ESPN: In letter, Pac-12's George Kliavkoff cites 'significant' financial, mental health concerns on UCLA move to Big Ten

Gophers7NatTitlesBadgers0

New Orleans 2020
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
8,160
Reaction score
1,674
Points
113
This is the kind of lack of intellect I would expect from right wingnuts.
Being confused by statements that have absolutely nothing to do with my comment is a lack of intellect! Got it! Thanks for setting me straight!

I think any reasonable person agrees there's a crisis of leadership on the west coast and California in particular. If you think people who think like the PAC12 commissioner are rational, you're in the minority.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
10,864
Reaction score
2,095
Points
113
An alternative to having to “replace” UCLA (eg with Colorado, Oregon, etc) is just stay at 15 with only adding USC.

15 teams 9 conf games, 4 locked in rivalries every year, means you cycle through the remaining 10 teams every 2 years with the remaining 5 conf games.

Probably keeps the $$ per school per year the same, instead of adding another mouth to feed just to have even number of members.
 

USAF

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
6,288
Reaction score
7,148
Points
113
I think any reasonable person agrees there's a crisis of leadership on the west coast and California in particular. If you think people who think like the PAC12 commissioner are rational, you're in the minority.
"Any reasonable person?"

Do tell.
 

noamfromm

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
2,516
Reaction score
1,543
Points
113
An alternative to having to “replace” UCLA (eg with Colorado, Oregon, etc) is just stay at 15 with only adding USC.

15 teams 9 conf games, 4 locked in rivalries every year, means you cycle through the remaining 10 teams every 2 years with the remaining 5 conf games.

Probably keeps the $$ per school per year the same, instead of adding another mouth to feed just to have even number of members.
Probably requires USC to find a rivalry week partner themselves for years in which they don't play Notre Dame.
 



mngolf

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
422
Reaction score
272
Points
63
An alternative to having to “replace” UCLA (eg with Colorado, Oregon, etc) is just stay at 15 with only adding USC.

15 teams 9 conf games, 4 locked in rivalries every year, means you cycle through the remaining 10 teams every 2 years with the remaining 5 conf games.

Probably keeps the $$ per school per year the same, instead of adding another mouth to feed just to have even number of members.
I just don't think they would leave it like that. They can easily fill with one more, just a matter of whom. Keep in mind they want more inventory to cover the new contract.
 


GopherWeatherGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
12,616
Reaction score
8,514
Points
113
They potentially have to deal with it already in Boulder, Salt Lake City, Seattle, Pullman and even potentially in Eugene or Corvallis.

No biggie, IMO. Heck, even the Bay Area can be chilly in November.

Those places are all still quite a bit milder than Minneapolis, especially near the Pacific coast. Boulder would be the most comparable, but their November is more like our October.

Just looking at last November, Boulder's coldest high was 51. Minneapolis' was 26 and had 10 days where it didn't get out of the 20s and 30s. And both cities were above average temperatures overall for the month mainly due to the warm start as you mentioned earlier.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
21,470
Reaction score
5,827
Points
113
I think there is something to the acclimatization argument but with some warm up/exercise the body adapts. It’s the wind chill/sub zero temps where things get interesting. Heat is much worse IMHO, and harder to adapt to.

Both teams will be suffering on a windy cold November morning, pretty much equally. Shady side or sunny side was a thing for awhile.
 



Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
4,941
Reaction score
2,894
Points
113
I think there is something to the acclimatization argument but with some warm up/exercise the body adapts. It’s the wind chill/sub zero temps where things get interesting. Heat is much worse IMHO, and harder to adapt to.

Both teams will be suffering on a windy cold November morning, pretty much equally. Shady side or sunny side was a thing for awhile.
Agreed. I would guess even Bruin or Trojan players would rather play a game with the temp in mid 30s than high 80s or warmer (all other factors equal).

If the regular season stretches or 1st Round BCS playoff games on home sites go into December, then weather be an issue.
 

Word

Eats difficult conversations
Joined
Jun 7, 2009
Messages
10,777
Reaction score
6,330
Points
113
I think there is something to the acclimatization argument but with some warm up/exercise the body adapts. It’s the wind chill/sub zero temps where things get interesting. Heat is much worse IMHO, and harder to adapt to.

Both teams will be suffering on a windy cold November morning, pretty much equally. Shady side or sunny side was a thing for awhile.
I disagree but I think it's more psychological than it is physiological. I've even seen Big Ten teams (where their climate isn't drastically different like California's) come here and look thoroughly discouraged to be playing in frigid weather. I think our cold weather will be playing head games with them.
 

