Mailbag: Metrics for Pac-12 expansion candidates, and how Washington State and OSU should proceed
The Hotline mailbag publishes weekly. Send questions to pac12hotline@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.
Should the Pac-12 use athletic department budgets as a metric for the reverse merger with the Mountain West? Were budgets or media value the primary reason Washington State and Oregon State got left behind? — @nickbeatty72
In a few days, the Cougars and Beavers will officially be adrift. The 10 departing schools are set to join their new conferences on Aug. 2, leaving the ‘Pac-2’ with about nine months to chart a path forward.
Their NCAA grace period expires in the summer of 2026. But two momentous, interconnected issues must be resolved well before that point: Identifying a conference home; and signing a media rights agreement for that conference.
Coincidentally, the Mountain West’s media deal expires in the summer of 2026, meaning its members must decide by next spring (or early summer) if they plan to remain together or join with WSU and OSU in some configuration.
Granted, athletic department budgets reflect revenue, and revenue is a function of competitive success and brand appeal. But budget size should be a secondary consideration for WSU and OSU if they attempt a reverse merger with schools from the Mountain West — just as it was a secondary consideration in the process that led to the Cougars and Beavers getting left behind.
Realignment is all about media valuation. Why? Because the networks control the largest stockpile of untapped cash.
Schools across major college football rely on three revenue buckets for their annual budgets: ticket sales, fundraising and the conference distributions based on media deals with the networks.
Revenue doesn’t flow evenly. Some schools rely more heavily on ticket sales. Others have an outsized dependence on conference distributions, which can account for roughly 40 percent of the annual intake.
The end result: Washington State and Oregon State should evaluate potential expansion candidates based on media revenue. Which MW schools carry above-average valuations (relative to others within the MW)?
We don’t have access to the Fox and CBS metrics, but San Diego State, Fresno State and Boise State are likely atop the list. The next tier probably includes Air Force, Colorado State and UNLV in some order.
Beyond that, the Hotline isn’t convinced any MW schools would be value-adds for a rebuilt Pac-12.
Identifying the right schools is only the first step, of course. Luring them into the conference is another matter entirely.
How long will it take for the 12-team College Football Playoff to evolve into a 16-team format? And will it include all the current conferences, or just the Power Four? — @MarcSheehan006
This issue is framed by the CFP’s existing contract with ESPN, which has two seasons remaining. The earliest expansion point is the 2026-27 competition season.
Commissioners of the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC already have discussed the next iteration but are committed to letting the 12-team format unfold this fall before they finalize any changes.
One option, of course, is to stick with 12 participants for the rest of the decade. But the Hotline views a move to either 14 or 16 teams in 2026 as more likely.
Once ESPN, the commissioners and the schools have a taste of the 12-team format and the interest generated in the sport writ large, they will formalize an expansion plan. Because when it comes to postseason (in any major sport), more is usually viewed as better.
And at that point, why bother with 14? Just go straight to 16 for the 2026 season and be done with it.
As for the inclusion piece, don’t discount the possibility of the Power Four removing the automatic bid for the highest-ranked team in the Group of Five in order to create an additional at-large berth for one of their own.
However, that step would risk a lawsuit by the American, Mountain West, etc., and for that reason, we view an exclusionary move as unlikely.
Any concerns with the future of college football media rights? The NFL is looking to opt-out of its media deal in 2029. Will that impact the SEC, Big Ten and others? — @TreySwaggart2
We cannot ignore the behemoth that is the NFL. But in theory, the top tier of college football will continue to receive barrels of network cash well into the 2030s.
Defining that top tier is another matter, and it could very well shrink over time.
Whether it’s ESPN or Fox, Apple or Amazon, the major media companies will pay a premium for the biggest brands and the best matchups. But the value of middle-level football programs in all four power conferences will diminish from one contract cycle to the next.
By the time 2029 arrives and the Big Ten steps to the negotiating table for a new rights deal, the sport’s financial structure could look markedly different than it does today.
In our view, the blue bloods will refuse to subsidize everyone else, and unequal revenue sharing will become the norm.
Michigan will receive more than Minnesota; Georgia will collect a bigger check than South Carolina. Once that point arrives, the sport will effectively have a super league.
Has the Pac-12 figured out the broadcast teams for the CW games? Are we going to be hearing some familiar voices? — @AmbitiousCoug
The CW is paying for the content and therefore makes the call on announcing teams.
Earlier this week, the network issued the following news release:
“The CW’s lead broadcast crew for ACC and select Pac-12 games will consist of veteran broadcaster Thom Brennaman alongside booth analyst Max Browne and sideline reporter Treavor Scales …
“Pac-12 games on The CW will be called by hall-of-fame play-by-play announcer Ted Robinson, booth analyst Chase Daniel and sideline reporter Nigel Burton.”
