Mailbag: The problem with promotion and relegation, options for WSU and OSU, Kliavkoff’s duties, the Pac-12 Networks’ future and more

The Hotline mailbag publishes each Friday. Send questions to pac12hotline@bayareanewsgroup.com and include ‘mailbag’ in the subject line. Or hit me on Twitter: @WilnerHotline.

Please note: Some questions have been edited for clarity and brevity.

What are your thoughts about the promotion/relegation idea that leaked? Is it a unique approach that could help draw more attention to the conference(s)? Are there blockers that will prevent it from getting done? — @BennyL1986

Before we address the specific proposal, two points to frame the discussion:

— The concept of a promotion-and-relegation structure in college football, in which schools would change divisions from year-to-year based on performance, has been discussed for years and is viewed by many as inevitable.

— The decision-makers in college sports, particularly the university presidents, are inherently risk-averse. And nothing is riskier than not knowing your division/conference and revenue base from year-to-year.

Also, it’s critical to remember that Washington State and Oregon State are considering a barrage of scenarios as they plot a future together.

Those options include joining the Mountain West, a reverse merger with the Mountain West (in which all the MW schools would join the Pac-12), reforming the Pac-12 with the top football schools in the Mountain West and perhaps other leagues, and competing as the ‘Pac-2’ for two years and then combining with the Mountain West.

And yes, a promotion-and-relegation system modeled after European soccer is also under consideration.

The schools are many weeks away from a decision as they await the outcome of their lawsuit against the Pac-12 (over the makeup of the board) and gain clarity on the conference’s assets and liabilities.

The specific proposal in question, reported by Front Office Sports, is the brainchild of a Boise State administrator and has been shared with Mountain West executives. (Yahoo also reported on the discussions.)

It calls for a huge consortium of schools — perhaps 24 — from the American Athletic Conference and Conference USA, plus the Mountain West, along with WSU and OSU.

We won’t rule out any scenario, not yet. But this one is difficult to envision. The American’s media partnership with ESPN pays a reasonable sum (approximately $7 million annually) and lasts into the early 2030s.

To join the coast-to-coast consortium, AAC schools would have to break their arrangement with ESPN and suffer the consequences (financial and otherwise).

In that regard, a regional configuration makes more sense: The Mountain West’s media deal with Fox and CBS expires in the spring of 2026, so the extraction process in just two years would be clean, simple and cheap.

However, the legal piece could be problematic.

Major issues within the 12-team Mountain West require super-majorities (i.e., nine votes). Would the schools at the lower end of the conference’s food chain (San Jose State, Wyoming, New Mexico, Utah State) agree to a system in which they were cast down to the second division and likely to receive lower revenue shares than in a traditional conference structure?

In other words, a promotion-and-relegation system that offers the upper division schools more cash, better TV exposure and stronger competitive matchups (think: ticket sales) doesn’t necessarily work for enough Mountain West members to clear the voting threshold.

Could they sweeten the system to pick up the necessary votes? Perhaps.

But specifics aside, the promotion-and-relegation structure requires the one element that administrators in higher education are typically loath to accept, no matter how dire their situation: risk.

If a “Pac-2” was to exist for a season or two, would any potential TV suitors be the usual suspects (Fox/ESPN), or something rather different (Apple, etc)? — @AmbitiousCoug

Perhaps Apple or a linear network would be interested, but we’re skeptical.

One of many issues: The game inventory.

If the Cougars and Beavers remain under the Pac-12 banner for the 2024-25 seasons — before combining with the Mountain West — they would need complete 12-game schedules.

No major media company would be interested in broadcasting a handful of matchups against FCS teams. Could they find enough quality FBS opponents to provide an enticing lineup of home games? (The road games would belong to the opponents’ broadcast partners.) We aren’t certain.

It’s possible Apple would be interested for pennies on the dollar, if for no reason other than to dip its toe in college football and test the technology and production pieces in anticipation of a broader move in the future.

Another option: OSU and WSU could sell their home games to regional/local media companies, a page from the Pac-12’s broadcast playbook prior to the deal with ESPN and Fox in 2012.

Presumably, the schools would plow forward as the Pac-2 with enough financial assets to minimize the loss of massive media rights revenue.

What does Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff do all day? — @MattRexroad

Why does Kliavkoff still have a job? — @InsideTheBig12

He has a job because someone has to run the conference on a day-to-day basis through the 2023-24 competition year.

And because his contract has at least two more years (and perhaps three or four) at about $3.5 million annually.

And because the schools have no motivation to cut him loose.

His daily duties are the same as any other commissioner — he still represents the Pac-12 on the College Football Playoff management committee, for instance — except for the part about leading any meaningful strategic endeavors.

