it looks like it hasn't hurt the NFL at all:
How is the NFL doing in ratings?
The NFL is eating TV as its ratings soar 7% to the second-highest ever, averaging 17.9 million homes. The NFL is the giant in the room. NFL regular-season games averaged 17.9 million viewers, tied for the second highest since averages were first tracked in 1995.Jan 10, 2024
2023 NFL playoffs set all-time viewership records
This year's NFL playoffs averaged 38.5 million viewers (TV+Digital) for the Wild Card, Divisional and Conference Championship rounds -- the most-watched playoffs ever (records date back to 1988).www.nfl.com
23 makes it one of the 20 least watched playoff games in 20 years.
NFL Playoff TV Ratings Defy Gravity and Demographic Shifts
Rich people having a bad time is something that will always draw a crowd, which maybe explains why so many of us tune in to watch the Dallas Cowboys drain the light out of Jerry Jones’ eyes on Janu…
www.sportico.com
It appears Apple is partnering with Paramount Global, specifically to get CBS/ CBS sports live events onto Apple TV. They seem to be trying hard to become more of a driver in network.
There are rumors that Apple might be looking to acquire Paramount. Would make Apple look like an underweight, but up and coming contender to the Mouse.
Would be a good opportunity for the MW to punch up for more media money.
Source: https://fortune.com/2023/12/01/appl...treaming-bundle-netflix-hbo-max-tim-cook/amp/
Which was supposed to be Kirk Shulz (WSU's president, former Kansas State Prez).
Gonna try to reply to multiple posts here. Mostly IMHO.
No on Gonzaga. They don't play football, and their BB team is losing its luster.
I don't think Stanford would come back to a PacWest. Too snobby. And there are no other snobby schools left. They are stuck with the ACC. Same with Cal but on a lower scale. Unless the entire ACC blows up and dissolves.
Good points by Meister about the Pac-12 organization. There need to be a ton of pink slips and other cost reductions. At least we got out of SF prior to this.
I dunno what the Pac-2 is doing. Yes, agree that part of it is waiting for the breakup to become official. Beyond that, if we are waiting for some other option, we are still as stupid as we have been so far. One of my fellow Cougs was commenting on the Big-12 kind of becoming a trash league. Don't see why we would be hoping for them to come around.
As I've said numerous times, yes on the merger, but make it a reverse merger and dissolve the Mtn West into the new Pac12-whatever the number. That would fix the BSU revenue issue immediately. But bring Gloria along to the Pac. Hell bring the entire MW Commissioner's office. They won't even have to move.
I didn't even think of a Pac-12 exit fee being in place. Silly me. That's $100 million to the Pac-2.
To me two years is an eternity. Short list must be to fire Kliavkoff, get everyone currently on the Pac bank accounts off, and figure out the money. There had better be a lot of figuring going on already. And it seems like it would behoove the entire Pac to settle things outside of a courtroom. The Pac-2 appears to have the legal upper hand, but these Comcast, etc. hanging liabilities worry me. Need to get them settled, and of course somewhat to our advantage. Looking down the road, salvaging some relationship with the traitors has its benefits. Future OOC and rivalry games in particular.
Next year if the ACC goes, it'll be interesting to see what pieces shake out where.. I could see a Coast to Coast power conference that could get top media $$. Actually might be fun to see
It is interesting. This "strategic plan" is kinda silly. I think it is lip service to the susceptible schools in the MW.
This sounds like she is trying to strengthen the MW brand. But if the merger were to happen, then a reverse merger is the only thing that makes sense. So the MW brand would dissolve.
If the PAC dissolves, there may be a question to the NCAAT money coming in from previous years and this year as well as the 100 mil buyout money. The PAC name needs to live on.
Also no way that WAZZU and OSU will want to join a league where Boise gets a bigger cut.
With the Buyout money, remaining TV funds distribution, and the NCAAT money, the PAC do have a good amount of capitol to create a new conference. How much of that they want to hold on is an issue. They are going to take a notable annual paycut regardless, and they may want to hold on to some of that money to subsidize the money that they are losing. Having new PAC teams may make that cloudy, but I'm sure they can word into the contract language that previous funds being ear marked "original members" if they wanted to.
