Mailbag: TV options for WSU and OSU, how the ACC will shape realignment, Big Ten half shares and more
The Hotline mailbag publishes weekly. Send questions to wilner@bayareanewsgroup.com and include ‘mailbag’ in the subject line. Or hit me on Twitter/X: @WilnerHotline
Please note: Some questions have been edited for clarity and brevity.
If Washington State and Oregon State are able to revive the Pac-8/Pac-10/Pac-12 to their liking, which network is most likely going to end up with the media rights? — @MarcSheehan006
Our hunch: The rebuilt conference would have multiple network partners.
In this scenario, Washington State and Oregon State would reconstruct the conference with the top football schools in the Mountain West or, perhaps, the entire Mountain West.
Currently, Fox and CBS share the Mountain West media rights. We suspect one (and perhaps both) would be interested in renewing the deal, with WSU and OSU inventory added to the mix.
Add let’s not dismiss the possibility of The CW, which has a deal in place with the Pac-12 for the 2024 season, to extend and expand the relationship. The CW has (smartly) concluded that live sports are a money-maker for broadcast networks, with football atop the list.
It’s easy to envision a modest media rights deal for a rebuilt Pac-12 that features either Fox or CBS and The CW, which would make use of Pac-12 Enterprises’ production capabilities.
Details should emerge in the winter or spring, because the media deal is closely tied to the membership question.
The Mountain West agreement with Fox and CBS ends in the summer of 2026, coinciding with the expiration of the NCAA grace period allowing WSU and OSU to compete as a two-team conference.
In order to establish a new conference with a new media deal by the fall of 2026, some level of clarity is seemingly required by the spring of 2025.
Florida State and Clemson don’t seem to have a landing spot if they leave the ACC. Is it possible their presidents are conspiring with peers at North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia — and maybe some of the top schools in the Big 12 — to form a new conference that’s equal to, or better than, the Big Ten and SEC? — Richard F
We don’t see this as a realistic scenario for a bevy of reasons. And if it somehow materialized, the combined league would not come close to matching the SEC or Big Ten for football brand power.
But the question provides the Hotline with a gateway to address several related realignment issues.
So here we go …
The video player is currently playing an ad. You can skip the ad in 5 sec with a mouse or keyboard
• Media value drives changes in conference affiliation — that has been proven time and again, decade after decade. The networks have the cash, and the schools are addicted to the cash because of a faulty financial model that requires two profitable sports to support 12 or 16 money-losing sports.
And the networks (primarily Fox and ESPN) made their preferences clear during the last round of realignment. With a few exceptions, the most valuable media brands in college football are concentrated in two conferences, the Big Ten and SEC.
That consolidation allows Fox and ESPN to operate more efficiently. Why would either network pay more for the best of the ACC and Big 12 when most of the schools in that hypothetical conference aren’t worth a dollar more than they are currently receiving?
• In their comments and inactions, the Big Ten and SEC have shown no interest in adding the top schools in the ACC.
We don’t believe that for a second, and here’s why: The schools aren’t available.
It’s easy to deny, reject and refute interest in something you can’t have. And in this case, it’s also smart business: The presidents and commissioners of the Big Ten and SEC want to avoid charges of tortious interference.
But if the ACC fractures and the top media brands become available, the calculation would change instantly for the Big Ten and SEC — and for their media partners, Fox and ESPN, respectively.
We suspect a bidding war would erupt over North Carolina, with Clemson and Florida State as the secondary selections. And don’t forget about Georgia Tech, which has always struck the Hotline as a possible Big Ten target. (Great school, Atlanta media market, fertile recruiting ground.)
View everything as a Fox executive would assess the situation: The network has no broadcast affiliation with schools in Georgia and North Carolina, nor is it connected to the top options in the Sunshine State (Florida State, Florida and Miami).
That’s 54 million people, or 18 million TV homes (roughly) that could pay in-market subscription rates for the Big Ten Network.
• The next round of realignment depends on the ACC.
If the conference holds together through the lawsuits (filed by Clemson and Florida State), the current Power Four structure should hold until the end of the decade, when the Big Ten returns to the negotiating table for a media rights contract.
If the ACC breaks apart, myriad outcomes are possible — from the formation of a 40-team super league to an expanded, 24-team Big 12 to a consolidation of the ACC to a rebirth of the Pac-12 (with Stanford and Cal).
Essentially, the ACC has replaced the Pac-12 as the most likely epicenter of the next rupture.
It’s the same story playing out on the opposite coast, with everything pointing to a massive reshaping of major college football over the next eight or 10 years.
