Diving into the Pac-12 mailbag for this week:
Any thoughts as to re-opening the Pac-16 discussion? At a glance, I love the idea: adding Oklahoma Oklahoma State, Kansas, TCU. — @BigKahunaSkiTm
A: We covered the realignment issue in detail early last month and concluded that the status quo is more likely for the Pac-12 than expansion, contraction or a combination of the two.
But that was then, with Larry Scott in charge. This is a new era, with George Kliavkoff running the conference and seemingly no topic off limits for discussion and consideration.
That said, it’s difficult to envision expansion unfolding without Texas involved, for two reasons:
Oklahoma wouldn’t leave the Big 12 for the Pac-12 without the Longhorns alongside.
None of the other Big 12 schools carry enough value in their media rights.
Generally speaking, football accounts for 85 or 90 cents for every dollar assigned to a university’s media rights — that’s why Kansas was an afterthought in the realignment discussion a decade ago and would be again.
The goal of expansion (for any conference) isn’t to increase the number of slices in the proverbial revenue pie. It’s to increase the size of the slices for the existing members.
The newcomers, in other words, must provide significant additional value. And the only newcomers capable of such are the football powerhouses.
There are no good options in the Big 12, outside of Oklahoma and Texas.
Is the NCAA or any other interested party (eg. conferences?) legally able to regulate NIL to create a level playing field for schools when it comes to recruiting? Or are we looking at MLB-style free agency where alumni groups with super deep pockets have a massive advantage? — @justgale
A: That’s the greatest unknown among many with regard to Name, Image and Likeness. And as with the other, responsibility (blame) lies with the NCAA’s astounding incompetence on the issue.
The association wants Congress to regulate NIL, so there aren’t different rules in each state. That may or may not happen. If it doesn’t, the NCAA will have to craft a permanent, comprehensive policy.
In either case, regulating the recruiting piece is what most concerns college coaches and administrators: NIL opportunities (real or fabricated) will be used as a means of player procurement.
The landscape is greased for exploitation, in large part because athletic boosters and local business owners are often one and the same.
Only an extraordinary level of school oversight and the implementation of tight NCAA restrictions could possibly prevent endorsement opportunities from being used to attract recruits.
But if the marketplace becomes overly regulated, lawsuits will surely follow — lawsuits that could lead to a further unraveling of the NCAA amateurism model and even more chaos.
As for the potential correlation between alumni riches and NIL opportunities for recruits, yes, that could very well be the case.
But whether the situation ultimately favors teams in college towns or in big cities, we aren’t sure. As Casey Schwab, the CEO of Altius Sports Partners, told the Hotline recently for our cheat sheet on NIL:
“Really, it depends on how the schools tap into their local resources and culture. In L.A., it might be the music scene. In Alabama, it might be hosting a golf tournament.
“The key is making sure the athletes understand the scope of the opportunities available in person and through social media and how well the schools tap into the local approach. It’s not a one-size-fits-all situation.”
Do you think the star players for UCLA and USC deciding to stay and play another season in the L.A. market has to do with NIL? — @JMilesMiller
A: We cannot state conclusively that Name, Image and Likeness opportunities were the reason Johnny Juzang and Isaiah Mobley (and others) decided to return to college.
But we would be stunned if NIL didn’t play a role in the thought process, particularly in Juzang’s case:
He’s the headliner on the potential preseason No. 1 team, which so happens to be a major basketball brand in a marketplace with unlimited sponsorship and branding opportunities.
For all we know, Juzang has already signed an endorsement deal with a container company, as Johnny Buckets.
Herm Edwards' reputation would be in tatters if the allegations against the Arizona State football program are true.
Any additional thoughts on ASU’s football recruiting scandal? If the dossier contains what it is alleged to contain, are these serious Level 1 violations for both the program and the implicated coaches? — @UA_Cattracks
A: If the allegations are true, it’s a catastrophe for Arizona State athletics because the inevitable penalties would only be half the problem.
Far be it for the Hotline to anticipate the NCAA’s next move — we don’t have an advanced degree in nonsense — but Level 1 sanctions seemingly would be a distinct possibility, especially if there are extra-benefit violations: Members of the program paying for the illegal visits.
It’s one thing to host a recruit during the dead period; it’s quite another to arrange payment for the flight, hotel, etc.
For all that has been reported, we still don’t know the extent of the material in the dossier or the degree to which additional incriminating evidence has surfaced.
But in our view, the optics would be worse for ASU than the sanctions.
Brazen disregard for recruiting rules specifically implemented to keep staff and athletes safe during a public health crisis would be next-level stuff.
The matter would zoom past the standard ethical shenanigans and approach a moral transgression: It’s just wrong.
Within the conference, there would be far more outrage than you typically see when cheating occurs, potentially even reaching the level of the presidents and chancellors.
There might even be backlash on ASU’s campus, within the Phoenix media and among some (but assuredly not all) ASU fans.
Oh, and coach Herm Edwards’ reputation would be severely damaged, if not in tatters.
How he could continue as the face of ASU football, as the leader of young men at a public institution, we have no idea.
The stain on ASU athletics would be deep, lasting and nauseating.
I know that this subject occasionally comes up, but the paltry interest in Stanford and Cal football and men’s basketball baffles me. Do the couple of dozen Bay Area college football and basketball fans just have to accept that we live in an area that just doesn’t care about those sports? Can these two elite universities reach locals who aren’t alums? — Eric Abrams
A: It wasn’t so long ago that the football stadiums and basketball arenas were jammed on both sides of the Bay, but it feels like forever.
Sure, professional sports rule the region, but lagging performance on the campuses contributes greatly to the apathy. (The ever-shifting times for tip-offs and kickoffs create another challenge, but that’s true everywhere in the conference.)
I would caution against a complete conflation, however, because the situations are not identical.
Stanford is a small private school with a student body that is both national and international; that combination doesn’t translate to a large ticket-buying constituency. (Also, when the Cardinal was rolling a decade ago, it did a poor job expanding its fan base within the Bay Area.)
Meanwhile, Cal has 30,000 undergraduates and draws heavily from both the region and the state. There are hundreds of thousands of alumni within a Saturday drive of Memorial Stadium.
If the Bears attained a high level of success for multiple seasons, as they did in the 2000s under Jeff Tedford, tickets would assuredly be hard to come by.
Thoughts on USC coach Andy Enfield? He got clowned by Mark Few in the tournament. Seems weird that when you have the No. 6 pick (Onyeka Okongwu, last year) and the presumptive No. 2 pick (Evan Mobley, this year), you’d maybe run plays for them. Is it time to move on from him? — @ObiWanKobe
A: Enfield isn’t exactly atop our list of the best tacticians in the conference, but he’s a quality recruiter who has taken advantage of the transfer portal and won 20+ games in five of the past six seasons.
His contract runs through the 2022-23 season, so we’re approaching decision time for the Trojans, and Enfield.
It’s difficult to believe that USC would seek to part ways following a season in which Enfield won 25 games, reached the Elite Eight and has a solid core returning.
Then again, his success is based largely on the decision to hire assistant Eric Mobley and the accompanying recruiting benefits.
That’s hardly a reassuring long-haul foundation for USC constituents.
