Breaking Down the Key Elements of Pac-12 Realignment

The Pac-10 held its press conference today to announce the future of the Pac-12. There are really three issues that are most important.

I’m curious to hear your thoughts. Are you happy with this? Would you have preferred the zipper alignment?

Divisional Alignment

What: With Utah and Colorado added to the conference in 2011, the Pac-12 will have North and South divisions.

Notable: California and Stanford will be allowed to maintain their rivalry with USC and UCLA on a yearly basis.

Winners: This isn’t so much about the winners as it is the losers. And in this case, the Northwest schools clearly made the sacrifice for the betterment of the conference

Reaction: I say “betterment of the conference” because I agree with Larry Scott about the branding benefits of a North-South split. I think an unfair concession was made to the California schools, but it’s one of those things that happens. The most influential have a way of getting what they want.

I don’t think Oregon loses that much here as compared to say Washington State. Missing a southern California road trip every other year isn’t going to derail the program. I just don’t like that two schools within the same division are being given an extra advantage, however small it may be.

Clearly, the split is advantageous to Oregon in the present when you strictly focus on the competitive balance. The Ducks are a clear alpha-dog of the North. These things are cyclical, of course, but Oregon’s future potential to play for Pac-10 titles looks bright.

Revenue Sharing

What:All schools will share media rights revenues equally. USC and UCLA are given a $2 million surplus until a threshold of $170 million is reached at which point revenue is equally split.

Winners: Everyone other than USC and UCLA. I’m sure the revenue issue had a lot to do with USC getting to keep its California rivalries intact. They’re used to getting a larger share of the pie, so having to share it is a concession their part. But don’t cry for them. Every school is about to get a lot richer when new TV contracts are negotiated.

Curiosity: I’m not sure how UCLA merits a surplus. To the naked eye, it doesn’t seem they would have more TV apperances than, say, Oregon. I’m sure there is solid data to back it up, but it would be nice to have some clarification.

Reaction: Revenue sharing is a win for the conference. Look at the SEC and NFL. Both are thriving on equal revenue sharing systems. It takes some sacrifice for the media-rich teams, but it’s better for the success of the conference overall as it generally promotes better competition from top to bottom.

Pac-12 Championship Game

What: The title game will be played on the home field of whichever divisional champion has the better Pac-12 record.

Winners: Any team with a good home-field advantage.

Reaction: As an Oregon fan, you have to be ecstatic. The possibility of an extra home game in any given year is exciting.

There is some concern that, say, a Washington State could host the title game with a mere 30,000 seat stadium to showcase the conference. But on the flip-side, a neutral site would run the risk of being a low-energy, corporate-heavy borefest (I’m looking at you ACC).

The home-field advantage model provides the conference with assurances that the game is always viable and exciting on a national level. It also provides a neat incentive in the divisional races that is absent in any other 12 team conference.

By rewarding the better team with home-field advantage, the Pac-12 also has a better chance to protect a nationally contending team from an upset.