I know the former Pac-12 bowl partnerships are mostly staying intact for the 2024-25 seasons, but what about the future? Any idea what the new bowl affiliations are likely to look like? — Jon Joseph
What we know about the college football postseason beyond the 2025-26 academic year can be summed up in one sentence: ESPN has an agreement to broadcast the College Football Playoff for about $1.3 billion annually.
We don’t know the format for the CFP starting with the 2026 season or the number of teams, and we don’t know the structure of the 30-something bowls not connected to the CFP.
Geography will play a role because bowl economics place a premium on ticket sales and hotel bookings. Cost and distance typically move in lockstep.
Also, we should assume that any expansion of the CFP beyond 12 teams would undermine the quality and credibility of the bowls outside the playoff structure.
Beyond that, the shape of the entire postseason is anyone’s guess. It wouldn’t make sense for the Holiday Bowl, for example, to match South Carolina against Minnesota. But at this point, anything is possible.
What makes UCLA a full-share member of the Big Ten while Washington and Oregon receive half shares? The Los Angeles market? The basketball program? The Bruins aren’t as successful in football as UW or Oregon, and isn’t that the main reason the Big Ten accepted these four Pac-12 schools? — Scott O
The marketplace made the determination for Fox; Fox told the Big Ten how much it would pay; and the Big Ten made the offers.
USC and UCLA went in together as full-share members in 2022 because of the L.A. market, the brand value of USC football and the Fox valuation model.
At the time, the network simply did not believe Oregon and Washington were worth full shares (roughly $65 million over the contract term).
And that never changed.
What changed was the motivation in Seattle and Eugene, where acceptance of half-share membership became vastly more palatable after former Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff placed a suboptimal deal on the table.
Now that California is split into two different power conferences, with the Los Angeles schools in the Big Ten and the Bay Area schools in the ACC, do you think Cal will shine? — @Moneyline_RAY
Quite the opposite, in fact. The Hotline views an ACC existence as fraught for the Bears (and Stanford, for that matter).
Yes, losing the longstanding connection to L.A. is central to our conclusion, as are the travel logistics.
But the conference change coincides with a vastly more daunting challenge for the Bay Area schools: the economic revolution in college sports.
The institutional ethos on each campus is all wrong for the era of unlimited transfers, revenue sharing and NIL.
Had the Pac-12 remained intact, Cal and Stanford would be hard-pressed to compete in the emerging environment. As members of a conference on the opposite coast, their task is next-level.
How would you rank the top 10 most successful college basketball programs in the West regardless of conference, from 2000 to today? — @Wazzucoug1996
Honestly, I’m not sure there are 10 worthy candidates.
Over the timeframe above, only five schools in the Mountain and Pacific Time Zone have reached the Final Four.
If we start the top-10 list with that quintet, the order probably looks something like this: Arizona, Gonzaga, UCLA, Oregon and San Diego State.
Add Stanford, Saint Mary’s and Brigham Young, and you have eight.
Then pick two of the following: Utah, USC, Arizona State, Washington and New Mexico.
The quality options are few.
At what point do fans give up and walk away? All of this upheaval has destroyed rivalries, etc. It’s all a big money grab for some schools but leaves a substantial amount of the country out. — @WebGuy223
Major college football is increasingly Darwinian.
The rules of the road favor the schools with deep tradition, massive fan bases and top-tier TV ratings. And most of those schools are in college towns across the South and Midwest, not in the pro markets of the East and West Coasts.
(Also, many of the schools in the Big Ten and SEC are flourishing because of their neighborhood, not because they have earned A-level classification.)
Another factor to consider: The regions where college football is king are the regions with the greatest number of 300-pound offensive and defensive linemen, who are necessary to win at the highest level.
Winning at the highest levels helps establish tradition and expand fan bases and generate TV ratings.
It’s a virtuous circle across the Big Ten and SEC footprints.
Others who are reporting that Washington State and Oregon State are negotiating with the Big 12 seem to be questioning the Hotline’s credibility. — @CelestialMosh
Let them question all they want — that’s all part of the social media machinery when it comes to realignment, the most difficult subject in college athletics to cover accurately.
Now, to be clear: My understanding is that the Cougars and Beavers are, in fact, in discussions with the Big 12 and ACC, but those discussions are limited to football scheduling for 2025 and beyond.
Joining the Big 12 isn’t an option for WSU and OSU. The Big 12 doesn’t want them, which is unfortunate but makes sense.
What has changed in the past year that would prompt the conference to reverse course on its membership strategy?
To spur ESPN and Fox to spend money they aren’t currently spending?
(Answer: Nothing has changed.)
That said, if the ACC implodes, the calculation changes — for both the ACC and, perhaps, the Big 12.
As long as the current conference structure exists, there is no path for the Cougars and Beavers into the Big 12 in the next few years.