I'll be as direct as I can be.
Quite a few people felt like we had a solid strategy for a long, slow build-up. AAU membership. Greater commitment to coaching staffs and facilities. Nice collegial relationships, including Frenk supporting "let's get back to football" during COVID.
But I've said this before. The Washington/Oregon desperation changed everything. Washington/Oregon were not the preferred partners of USC/UCLA. Washington/Oregon weren't even in the top 2 spots for the Big 10. But their ploy to take half-shares changed EVERYONE'S calculus. It was obvious that the networks would do anything, for the right price. That move ****ed up the expected timeline and the expected pecking order.
I said it then and it is still true. Washington/Oregon changed everything. Moreso than Texas/Oklahoma. Moreso than USC/UCLA. At least with those pairs of teams, you could expect movement, they were the two most desirable teams in their respective conferences.
But no matter how many Grey's Anatomy/Portlandia fans try to convince you that Washington/Oregon are some great programs that everyone covets, it's a load of horse****. On every level. No matter how koool you think Oregon's uniforms are.
Washington is the 13th largest state, with 7.8 million people. Oregon is the 27th largest, with 4.2 million people. For media markets, you've got Sea-Tac at #12 and Portland at #22. After that? Spokane at #67. Outside of California, the Washington-Oregon area is surrounded by Alaska and Canada and Idaho and Nevada (Vegas is in the far southern end of Nevada).
And I know, I know, "population isn't everything". Except, in this case, you have a fairly weak sports market. Those 12 million people are concentrated in two areas with a LOT of land in between, and football is not nearly as big of a deal up there as it is in the southeast. Travel is challenging, both for local fans and rival fans. Three of the four big sports universities in those states are fairly remote from the two big urban areas. So these are not natural and enthusiastic sports markets, at least not nearly as other available schools are in other parts of the country.
But Washington/Oregon took half. And not only cranked up their spots in the pecking order, but fundamentally changed the economics and bargaining positions for everyone else. BEFORE Washington/Oregon, F$U thought that the Big 10 would pay their exit fee. BEFORE Washington/Oregon, nobody thought SMU would take ZERO-POINT-ZERO to get into the ACC.
So while Miami spent a lot of time and political capital to position itself, and has done (almost) as much as it can do, the Washington/Oregon situation screwed everything up on the "expectations" side. Now it is much harder to know how many schools the SEC and Big 10 might take, and what kinds of arrangements might need to be made. ****, if SMU offered to play in the SEC for free, do we honestly believe that a proposal like that would be rejected without discussion? That could be a very tempting offer for the SEC.
Speaking to people who know, there are certain things that are in Miami's favor and/or that Miami can impact. But there are some other factors that are a lot more complicated and are out of our hands.
I still believe that a lot of people feel that "Florida" is too big for the Big 10 to ignore us forever. But how much the Big 10 will pay (and when) were heavily impacted by Washington/Oregon.
And as evidenced by Washington's university budget, a Big 10 half-share will exceed an ACC full-share.
View attachment 292757