Should “Cal-imony” be enforced and the amount is on the high side, say $10 million per year, any chance UCLA sues to prevent it? After all, Cal’s money woes are almost all due to bad management. — @Douglas79390104

For those unfamiliar, the University of California regents are expected to require UCLA to provide financial assistance to Cal using revenue from the Big Ten’s media deal.

The maximum approved “contribution” — that’s the term used by the regents — is $10 million per year.

Granted, the Hotline did not attend law school; nor do we watch Law and Order, Boston Legal, The Practice, Matlock or Perry Mason. But we can’t envision a scenario in which UCLA could sue the regents because, after all, they are one in the same. The regents are the governing board for the 10-campus UC system, which includes Westwood.

They aren’t competing or independent entities. They’re connected to each other like a finger to the hand.

The Bruins will make their case against the subsidy and, if it’s imposed, they will argue for something near the low end ($2 million). But the campus will do as it’s told.

Any chance Washington would owe money to Washington State, like UCLA does to Cal? If so, how much are we talking? — @CelestialMosh

The Bruins and Bears are part of the same university system. The Huskies and Cougars are different systems.

Unless state politicians get involved, we don’t foresee a similar agreement.

And that goes for Oregon and Oregon State, as well.

Given early buzz around the conference, and the realities of the costs (financial, physical and mental) from longer travel, is there any chance, however remote, that the recent realignment of Pac-12 schools could be unwound through agreements with the Big Ten, Big 12, media partners, etc.? — @astolli

In other words, could they roll back the clock to its mid-July existence, before Colorado left the Pac-12 for the Big 12 and the others eventually followed?

The Hotline never says never. But on that matter, we’re saying never … at least for the rest of the decade.

Once the Big Ten’s media contract expires in 2030, the sport could undergo another round of massive realignment in which an upper tier emerges and some semblance of regionality returns.

But until then, the structure in place for next summer should hold.

When Cal and Stanford joined the ACC, did they lock themselves into the full term of the conference’s grant-of-rights agreement, which expires in 2036? If not, are they free to leave the ACC at any time? — @TerryTerry79

You better believe they are locked in.

The ACC never would have agreed to allow the schools an early exit. They are members for the long haul.

Now, if enough schools vote to dissolve the conference, thus voiding the grant-of-rights deal with ESPN, the Bay Area schools could go their merry way.

But as the ACC is constructed, there simply aren’t enough wandering eyes. In fact, the vast majority of members love the stability the grant-of-rights agreement provides.

Assuming the Pac-12 exists in some form next season, are TV carriers like Comcast currently obligated to continue carrying the Pac-12 Network beyond this year? Does the mass exodus give the carriers a window to renegotiate carriage fees down or drop the channel entirely? — @mgechert

Nope, the distribution contracts that began in 2012-13 expire next spring. We don’t know the exact date. But on or before the close of the fiscal year, the Pac-12 Networks will lose their distribution agreements and cease being a media company.

Their production value has been top-notch, and their presence greatly impacted the Pac-12 Olympic sports in a positive fashion, especially women’s basketball.

But their ultimate legacy — as a gross strategic error and abject business failure that contributed enormously to the demise of the Pac-12 — is secure for time immemorial.

The infrastructure and human resources involved in event production could be used to support a streaming service if the conference is somehow rebuilt and secures a media deal for 2024 or beyond.

Or the people and technology will simply scatter to the wind.

Has the Pac-12 Network quietly cut back on the number of live broadcasts of fall Olympic sports to save money? There doesn’t seem to be as many volleyball and soccer matches as in the past. — @bogeycat85

I cannot offer you a firm answer on those sports but would remind readers that the Pac-12 Networks are contractually obligated to produce 850 live events each school year for their distribution partners (Comcast, Dish, etc.).

That commitment expires, as we noted above, next summer.

Have they adjusted the number of broadcasts of a given sport? Perhaps. But by the end of the 2023-24 competition season, the networks will have aired at least 850 events.

How lame is rebranding Cal to UC Berkeley? — @Wondertaker1

On a 1-to-10 scale of lame, we would ‘Cal Berkeley’ a 17.

How can so many smart people select such a dumb option? (Don’t answer.)

If the Hotline were advising — and if the school insisted on rebranding — then ‘California’ is the only option worthy of consideration.

What conference will you follow next year? — @TheMattHolt

All the conferences that include current members of the Pac-12.

We cover the schools and the issues that matter to them, whether they compete under the Pac-12’s banner or are members of the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Mountain West, Pac-2, Pac-14, PacWest, MountainPac … whatever.

The Hotline isn’t going anywhere.

As always, thanks for your loyalty and support.