GVLCGopherFan

Active member
Joined
Nov 7, 2019
Messages
236
Reaction score
212
Points
43
I have been to 4 UCLA games and a boxing match at the Rose Bowl. Never had a problem with the view, even near the top/corners, even when it's full. I am average height, at best.

Great place to see a game. My only issue is traffic nightmare getting out of the place.
I guess I wasn't totally convinced of the flat stadium theory anyway.
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
4,941
Reaction score
2,894
Points
113
I disagree but I think it's more psychological than it is physiological. I've even seen Big Ten teams (where their climate isn't drastically different like California's) come here and look thoroughly discouraged to be playing in frigid weather. I think our cold weather will be playing head games with them.
I will be curious if they make the West Coast teams play at 11am Central/Noon Eastern which would be 9am Pacific. That to me would have a greater potential impact then playing in games in cool temps.

Seems like it would be foolish, since this is all about TV and would be harder to get eyeballs on the games that early.
 



disco

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
2,099
Reaction score
1,007
Points
113
Slight political comment (from a pretty liberal guy): the whole climate thing is absolutely grasping at straws. Period. End of story. It's not like their teams are taking solar powered trains up to Seattle and Eugene.

I was also extremely surprised to see that the salaries at UCLA are that much lower than in the B1G. I was having a conversation last Friday at a neighborhood get together with an Iowa graduate/fan who made some comment about how much tougher the league will be with USC/UCLA. I said that yes, USC was and could again be a major power, but UCLA will be like adding another Indiana or Illinois. They aren't a major program at this point. They don't even have a 100 yard practice field. They play 26 miles away from campus (and in LA traffic, that's a hike).

If they moved to SoFi, maybe that would help, but an on-campus stadium, where they control revenue etc. would be the best fit for them. I was going to suggest they play in Carson, where the Chargers played in the interim, but they'd be a sub-tenant to the MLS team, so that probably wouldn't work either.
 

Goldmember

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
2,496
Reaction score
715
Points
113
The bolded is just not correct.

It has already been confirmed by legal counsel that the UC Regents do indeed hold legal authority, according to state law and the UC bylaws, to block UCLA's move to the Big Ten, if they choose to do that.

The question is really if they would "dare" choose to do that.
Much like one has the legal authority to cut their own nose off to spite their own face.
 

Gophergrandpa

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
2,659
Points
113
I think he's seen the low numbers that networks are offering the PAC12 for their new deal and has become desperate. And if for some bizarre reason UCLA ended up staying then Oregon/Wash would replace them in 2 seconds. He's f'd either way.
UCLA out and Stanford in as replacement; add Washington and Oregon. Put Nebraska in new West Division. Thank you.
 

Cedar Rapids Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
610
Reaction score
433
Points
63
Slight political comment (from a pretty liberal guy): the whole climate thing is absolutely grasping at straws. Period. End of story. It's not like their teams are taking solar powered trains up to Seattle and Eugene.

I was also extremely surprised to see that the salaries at UCLA are that much lower than in the B1G. I was having a conversation last Friday at a neighborhood get together with an Iowa graduate/fan who made some comment about how much tougher the league will be with USC/UCLA. I said that yes, USC was and could again be a major power, but UCLA will be like adding another Indiana or Illinois. They aren't a major program at this point. They don't even have a 100 yard practice field. They play 26 miles away from campus (and in LA traffic, that's a hike).

If they moved to SoFi, maybe that would help, but an on-campus stadium, where they control revenue etc. would be the best fit for them. I was going to suggest they play in Carson, where the Chargers played in the interim, but they'd be a sub-tenant to the MLS team, so that probably wouldn't work either.
Very well written and I personally didn't see anything political (from a conservative guy).
 

GopherWeatherGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
12,616
Reaction score
8,514
Points
113
Agreed. I would guess even Bruin or Trojan players would rather play a game with the temp in mid 30s than high 80s or warmer (all other factors equal).

If the regular season stretches or 1st Round BCS playoff games on home sites go into December, then weather be an issue.

You think people would rather spend time outside on a 30º day over an 80º day?
 

Ski U Mah Gopher

Member of the Tribe
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
7,321
Reaction score
574
Points
113
The bolded is just not correct.

It has already been confirmed by legal counsel that the UC Regents do indeed hold legal authority, according to state law and the UC bylaws, to block UCLA's move to the Big Ten, if they choose to do that.

The question is really if they would "dare" choose to do that.
Or can it be that the UC Regents are trying to leverage the Big Ten to take Cal?
 




Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
10,864
Reaction score
2,095
Points
113
Slight political comment (from a pretty liberal guy): the whole climate thing is absolutely grasping at straws. Period. End of story. It's not like their teams are taking solar powered trains up to Seattle and Eugene.