With the buyout from the ACC being so large, I don't see Stanford and Cal changing their minds any time soon. Even if their buyout is smaller ( I imagine it is), but that exorbitant number will make it very difficult for the ACC to be poached any time soon. Even the Big 2 with their near infinite resources will balk at that price. They do not want those teams that bad. A new PAC or PACWest merger probably will not be enticing enough for them to change their minds.
This sounds like she is trying to strengthen the MW brand. But if the merger were to happen, then a reverse merger is the only thing that makes sense. So the MW brand would dissolve.
If the PAC dissolves, there may be a question to the NCAAT money coming in from previous years and this year as well as the 100 mil buyout money. The PAC name needs to live on.
Also no way that WAZZU and OSU will want to join a league where Boise gets a bigger cut.
With the Buyout money, remaining TV funds distribution, and the NCAAT money, the PAC do have a good amount of capitol to create a new conference. How much of that they want to hold on is an issue. They are going to take a notable annual paycut regardless, and they may want to hold on to some of that money to subsidize the money that they are losing. Having new PAC teams may make that cloudy, but I'm sure they can word into the contract language that previous funds being ear marked "original members" if they wanted to.
With the buyout from the ACC being so large, I don't see Stanford and Cal changing their minds any time soon. Even if their buyout is smaller ( I imagine it is), but that exorbitant number will make it very difficult for the ACC to be poached any time soon. Even the Big 2 with their near infinite resources will balk at that price. They do not want those teams that bad. A new PAC or PACWest merger probably will not be enticing enough for them to change their minds.
On one hand I wanted to give them credit for having a plan in the first place. But I tend to agree it sounded more like lip service because there was a noticeable absence of specifics. Maybe they kept those close to the vest and they do have specifics, but not too confident in that.
Coupla things.
Yeah in my experience strategic plans are often a bunch of pithy BS. They go on a shelf then get dusted off in 5 years when it's time to redo/update them. But Gloria certainly can't have "reverse merge with the Pac-2" as a stated strategic goal.
Not sure what you are saying about the Pac-2 carryover money (whatever that ends up being), and future NCAA BB payouts of that stupid 6 year rolling average. We aren't going to share that money with anyone. It's WSU's and OSU's. Ours! Our Precious! Likewise, the MW has that same money (different $'s) out there. I guess that begs the question - does it vest with you guys or just vanish? If we do a reverse merger, the MW's benefits will come from future revenues, TV deals, etc. Just like all the other schools that moved around. Texas and Oklahoma aren't getting paid to join the SEC, they are signing on for more TV, etc. money going forward. Same with the Pac traitors.
We'll pay for new signs on the MW doors I suppose. There is just no downside for you all IMHO. The Pac-2 isn't God's gift, but hey we are not a downgrade for the MW. It would generate some buzz for sure.
Edit - think I'll take some of this back to my Board. The NCAA BB tournament future distributions has me wondering.....Peace.
Without a media contract, is there still an exit fee at the end of this school year?
I found one article that said there are no Pac-12 exit fees because no media contract at the end of July. I believe that is why those departing schools made their effective departure dates as August 1st or 2nd, 2024.
I most likely found the same articles, and that is why I asked the question. On the other side, I also found articles that said it was a $10 million exit fee which is nothing compared to the ACC.
I know the Coloradoan newspaper said there was no exit fee for Colorado. But I can't find any articles saying specifically the Pac-12 schools have an exit fee. When the Pac-2 settled after three months of litigation with the Pac-10 there was no mention of exit fees. During the litigation they discussed forfeiture of future revenues that was close to the $10 million you mentioned but I don't believe OSU and WSU went for that ridiculous amount. To be honest I haven't seen what was agreed upon since I can't find that agreement in the interwebs.
Yeah I just googled it and saw no fees for the traitorous 10. This Wilner guy (link below) is pretty connected. So what's with the MW? Doesn't your media deal expire next year? Is the exit fee untied from media $?
