All Hokie, All the Time. Period. Presented by First Bank & Trust Company

B
Big12 guy OP
Jun 24, 2025 at 08:09 AM ET
It appears that the new PAC has finalized a deal
with CBS as a partner through 2030/31. CBS will air 3 football games, and 3 basketball games, and the conference championship game on their flagship channel and paramount. While it gives their top games good exposure, ir solidifies the PAC as a "G" conference. The amounts were not mentioned, but speculation puts the figures between $7M and $11M - a pretty wide range. CBS is calling this a "partnership" as they did not secure the rights to all of the content like ESPN has with the ACC. Apparently, there will be a couple more "partners" for content and regular season games that have yet to materialize. The PAC has a week to secure Texas State before that schools exit fees double from $5M to $10M. Some expect an announcement soon. WSU and OSU retain all of the former NCAA credits from the old PAC, and they also retain the playoff distributions until 2028. The new distribution model also allows schools to retain 50% of their NCAA basketball units earned in the tournament, with the other 50% being shared with the conference. There are news reports all over the place, so no link is provided.

55 Replies

H
HOO86
It looks like Texas State will be joining the PAC 12.
Look for an announcement soon.
Link: link
HokieAl HokieAl
Average viewership per game info (including current PAC)
I'll eventually get to writing up explanations for all of this (or do some videos maybe). For now, here is a quick view of the following: - 10 years of regular season games (no conf champ games, no bowls, no playoffs shown below...but I do have that data) - Showing the average viewership per game for each school - Viewership data is all inclusive for what has been reported (main channels plus smaller regional channels) - Below chart is for ACC, B12, P12, and top level of the G5 - Chart is in 1,000s (e.g., the 1000 level equals 1 million viewers) ** Edited by HokieAl at 6/24/2025, 4:37:29 PM
grosehokie grosehokie
This viewership graphic
Is why I can’t understand UNC or UVA being more attractive to the P2 than VT, considering TV drives the $. It also tracks with the overall fan interest/passion you see in everyday life and game attendance.
S
Stech
Has to be expanding 🏀 tournament & paying Sweet 16 like Playoff 16, it’s
definitely not football eyeballs. Sankey did say we don’t need more football powerhouses, we need to better our basketball. If that’s the case, then why not Duke and North Carolina, I guess because they want a new state, like Virginia.
L
La Gargola
Bah gawd another State to the Pac😂
B
Baltimore_Hokie
I pull for Oregon State and Washington State at every opportunity now.
Nobody has been done dirtier by conference realignment than those two institutions. They're the prime example of schools that have actual fanbases, and actually try to compete at football and basketball, and do the best they can with what they have, unlike, for example, Cal or Stanford. But, they were both tossed out like yesterday's garbage because the media suits cutting the TV checks decided they weren't in a market while the academia pencil necks decided they were worthless diploma mills. It's all-time level bull****. ** Edited by Baltimore_Hokie at 6/24/2025, 10:22:12 AM
Pylons Pylons
They may have fine fanbases, but they
pale in comparison to their in-state rivals. Combine OSU and WSU attendance and you're at less than half what their rivals total. And I doubt they pull in much ratings-wise, regardless of "market." I lived in the NW in recent years and don't remember either school seeming to have much of a following, whereas the Ducks and Huskies did. They didn't get screwed by any pencil necks...they weren't attractive enough draws athletics-wise to be given a second thought beyond sports. I am definitely a fan of beaver though. 🤣
B
Baltimore_Hokie
It's thanks to big thinkers like you that college sports have been ruined.
Nobody, but especially not I, ever said that Oregon State and Washington State were bigger TV draws than Oregon and Washington. That's an all-time captain obvious statement, and I'm not sure why you're parroting that like you're making some kind of amazing point that nobody thought of. My point was that they actually try to be competitive at football, and they have fanbases that actually care. I'm sorry if you're not thoroughly impressed about their localized regional fanbases, and that they didn't have Oregon State parades in Seattle or wherever you were living. Nobody in the bay area or even on the entire west coast watches Cal and Stanford football games, let alone anyone on the east coast, and yet the giant brains running the ACC shat their pants with glee to add them. Why? It had to be academic snobbery, because it wasn't football numbers.
Pylons Pylons
Right. My kind (whatever you think that is) ruined it. 🙄
You brought up "actual fanbases" with respect to conference realignment and the media. There's no argument that theirs are very good from a media perspective. A look the data posted above by @HokieAl doesn't show that the media (or candidate conferences) should have treated them any better than they did, does it? As for Stanford and Cal, I agree that they're pretty silly adds for the ACC. For multiple reasons. And that if academics played a role, that's stupid. Although Stanford at least is a decent media draw relative to the rest of the ACC. Cal seems like an add just to have a partner on that remote outpost.
HokieAl HokieAl
Ratings are shown in my post above
V
VPI 1924
You are dead on Baltimore!
It’s all bull****. No one should waste a precious weekend going to any college football game!
B
Baltimore_Hokie
To the extent it's an SEC or Big 10 game, I agree. Nationwide boycott. F em
V
VPI_1998
...and the horse they rode in on...
S
Stech
@HOO86 I believe mentioned ACC approached them, weren’t interested
because of travel. Do I have that right HOO86?
R
RandomAsianGuy
Here is the evidence showing that’s not true.
From FSU’s legal filing: “In demonstration that the ACC had missed the point of conference realignment, in making its ‘strategic’ conference realignment move, the ACC skipped over Oregon State in favor of Cal and Stanford, a recognition the ACC did not appreciate what had driven the Power Four Conference realignment in the first instance—Tier I media value in football.” I trust this ten times more than a beat writer’s blog.
S
Stech
That doesn’t mean they didn’t talk to them, they easily could’ve skipped
over them because Oregon State wasn’t interested. Oregon State doesn’t have the money that Stanford, Cal (with UCLA paying them) and SMU. Remember these three aren’t getting a full share or any share for a while. Oregon State probably could not afford to get little or no media money, plus do all that traveling. Why does this matter so much at this point? Don’t you think there are way more important things than this subject right now?
R
RandomAsianGuy
Hey I am not the one who brought up Oregon State issue.
It didn’t make sense then and it doesn’t make sense now.
S
Stech
Okay, for the record I didn’t want Stanford and Cal, SMU I was okay with,
but I really would have grabbed some other schools before them, but Jim Phillips does what Notre Dame wants him to do.
R
RandomAsianGuy
Fair enough.
H
HOO86
Jim Phillips talked to Oregon State, Yes. They said NO.
He also talked to the Arizona schools. They told him they were headed to the Big XII. Regarding Oregon State, I got from an article of an interview with the Oregon State President or Athletic Director by that reporter Canzanno? who covers Oregon schools. He said OSU would have to get A Lot Of Money to do that travel, so he said NO. I thought I linked it then unless it was paywall stuff. Jim Phillips was late. Not a surprise. ** Edited by HOO86 at 6/25/2025, 10:59:53 PM ** Edited by HOO86 at 6/25/2025, 11:18:42 PM ** Edited by HOO86 at 6/25/2025, 11:41:02 PM
S
Stech
Here is the link to HOO86 post on Jim Phillips talking to Oregon State 🔗
I thought there was a link to an article somewhere in this thread, but I haven’t found it yet. HOO86 is usually spot on and has posted many spot on posts.
H
HOO86
It was from an interview with that Oregon reporter Canzanno?
I believe it was with the President, but could have been the Athletic Director. But anyway it was 2 years old. If the ACC wants Oregon State now, which I'm good with, go back and ask. ** Edited by HOO86 at 6/25/2025, 11:28:03 PM ** Edited by HOO86 at 6/25/2025, 11:39:11 PM
R
RandomAsianGuy
That’s non sense on so many levels.
S
Stech
What specifically is nonsense?
R
RandomAsianGuy
See below.
1. Oregon State doesn't bring enough value. Stanford and Cal brings more but even for them the ACC was very reluctant. 2. WSU brings even less value. 3. The ACC would NEVER approach these two schools in 2022/2023 4. Oregon State / WSU would take ANY offer from the ACC. The new Pac 12 media value is projected to be less than $10M. That's lower than the ACCN money. Basically they would join the ACC with zero tier 1 money like SMU did. 5. I have NEVER seen any report about the ACC approaching Oregon State / WSU. The ACC's targets were Oregon and Washington. Maybe you or Hoo86 were confused.
B
Big12 guy OP
The ACC NEVER targeted Oregon and Washington. In
addition, if they even talked to the 4 corners, it was a casual conversation, nothing more. No one was going to sign on to a grant of rights that extended to 2036. No football team of value would even think about it at the time.
R
RandomAsianGuy
WRONG
B
Big12 guy OP
SMH
R
RandomAsianGuy
LOL
S
Stech
Will Stewart who runs TSL, and knows who HOO86 is, liked my post, you’re
doubting the wrong poster here, when you’re doubting HOO86. He has proven himself to be very well connected to what goes on in the ACC. He has done that for many many years. PS I did look at his post again, and he didn’t mention Washington State. ** Edited by Stech at 6/25/2025, 12:59:32 PM
R
RandomAsianGuy
Can you show me any article to back that up?
I have been following conference realignment news related to VT and the ACC very closely but haven’t found seen anything about the ACC approaching Oregon State.
S
Stech
I know I saw it, but I can’t find it, I think HOO86 said it was subscriptio
and has now gone away. Like I said, HOO86 has been spot on with his information, and unlike the rest of us, Will Stewart knows who HOO86 is and thus why you can trust his post, PS You can ask him directly, he’s a really good guy that shoots it straight as the saying goes.
H
HOO86
It was from John Canzano
He was the Oregonian Beat Reporter for Oregon and Oregon State Stuff. He has his own blog, and I paid for it in 2023 during that timeframe that the PAC12 fell apart. I don't pay anymore. I never said that he indicated Jim Phillips talked to any Washington school.
Link: Canzano
R
RandomAsianGuy
He is not that credible.
John Canzano covers the Pac-12 schools but was very wrong about the Pac-12’s future (he thought the conference would survive).
H
HOO86
Fair Enough! I reported at the time what he said.
If he didn't know what he was reporting, I don't know. i assumed he was accurate. You can accept it or not.
R
RandomAsianGuy
I don’t distrust you or anything
But what Canzano said just doesn’t make sense. From FSU legal filing: “In demonstration that the ACC had missed the point of conference realignment, in making its ‘strategic’ conference realignment move, the ACC skipped over Oregon State in favor of Cal and Stanford, a recognition the ACC did not appreciate what had driven the Power Four Conference realignment in the first instance—Tier I media value in football.” The ACC SKIPPED OVER Oregon State.
H
HOO86
Well of Course they did.
They skipped over the Arizona schools too. When the Oregon State AD said no way due to travel, and both Arizona Schools said they were going to the Big 12, Jim Phillips dropped them. Stanford and Cal said YES. I reported what he reported, and did not continue to pursue after that. It's 2 years later. If you want to pursue Oregon State go for it. I don't know what the ACC wants to do
R
RandomAsianGuy
I would not make a judgment based on John Canzano’s article.
I don’t think Jim Phillips had the votes for expansion (even for Arizona schools). Stanford and Cal, which are two academic powerhouses and better fit for the ACC, were barely admitted after much discussion and concession. When and if the ACC loses some schools in 2030, I think it wiil expand westward (GO WEST!)
H
HouClone
Just my 2 cents, Canzano was a clown and his reporting was skewed
to the Pac's hopeful survival. He wasn't objective.
S
Stech
Yeah I misremembered the Washington part, it was over 2 months ago, so 🤷‍♂
H
HOO86
Thank you!
I thank you for defending me from 2 years ago. I have not heard anything from Oregon State. Don't know what they are looking at. The ACC hss many options if we want to do something. So we'll see. I believe that the P2 is set. Perhaps kicking out stuff not perforning.
H
HOO86
I will say that this was from 2023.
If we have interest in them now, then Jim Phillips should go back and approach them. I believe they have a new Athletic Director. I'd be happy with Oregon State. Just knowing Jim Phillips he wouldn't want to interfere with the PAC 12 neighborhood. ** Edited by HOO86 at 6/25/2025, 11:41:57 PM
B
Baltimore_Hokie
If that's true, which I kind of doubt, it was an all-time bonehead move.
S
Stech
I was surprised too, but I’m pretty sure he had link backing it up. As some
have suggested in other post, maybe the reduced amount of money was a problem for them. Stanford and SMU have plenty of money, and UCLA is paying Cal.
B
Baltimore_Hokie
They could have received half shares permanently and it would have-
been significantly more than they have been getting and will get now under their new deal. If it's true that they snubbed the ACC, it can't have been the money, and why else would they have snubbed the ACC? I'm going with, "things that never happened for 500, Alex."
S
Stech
HOO86 doesn’t just make this stuff up, he’s been spot on, here is more 🔗
B
Baltimore_Hokie
Well, like I said, if it's true, it was an all-timer bonehead move-
by those schools to decline ACC membership, especially in light of Cal and Stanford agreeing to join. It makes zero sense. Rebuild the PAC-12? Into what? The new-look PAC-12, like the imminent new-look ACC, was never going to be anything more than a mid-major football conference.
S
Stech
Schools aren’t equal on being able to pay travel $$, Stanford & SMU have $$
Cal is getting money from UCLA going to the B1G. I get the staying in a Power Conference, but they probably felt like they couldn’t afford it at the reduced rate. One thought, maybe unequal sharing will push us back to more regional conferences, since a lot of lower level P2’s aren’t going to be raking in just for being in the conference.
B
Baltimore_Hokie
Go look at how much OSU/WSU are making in their new deal, then compare that
with even a permanent half-ACC share. The travel costs are entirely beside the point. You think they're not putting those teams on planes to go play San Diego State, Colorado State, or Texas State?
Maroon Baboon Maroon Baboon
Wazzu and OSU couldn’t afford to give the ACC the SMU discount.
And not even the Stanford-Cal discount. And the travel was an issue for all parties. I am also not sure Cal and Standard (read: Notre Dame) wanted them. But even if true, that’s secondary.
H
HouClone
Wonder how much additional travel cost it has been for the former Pac
schools? I guess I am answering my own question, but I see Kliavkoff said either $8.1 million (commercial), $13.4 million (1/2 charter), or $23 million more (full charter) additional when he was trying to keep UCLA in the Pac. ** Edited by HouClone at 6/24/2025, 2:11:56 PM
VTHokie2000 VTHokie2000
Given the 2 schools had a temporary arrangement with the MWC and where the
MWC schools are located, the additional travel cost may not be as significant people believe. I guess it would depend on if the MWC adopted the same scheduling strategy that the Pac did when it had 10 or 12 members. Specifically I am referring the travel partnership used for grouping away games/series for visiting a state or region. If a team is scheduled to play 1 team from a state or region, then they play the other team in that state or region before returning home. The partnership (see list below) is obvious if you think about it. UDub/Wazzou Oregon/Oregon St Cal/Stanford UCLA/USC Ariz/Ariz St Utah/Colorado Even if the MWC couldn't fully incorporate the scheduling formula, the conference did have some "natural" pairings to help ease some of the burden. Hawai'i/San Diego St Fresno St/San Jose St Nevada/UNLV Boise St/Utah St Wyoming/Colorado St Air Force/Colorado St maybe Air Force/New Mexico (if using the same logic as Utah/Colorado pairing)
B
Big12 guy OP
It was probably the partial share that scared them off. All of
the PAC schools were talking to all of the conferences looking for a landing spot. Thing is, the PAC8 will have a decent pathway to the playoffs, and we are more likely to see Washington State or Boise State in the playoffs then 1/2 of the ACC or 1/2 of the B12.
B
Big12 guy OP
When the PAC imploded, I wanted WSU and OSU to
be invited to the B12. They fit perfectly into the truck stop hateful 8 conference. While the 4 corners was a stoke of good timing, OSU and WSU just seemed to fit better. BTW, I'll be at a Washington State game this coming season. ** Edited by Big12 guy at 6/24/2025, 10:43:04 AM
HokieAl HokieAl
When I get home later I’ll post some viewership info on this
WSU has a much stronger showing than expected. They definitely got shafted the most. ** Edited by HokieAl at 6/24/2025, 11:46:57 AM