The Hotline mailbag publishes weekly. Send questions to wilnerhotline@bayareanewsgroup.com and include ‘mailbag’ in the subject line. Or hit me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline
Some questions have been edited for clarity and brevity.
Given all the gripes with the current state of college football, what percentage chance would you give that by 2030, the original collection of Pac-12 schools will be back together in a conference? — Will D
Whatever the likelihood, the percentage is markedly higher today than it was before the ACC settlement announced earlier this week. The Hotline would hesitate to suggest that we expect the Pac-12 to reform, but the situation is fast approaching 50-50 territory.
However, there’s a caveat.
Actually, there are several caveats:
1. Whatever entity reforms, it probably won’t include “the original collection” of all 12 schools.
2. It won’t be up and running by 2030.
3. The likelihood of football being included is substantially less than 50 percent.
Let’s take the situation one step at a time, because there’s a lot to unpack.
First, a few words on the forces in play.
The settlement terms of the ACC lawsuits include a reduction in the cost to depart the conference that ladders down over time and reaches $75 million in 2030. Considering the massive dollars involved in conference realignment and media rights contracts, that’s a manageable figure for any school that has a better opportunity elsewhere.
As we outlined in a column that set a date for college football’s Doomsday Clock to strike midnight, there are five media rights contracts holding the industry in place: The Big Ten, Big 12, SEC, College Football Playoff and NCAA Tournament deals with their respective partners. Add the lowering of exit fees for ACC schools in 2030, and there are six in total. All six expire (or are greatly reduced) in the first half of the 2030s.
Additionally, the onset of the revenue-sharing era will undoubtedly serve as an extinction event. By that, we mean the following: A barrage of schools will, over time, decline to commit the resources necessary to compete at the highest level.
That figure is expected to be roughly $15 million starting in 2025-26, but it will climb as total revenues increase and doesn’t include the traditional (pure) NIL from outside athletic departments, which remains in place. All in all, the cost of a top-25 football roster seemingly will exceed $25 million by the end of the decade.
So the mechanisms exist for upheaval, but the timing is a bit unclear.
With the Big Ten’s media rights contract set to expire in the summer of 2030, any additional expansion (to 20 teams or more) must occur in the summer or fall of 2029.
However, that’s just the first step. The future forms of the other power conferences could take longer to play out, and the start date for the new structure might be several years later.
In other words: Decisions are likely to be made by the spring or summer of 2030, but the actual movement of schools could come in the 2032-34 window.
We fully expect football to be untethered from the other sports at that point. The money and logistics are unlike everything else, and the sooner it’s treated in that manner, the better for everyone.
It’s abundantly clear from watching the West Coast schools compete, and from listening to comments by USC’s Eric Musselman and UCLA’s Mick Cronin, that the travel is unsustainable for basketball and the Olympic sports.
Combine the why, when and how, and the end result is a major retrenchment in the early-to-mid 2030s — the return of regional conferences for sports other than football.
Will it include all the Pac-12 legacy schools? Probably not.
For one thing, the Four Corners fit reasonably well into the Big 12 geographically, aside from the trips to UCF, West Virginia and Cincinnati. They might not feel as compelled to remove their Olympic sports.
On the other hand, the travel could get worse for the West Coast schools in the Big Ten if the conference expands to the East Coast with North Carolina and one of the Florida schools.
And as we have written previously, Cal and Stanford will do everything possible to join the Big Ten in the event the ACC collapses. (With more wins on the field and better administrative leadership, they would have been in position to make that very leap in the summer of 2023.)
The Hotline has always viewed UCLA as the North Star in this post-realignment world. Nothing about life in the Big Ten works for the Bruins, except the money. Don’t be surprised if a regionalized conference emerges as the obvious solution for them by the end of the decade. And if UCLA reverts, others will follow.
Football’s inclusion in a reconfigured West Coast conference remains unlikely, unless either the Big Ten adds Cal and Stanford and forms a six-team division (the most sensible move) or a super league forms in the mid-2030s and features a western arm with eight or 10 schools.