Mailbag: Desperation, thy names are Stanford and Cal; an ACC power play(?); Pac-12 had no Luck and more
The Cardinal and Bears appear ready to lock up their media rights with the ACC until 2036 and take reduced revenue payments.
www.mercurynews.com
Expires before the start of the 2026 season. More than likely they will begin media negotiations way before then kind of what the Pac-12 did. We don't have the luxury to be too demanding in wanting $50 million dollars. So we will take the best offer.Yeah I just googled it and saw no fees for the traitorous 10. This Wilner guy (link below) is pretty connected. So what's with the MW? Doesn't your media deal expire next year? Is the exit fee untied from media $?
Mailbag: Desperation, thy names are Stanford and Cal; an ACC power play(?); Pac-12 had no Luck and more
The Cardinal and Bears appear ready to lock up their media rights with the ACC until 2036 and take reduced revenue payments.
So at least for the next two seasons we are tied to the exit fees. What made our exit fees worse (higher) is the Scheduling Agreement with the Pac-2. Our one year notice exit fee will now be closer to $20 million. Thanks for the extra money you gave us. We appreciate it. It still sucks we don't get to play WSU even if the agreement is extended for a 2nd year.
WTH did we give the MW to bump the fee? Yeah it does suck if we aren't on the 2nd year schedule with UNLV. Who came up with that?
Anyway, it's Feb now. Things will clear up a lot in 6 months. I hope.
From the $18 million the Pac-2 gave the MWC for the scheduling agreement each school gets $1 million dollars. That money is being applied to the total revenue distribution for each school which normally involves media revenue and NCAA Tourney revenue. That total revenue distribution is part of the formula to determine exit fee. The last distribution to each MWC school was close (approximate) to $6 million dollars which is why the number $17 million dollars was being thrown around as the amount due with one year notice. The formula is annual revenue x 3. With the $1 million dollars from the agreement added to that $6 million you now have $7 million as annual revenue multiplied by 3. My numbers are approximate but it will be more than $20 million but under $21 million for our exit fee.
As for why we aren't playing you the next two years is because the teams selected were selected in the agreement. This coming season home games for you will then become your away games the second season of the agreement. The first season away games become your home games the second season. We got OSU on our schedule but missed out on WSU.
I assume that the $18 million covers both years? And I wonder if game guarantees go away. Seems like a lot, to be honest.....but hey, at least we have a schedule.
Just for 1 year. Looks like I was incorrect on the amount as I see it is $14 million not $18 for the first year. Still $1 million to each MWC school which impact our exit fees. Second year costs are lower. Per the agreement:
Specifically these are the first year costs:
o $2 million to the MWC for administrative fees.
o $9 million to the MWC for the 6 Pac-2 home games. ($1.5 million per home game x 2 schools (OSU and WSU))
o $3 million to the MWC for a General Participation Fee.
If the Pac-2 decides to play a second year the cost will be:
o $9 million to the MWC for the 6 Pac-2 home games.
The only other costs to the Pac-2 I see in the agreement would be termination fees and what I would call poaching fees. Should we get to that then we can discuss that later.
Geezus - who the F negotiated that for the Pac-2? $1.5 million for our home games? Shit we could get Michigan at home for that (well maybe not but you get the idea). And we get -0- for the away games?
Don't get me wrong guys - I want the (reverse) merger, but fer Gawdsakes. $2m for admin fees? to admin what? This is, IMHO, just another example of how F-ed up the Pac-2 leadership is.
Meister - hope you don't mind me sharing this over on my site (I'll attribute it to Bullmastiff
)P.S. and thanks for the info!
No problem. I actually found the link to the agreement from Cougar Lair which someone found from a news media website called OregonLive.com. Here is the link: https://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/...-schools-could-exceed-50-million-in-fees.htmlGeezus - who the F negotiated that for the Pac-2? $1.5 million for our home games? Shit we could get Michigan at home for that (well maybe not but you get the idea). And we get -0- for the away games?
Don't get me wrong guys - I want the (reverse) merger, but fer Gawdsakes. $2m for admin fees? to admin what? This is, IMHO, just another example of how F-ed up the Pac-2 leadership is.
Meister - hope you don't mind me sharing this over on my site (I'll attribute it to Bullmastiff
P.S. and thanks for the info!
Similar threads