Pac-12 fans should be reasonably happy with this outcome. Browne, Robinson and Burton are extremely familiar with the Washington State and Oregon State rosters and should provide plenty of context during their broadcasts.
Why did Arizona State president Michael Crow spend $134 million generated by the Facilities District funds on the construction of an ice hockey arena for men’s hockey? Should that money have been more wisely spent on ASU’s two struggling revenue generating sports? — @TerryTerry79
We can’t confirm that cash from the Facilities District covered the entire $134 million needed to build Mullett Arena, but the specifics don’t matter. The university paid for it.
The 5,000-seat arena hosts a variety of events, including concerts and the Phoenix Suns’ G League team, plus several ASU sports. Crow didn’t spend $134 million on a single team, and he fully expects revenue from an array of events to eventually justify the cash outlay.
That said, Desert Financial Arena, home of men’s basketball, is 50 years old and an enduring symbol of Crow’s refusal to support the program at the level needed to thrive.
It’s an embarrassment.
As the Hotline opined in April:
“The facility opened in the same year (1974) as Packard Stadium, the Sun Devils’ baseball venue. While the former remains in regular use by numerous ASU sports … the latter was permanently closed a decade ago. The entirety of (Bobby) Hurley’s nine-year tenure in Tempe has unfolded since ASU shut down Packard for good.”
How many games will USC have an advantage at quarterback over its opponents? Even though Miller Moss is new (as a starter), it feels like a down year for QBs for the rest of the Big Ten, too. — @Yung__Jehovah
Moss was terrific in the Holiday Bowl (six touchdown passes), but will that performance eventually be seen as an outlier? Or is he capable of high-level play each week?
We expect inconsistency from the first-year starter.
Fortunately for the Trojans, the lineup of opposing quarterbacks is hardly daunting. Moss should be more effective than most and could be the equal of Washington’s Will Rogers, Penn State’s Drew Allar and LSU’s Garrett Nussmeier, although not Notre Dame’s Riley Leonard. (He won’t face the best in the Big Ten, Dillon Gabriel, because USC doesn’t play Oregon.)
Don’t be surprised if the Trojans have the better quarterback more often than not.
Then again, quarterback play relies heavily on the surrounding talent. If USC’s pass protection is weak, if the receivers aren’t open or if the running game is lacking, Moss will struggle.
Our hunch: The Trojans are better than they were last season on defense but worse than they were on offense with Caleb Williams in command. That combination will lead to a similar trajectory, a bevy of losses and mounting pressure on coach Lincoln Riley.
Will Cal’s success from the Jeff Tedford era ever be replicated? My dad went to Cal, and I grew up in the Bay Area. Other than a slice of his tenure, the Bears have always stunk. — @BoltokGroq
You asked the question so many Cal fans have pondered. Never say never, but we’re deeply skeptical the program can produce a slew of top-10 seasons during a condensed period of time.
Maybe the Bears will rise up once and finish 10-2 or 9-3. But could they reach that level three times in five years, or five times in eight years? That’s difficult to envision.
The sport has changed dramatically in the two decades (approximately) since the glory years of the Tedford era, and those changes have, without fail, made success in Berkeley more, not less, difficult.
In fact, you could not have scripted a more challenging series of NCAA policy changes for top academic schools in the power conferences.
Cal isn’t alone. The landscape is equally challenging for Stanford, Vanderbilt and Northwestern and a handful of others.
When it comes to football media days, which of the former Pac-12 teams made the best impression and which maybe should have been more prepared? — @brycetacoma
In the interest of full disclosure, please know the Hotline did not attend the Big 12 or ACC events, but we watched the coaches during their news conferences and followed all the relevant reports.
For the most part, everyone looked ready for the moment. (Oregon’s Dan Lanning was particularly smooth at the podium Thursday at the Big Ten’s event in Indianapolis.)
The glaring exception was UCLA’s DeShaun Foster, who struggled through his opening statement — to put it kindly — and was wholly ill-prepared for his task.
Foster is a rookie head coach who spent very little time with the media as an assistant and is not naturally comfortable with public speaking.
But responsibility for his podium woes falls on the Bruins’ administration, particularly the communications team, which should have equipped Foster with talking points — and made sure he rehearsed them ahead of time.
Substantively, the situation means absolutely nothing. It was an unfortunate few minutes that will have zero impact on UCLA’s prospects for the season.
But we wonder if an ill-prepared head coach will come to symbolize a program that isn’t ready for life in the Big Ten.