Both of those outcomes feel more likely than the status quo.
Put another way: The ACC settlement has increased the chances of regionalized conferences, especially for the Olympic sports.
What arises on the West Coast might not replicate the former Pac-12, but it will be closer to the old version than what we have now.
Think about all the changes that have unfolded in college sports over the past five years, then consider this: The next five years might make that seem like amateur hour.
How happy would you say the former Pac-12 schools are in their new conference situations? Oregon won the Big Ten in football. Arizona State seems like a winner. Everyone else is less happy, right? And who is least happy? – Ken S
A word of advice: Don’t presume the level of contentment with the new conferences is tied exclusively to success on the field.
That’s an important piece, for sure, but the schools have a broader view of the matter that includes success in Olympic sports and basketball, event logistics and travel, the media rights aspect (start times, exposure and cash), the academic and cultural fit and conference management and governance.
(On that final matter, most schools are delighted after years of administrative woe at Pac-12 HQ.)
Competitively, the situation has played out as expected in the major sports, with Arizona State’s run to the Big 12 football title the unforeseen development.
Nobody should be surprised by the impact of the travel and time zone changes. The schools are getting exactly what they asked for, especially the six West Coast universities competing in the Big Ten and ACC.
Bottom line: None of the eight that departed in the summer of 2023 wanted to leave — they stuck around for 13 months precisely because they hoped the conference could remain intact.
Some are happier than others, but we have neither seen nor heard of comprehensive disgruntlement. They are making the best of a challenging situation.
We have been frustrated with ESPN’s basketball scheduling this year. It seems like every time we turn on ESPN for the start of an Arizona game, the previous game still has several minutes left. ESPN constantly moves the beginning of the Arizona game to a different one of their feeds, often one we don’t have access to. — Debbie N
That has been an issue all season, for sure, with the Wildcats’ matchup against ASU the latest example: Tipoff was at least 15 minutes later than scheduled, if we recall correctly.
The Hotline has not tracked the number of delayed starts, the average length of delay or the number of times the broadcasts begin on alternate feeds. (And that’s the case with all 10 former Pac-12 schools, not just Arizona.)
So the following explanation is more shooting-from-the-hip than rooted in data, but it strikes us that the schedule itself is part of the issue.
In the Pac-12, a huge percentage of weeknight games were either on the Pac-12 Networks or on Thursday, when the ACC, Big 12 and SEC are relatively quiet.
But those conferences play the bulk of their weeknight games on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, so Arizona’s games are often the back end of a doubleheader.
Then again, ESPN needs to adjust its broadcast windows to fit the reality: Two-hour basketball games are as common as three-hour football games.
Pac-12 Enterprises is continually mentioned as a sweet side piece in the rebuilt conference. But what is the real expectation as far as contributions to revenue and disbursements? Seems like it could be a major piece if operational costs aren’t wild. Is Octagon negotiating on its use with other entities? — @TonyOnly
There are two components to the Pac-12 Enterprises as a value proposition:
1) The role it could play in producing Pac-12 events for media partners once the conference enters its next chapter in the summer of 2026
2) The revenue it could generate producing events unaffiliated with the rebuilt Pac-12
Before the conference expanded in September, Pac-12 Enterprises agreed to produce a Colorado State football game. It also produced studio shows for the ACC Network and a Warriors exhibition game for NBC Bay Area.
Based on what we have gathered thus far, the profit margin isn’t huge. (Our guess: $10,000 per event.) The hope is to eventually generate material revenue for the schools as the streaming of professional and college sports becomes more widespread.
That’s an ancillary benefit, in our view. If the Pac-12 Enterprises plays a decisive role in securing a media rights agreement that offers the rebuilt conference satisfactory dollars and exposure — the exposure piece is vital considering the football teams are essentially auditioning for spots in the sport’s upper tier in the 2030s — then it will have accomplished its mission.