I was also extremely surprised to see that the salaries at UCLA are that much lower than in the B1G.
I was having a conversation last Friday at a neighborhood get together with an Iowa graduate/fan who made some comment about how much tougher the league will be with USC/UCLA. I said that yes, USC was and could again be a major power, but UCLA will be like adding another Indiana or Illinois. They aren't a major program at this point. They don't even have a 100 yard practice field. They play 26 miles away from campus (and in LA traffic, that's a hike).

If they moved to SoFi, maybe that would help, but an on-campus stadium, where they control revenue etc. would be the best fit for them. I was going to suggest they play in Carson, where the Chargers played in the interim, but they'd be a sub-tenant to the MLS team, so that probably wouldn't work either.
And when you factor in the cost of living in California -- that is not a political statement, just fact -- they're that much worse.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
10,864
Reaction score
2,095
Points
113
Or can it be that the UC Regents are trying to leverage the Big Ten to take Cal?
Of course.

I think that was the original goal, and maybe they're still trying.

But here's the thing: I don't think there's a chance in hell that the Big Ten and its TV partners didn't already do all the due diligence on what the TV contract numbers would look like for all various sorts of permutations of adding addition PAC members. All the way from just merging the two conferences, and likely down to just adding USC.

It would be absolutely in all parties interest to have done that.


And so, they could've added any other PAC schools at the time they announced USC & UCLA. But didn't.

That to me says that none of the others moved the needle like USC did, to the point where it was "the answer is yes, right now!"


They're trying to wait out Notre Dame. That's the real major fish left in the pond, save for ACC schools that are locked away for more years.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
10,864
Reaction score
2,095
Points
113
Much like one has the legal authority to cut their own nose off to spite their own face.
Well .... yeah!

You could easily end up being correct, that UCLA is in the conf come 2024. I just don't think it's a zero percent chance, for the reason of the legal authority of the UC regents. That's all I'm sayin
:cool:
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
10,864
Reaction score
2,095
Points
113
I just don't think they would leave it like that. They can easily fill with one more, just a matter of whom. Keep in mind they want more inventory to cover the new contract.
Inventory is a valid point. For sure.

It would be up to the TV partners. Unquestionably, the absolute total value of the TV contract would decrease, because it would only be for 15 teams worth instead of 16 teams worth. As you're saying.

I'm just saying that the worth per school would be the same or similar, because you're only dividing by 15 instead of 16.


But at the end of the day, it's what the TV partners agree to pay for, that matters.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
10,864
Reaction score
2,095
Points
113
Probably requires USC to find a rivalry week partner themselves for years in which they don't play Notre Dame.
True but PAC would also have an odd number at 11, so would think that the California schools would continue to do the scheduling dance that they all do in order to make room on the schedule for:
USC-Notre Dame, Stanford-Notre Dame, USC-UCLA, Cal-Stanford, USC-Stanford, Cal-UCLA.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
10,864
Reaction score
2,095
Points
113
I’m not going to say your wrong, but I don’t think this is a slam dunk that the regents can stop this. Sure, an attorney that represents the regents claims they have the power to do so, but I’ve read other articles that were linked from Cal and UCLA forums which reference other attorneys and school sources which say the regents don’t have much ground to stand on to stop this. If the regents have the stomach to challenge this, a court will ultimately decide who has the most standing.

One thing I do find interesting, and I’m not saying it’s a fact, is that I keep reading that if UCLA does leave without Cal, that UCLA may be forced to give some of the money earned from the Big10 to Cal to limit the financial damage they suffer from UCLA leaving the PAC-12. Seems ludicrous to me but every time I’ve read that, I see nothing from anyone disputing that the regents could actually take that step. Such a move though would seem to fit right in with the state of California. Now I don’t know what percentage of dollars they could/would be forced to give Cal, but if it’s as much as half, then why would this move to the Big10 be worth it to UCLA, given the increased costs that are going to come with joining the Big10? It’s probably all destined for court.

I wouldn’t be broken up if UCLA didn’t come. I think I’d rather have Utah, Oregon or Washington.
This is the thing in question: https://policy.ucop.edu/_files/da/da1058.html

Note the last bullet point.

A lawyer can easily argue it either way. "It clearly says athletic agreements!" But on the other hand, "It clearly says 'except coaching contracts'. So you're telling me that the school switching its entire conference, for all sports, coaches, and student-athletes, is something that the Regents wouldn't care about, but they do care about reviewing and approving coaching contracts?? Come on!"


Have heard a similar thing you're talking about in the 2nd paragraph. I would call that the "UC regents lost the fight, but stabbed them in the eye on the way down" scenario.


Assuming Stanford won't come without Notre Dame, then I'd take Washington of the remaining, if forced to replace UCLA.
 






Top Bottom