George Kliavkoff speaks: Pac-12 commissioner blames the schools for lacking patience, takes credit for Pac-12 football success

In his first public comments in months, Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff did not express sorrow over the downfall of the conference or accept responsibility for his role in the collapse of a century-old college sports institution.

Instead, Kliavkoff appeared to take credit for the Pac-12’s successful football season and blame the schools for the failed media rights negotiations.

Who does Kliavkoff think he is, Larry Scott?

Approached by reporters in the Superdome on Monday night, following Washington’s playoff victory over Texas, Kliavkoff offered several brief comments.

He told Yahoo:

“Happy for the kids. They don’t deserve all the nonsense going on around them. We were focused on rebuilding football. Took 2 1/2 years. I wish it would have happened quicker. If some of our schools would have been a little more patient, it would have paid off.”

Seconds later, in a subsequent interview, he told 247Sports:

“Surreal. It’s surreal. It’s upsetting that some of our schools weren’t more patient because if they saw what we were building it would have paid off.”

First, let’s hit the easy target:

Blaming the schools for not being “more patient” epitomizes the complete disconnect between Kliavkoff and his campuses that ultimately doomed the negotiations and fractured the conference.

University presidents and athletic directors aren’t built to wait 13 months for a media rights deal, especially when the process is delayed repeatedly and the final offer isn’t what they anticipated.

In an alternate universe, sure, the Pac-12 could have bet on itself in the fall of 2023 and signed a lucrative deal this winter. But in the real world, with risk-averse presidents and athletic directors facing daily pressures on the front lines, the strategy was all wrong.

(Kliavkoff didn’t have the requisite urgency last winter and, apparently, hasn’t learned from the mistake.)

Before we plunge into the legitimacy of his view on the football “rebuilding” process, understand the circumstances under which Kliavkoff offered his comments.

It was not a formal session with the media. It was impromptu and brief and not the place for Kliavkoff to provide a detailed assessment of any topic.

Could Kliavkoff have declined to comment? Sure. But he’s an affable guy who probably didn’t want to snub familiar reporters.

Also, Kliavkoff absolutely believes what he said.

The Hotline has engaged in enough conversations over the years with Kliavkoff and various Pac-12 and campus officials to be fairly certain that he’s convinced of his own role in the conference’s on-field success — and wants credit for it.

Two years ago this week, in fact, we reported the following:

New commissioner George Kliavkoff hopes to change that state of affairs by making the case to the university presidents and chancellors that investing in football can provide returns that benefit not only cash-strapped athletic departments but entire campuses.

“Historically, I don’t think we’ve made a great case for the ROI of footbalI,’’ Kliavkoff told the Hotline. “I’m not going to take the opportunity to speak to my 12 bosses without talking about it. It’s going to be a constant topic. They are going to get tired of hearing it from me.’’

And let’s not forget that on the day he was hired, back in May 2021, Kliavkoff declared his priorities to be winning national championships in football and men’s basketball:

“We know where our bread is buttered. We’re focused on the revenue sports and winning in football and men’s basketball.”

Forget the subsequent ash and ruin. The conference is on the brink of a football championship — its first since USC in 2004 — and the opportunity comes on Kliavkoff’s watch.

Does he deserve any credit?

Not in our view.

Why? Because Oregon and Washington were primarily responsible for the Pac-12’s success this season, and neither situation fits neatly into Kliavkoff’s narrative.

The Ducks have been spending on football for years. Phil Knight, of all people, needs no convincing.

Meanwhile, the Huskies didn’t step far outside their standard resource range in order to reach the championship game.

They hired Kalen DeBoer two years ago for $3.1 million a year, then gave him a whopping raise last season all the way to … $4.2 million per year!

According to USA Today’s salary database, 43 major college coaches were better compensated than DeBoer this season — and that doesn’t include those at private schools.

Sure, the Huskies will have to spend top dollar to keep DeBoer, but the path to 14-0 was hardly lined with gold.

On the other hand, USC poured immense resources into the Lincoln Riley regime in the fall of 2021. But that decision had nothing to do with Kliavkoff’s case “for the ROI of football” and everything to do with one of the sport’s blue bloods paying market rate for an elite coach in order to reclaim its place of prominence.

As best we can tell, only one school reset its football spending and (potentially) did so in response to Kliavkoff’s case for more football resources.

That school, Colorado, finished last.