In light of the news of the Big Ten searching for a capital partner, any chance the Pac-12 will do the same? And what kind of money are we talking about here? — @CelestialMosh
Both the Big Ten and the Big 12 are examining the benefits of outside capital. We aren’t privy to the details, but keep in mind two matters:
— There is a difference between private capital and private equity. The former is more like a credit card than the latter, which is vastly more invasive in terms of ownership, management and ROI.
— There is a difference between the conference using outside cash and the schools themselves borrowing to fund department operations.
We don’t know how the Big Ten and Big 12 might structure their deals or even if they will consummate the relationships. But if they take the plunge, it won’t be for a few million dollars. It likely would be for tens, and probably hundreds of millions.
Everyone has considered, or is currently mulling, the use of outside capital. That includes the Pac-12. The economic pressures in the revenue-sharing era are so immense, conferences would be silly to not consider external support.
Our hunch is that, as with most matters involving the rebuilt Pac-12, clarity will come to the funding issue after the media rights agreement is locked in. (That should happen in the next six to eight weeks.)
The five schools leaving the Mountain West for the Pac-12 are suing over the exit fees. But reading the Pac-12 agreement, they agreed to the exact same exit fees (three times the annual payout). Can you explain the logic of that? — @NateJones2009
First, San Diego State and Fresno State are not plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed originally by Utah State and Colorado State, with Boise State later joining. It’s just those three.
Related Articles
CFB recruiting: The top out-of-state defensive targets for Pac-12 legacy schools
CFB’s Doomsday Clock: ACC settlement, realignment and a super league
Big 12 MBB power rankings: Houston on top as BYU stays hot
Best of West WBB: USC sweeps UCLA, Cal rises ahead of ACC tournament
Is the end approaching for Arizona State coach Bobby Hurley? It’s difficult to see a path forward
The logic is simply to pull the Mountain West into a costly process and hammer out a settlement for an amount less than what’s written into the conference contract.
Presidents avoid court trials like they are spinal meningitis; they are not fond of discovery.
And from what we have seen, the move by Utah State, Colorado State and Boise State has had the intended effect. The Pac-12 and Mountain West are considering mediation to settle the separate but related lawsuits over exit fees and the poaching penalty.
The total amount owed to the Mountain West is at least $150 million. If the mediation process knocks that down to $100 million, for example, it will have been worth the trouble — and the attorney fees.
Should we Cal fans be concerned that no formal announcement has been about Ron Rivera’s role in the football program? — @Olibbey1
A deal to bring Rivera on board is more likely than not and should be resolved by the end of this month. But the leak to the media in early February — by Rivera or his representation — was premature.
Clearly, he did not take Cal bureaucracy into account.
When and if the deal becomes official, the Bears will blast the news to the heavens. And they should: Rivera’s expertise in evaluating talent and managing rosters should help immensely.
Will the current struggles of TV media partners lead to havoc for the power conferences in the coming years? Cable and satellite companies are hemorrhaging millions of subscribers every year, and the streaming giants are struggling to grow. — @TerryTerry79
The situation is bleak, except for live sports. Well, live sports and breaking news.
Those are precious commodities in the media ecosystem and gaining value each year.
So yes, the subscriber losses are bad, but they would be much worse without A-level sports, and college football is an A-level sport.
The trajectory of the media distribution game is one of several unknowns as we assess the next iteration of college football. (Another: The extent to which revenue sharing creates a bifurcation on the competitive landscape.)
Our strong suspicion is that streaming will play a much larger role when the Big Ten and Big 12 negotiate new media deals in 2030 and 2031, respectively, but the broadcast networks will remain deeply engaged.
And don’t discount the value of exposure. At a certain level, the money doesn’t matter if consumers cannot see your content.
*** Send suggestions, comments and tips (confidentiality guaranteed) to wilnerhotline@bayareanewsgroup.com or call 408-920-5716
*** Follow me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline
