Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott met with a gaggle of reporters in Scottsdale on Wednesday evening and touched on a variety of topics and challenges facing the conference.
The gathering came during the Pac-12’s spring meetings — the only time all year that conference executives, athletic directors and football coaches are together.
Scott didn’t announce news but provided insight on several issues central to the conference’s long-range health, from the football schedule to the potential for an equity partner to the football officiating review and the impact of the basketball trial in New York City.
I didn’t attend the meetings but listened to the Q&A session and have included comments here that might have high interest for Hotline readers. (Thanks to Stewart Mandel of The Athletic for passing along the audio file.)
Also of note: I have rearranged the order of questions and answers so that topics are grouped together. There was some level of jumping around during the session.
On playing eight or nine conference games:
“Our schools have not wanted to change (from nine) … Our schools like playing against each other, don’t really like going into the buying-of-games market.
“One of the things that’s unique about the Pac-12 is fans aren’t going to come out to our stadiums for any game; they come out for high-quality games. So I think there’s pressure our campuses feel to have a high-quality slate of games.
“Our schools do not singularly focus on how do we skate through as easily as possible” to the College Football Playoff.
(Context/background: As Oregon athletic director Rob Mullens told the Hotline a few months ago, football scheduling is essentially a local economic and fan engagement issue. Dropping to eight conference games would be a money loser: Pac-12 teams would have to pay a Group of Five or FCS opponent and would sell fewer tickets than to a conference game.)
On a new bowl alignment for the 2020 cycle of games:
“There’s no finality yet on either our bowl arrangements going forward or the football championship game. We’re treating this as a very unique opportunity in time in that we’re going to give two of newest, most exiting stadiums in country in our footprint (Las Vegas and Los Angeles).
“We’re thinking about it strategically, what’s best for Pac-12 football, how do we take advantage of the opportunity for our fans, our student-athletes and the teams that want to come play.
“We’re looking at bowls, early-season nonconference games and the football championship game — we’re looking at all three.”
(Context/background: The conference should consider a Labor Day weekend game in Las Vegas and pair the football title game with a basketball doubleheader in Las Vegas.)
On the status of the independent football officiating review by Sibson:
“I don’t know that a conference has ever done something like this. This may be the most comprehensive review of officiating that’s taken place in college (football).
“They’re interviewing all of our coaches, all of our athletics directors, many officials, current and former. They’re benchmarking other leagues … It’s being done under the direction of the (athletic directors’) steering committee we put together (led by Arizona State’s Ray Anderson).
“I’m encouraged. Officiating is always a topic that’s hotly debated … (There are) no limits on what they might come back with.”
(Context: Sibson’s review is expected to last into the summer.)
Could the Pac-12 do a better job — and maybe every league, for that matter — in pushing back against the narrative that their officials are terrible?
“When I was recently at a meeting with my peer commissioners, we were chatting about that. We all believe our fans think we’ve got the worst officiating in the country. Each of our fans tell us so. I think that is the reality of the situation. One of the challenges we’ve got, and my peers have, is there’s not an objective measure of how your officiating stacks up.”
(Context/background: The Pac-12 should consider adopting the NHL’s approach to transparency by using a Twitter feed to explain controversial calls.)
If some of the high-profile coaches mentioned in the basketball bribery trial don’t lose their job, does that send a message that nothing will change?
“There are a lot of people in college sports, including myself, that hope there are some definitive conclusions one way or another because of this trial.
“In a strange way, it’s a potentially positive development for college basketball. The FBI has tools and the ability to look into things that have been difficult for the NCAA …
“We’re really hopeful that there are some clear conclusions that come out of it one way or another, and not just opened-ended questions that don’t have concrete conclusions.”
Any update on taking on an equity partner in the conference’s media rights?
“No update. We’re in the middle of the process. Very encouraged by what I’ve heard and seen so far. There’s a lot of interest in premium sports rights, and what I’ve seen so far certainly validates that college football is highly, highly valued at the top level.
“We’ll see. I don’t know exactly where we’ll wind up, but the process is a really good one for us — learning a lot, understanding the interest. It’s left me very, very optimistic about the value of our rights and the options we’ll have going forward, whether it’s now or later.”
(Context/background: Led by The Raine Group, the process is expected to stretch into the late spring. The presidents and chancellor are scheduled to meet in June and could take a vote at that point. The conference best be careful.)
Could partnering with a private equity firm jeopardize the Pac-12’s non-profit status?
“We’ve got folks that have looked at that question. They look at it more akin to other leagues that have taken on investors in conference-branded TV networks (Big Ten and Fox, SEC and ESPN) … From a governance and structural perspective, there are no unique issues.”
Can the Pac-12 afford to wait until 2024 (for the next media rights deal) as the revenue gap continues to grow?
“One of the reasons we’re looking at (an equity partner) right now is our schools feel a tremendous amount of financial pressure. They do worry about the gap in revenues with peers from other conferences, both in terms of what is distributed from our conference and in terms of what they are able to generate locally.
“This not a new phenomenon. When I came in in 2009, our conference distributions were less than 50 percent of what other conferences distributed, and it’s not new that we don’t have a lot of 90,000- or 100,000-seat stadiums that get filled every week. These dynamics are not new.
“What happened for a while is we did catch up, we did close the gap, at least in terms of conference distributions (with the $3 billion Tier 1 deal). And now because of timing, other conferences — it’s a little bit of a game of leapfrog — now other conferences’ time has come to do their TV deal … and they are pulling away.
“Our time is coming. And maybe in 2024, we’ll see happen what happened in 2012, where we will catch, we will leapfrog. It’s hard to predict … some of this is a timing issue.
“I don’t know that it will make sense for us to do anything or not (with an equity partner). But I think our schools appreciate that we’ve got ability to look at it. The question you ask is the question they will be asking themselves as they evaluate this: What are the pros and cons in terms of increasing some revenue now as opposed to controlling all of it ourselves? That decision will be made by the campuses. My role is to tee it up, to frame it, to create opportunities to allow them to make that decision.”
(Context/background: The Pac-12 is in danger of falling further behind because of media deals in other conferences scheduled to unfold before the Pac-12’s next negotiating window.)
Where do the schools most feel the revenue gap?
“We spend a lot time talking about this. I think it’s felt everywhere. You don’t see us breaking records in terms of coaches salaries or assistant salaries … Even if they had more money, I’m not sure if you’d see them break records anyway — some of this is kind of a mindset, culture. I don’t think it would be well appreciated in our markets or at our schools to set records … But it is felt in certain areas of football, basketball and Olympic sports.”
(Context/background: Purdue’s football coach makes more money than the best coaches at the best programs in the Pac-12.)
If promotion of student-athletes is the goal of the Pac-12 Networks, as president Mark Shuken indicated recently, why isn’t it the most widely-distributed network in America with a minimal carriage fee?
“Mark was disappointed that part of his answer wasn’t included. What he said, which wasn’t fully conveyed, was of course he and his team are always focused on a fiscally responsible model and generating as much (revenue) as possible for members, with the understanding that the primary focus of creating the networks was mission-driven …
“Our priority at the time (2012) was not first and foremost financial … If we were to reduce rates significantly, it would make the network unprofitable and it would be a financial drain.”
(Context/background: The networks are profitable but not nearly to the extent that was expected.)
What’s the mood of the membership at the spring meetings?
“It depends on what room you’re in. We may be the hottest conference in any sport in the country in women’s basketball … They couldn’t be more excited.
“So the mood is balanced. A lot of great things are happening, and there are concerns — it’s balanced. They see our success in Olympic sports is off the charts. A lot of programs see a lot value in the Pac-12 Networks … They’re capable of feeling good about those things and being concerned about being below par in football and men’s basketball.
“The vibe in a lot of our meetings is that a lot of it (with football and men’s basketball) is cyclical, and they generally feel good about the fundamentals. That doesn’t mean they’re not concerned … We’re spending a lot of time examining things.
“There’s serious consideration of a 20-game (conference basketball) schedule. We’re looking at a model where there’s more conference involvement in the non-conference schedules.
“It’s in this context: We’re not performing at a level we expect. Some of that is related to strength-of-schedule. Are there things we should try? We spent a lot of time with the SEC trying to understand what they did. We’re concerned our standard (for non-conference scheduling) might not be aggressive enough.”
(Context/background: After a dismal year in 2016, the SEC took tangible steps to improve its basketball product. The rebirth offers lessons for the Pac-12.)
Get Pac-12 Conference news in your inbox with the Pac-12 Hotline newsletter
The opinions expressed in reader comments are those of the author only and do not reflect the opinions of The Seattle Times.