Just to play devil's advocate a bit here, I think there's a reasonable case that Kliavkoff was more the victim of terrible timing, a complacent and naive governing Board (the Pac 12 university presidents/chancellors), and the Big-12 getting the perfect hire at the perfect time.
-Timing: both tech and media retrenched in 2022 after the Fed started raising rates. Pac 12 coming off several terrible years of both football and basketball. If the Pac 12's media deal expired in 2026 and the contract had to be renegotiated by 2025, there'd still be a Pac 12.
-Naive Board. Kliavkoff was ordered to go back to ESPN and counter the $30m offer with $50m. If the university presidents/chancellors had accepted $30m, they'd have matched the Big 12 and Colo et al. wouldn't have fled.
-The Big 12 Presidents are so much scrappier, and they found a Commissioner in Yormark who was their equal: willing to do anything to keep their League alive, including go out and proactively beat the Pac 12 to the punch. Arguably, Kliavkoff should have done the same, and in retrospect, that's clear as day. But I just don't think any of the Pac 12 university Presidents/Chancellors were realistic/scrappy enough.
Was Kliavkoff the hire we needed? In retrospect, clearly not. But I don't think the Board would have hired who, in retrospect, we needed. The same governing board that allowed Larry Scott to fiddle (and count his money) while the Pac 12 burned clearly didn't see how bad their collective position had become.
And honestly, are you surprised? Has anything about MTL and Muir's comportment during the relevant period (negligence related to Shaw's/his assistants' retention, Haase, dropping 11 varsity sports for dubious and easily-refuted reasons) suggested EUTM for securing Stanford Athletics' long-term future.
Knowing what I know about how the Pac-12 was managed, Kliavkoff at best shares blame with the Board.
-Timing: both tech and media retrenched in 2022 after the Fed started raising rates. Pac 12 coming off several terrible years of both football and basketball. If the Pac 12's media deal expired in 2026 and the contract had to be renegotiated by 2025, there'd still be a Pac 12.
-Naive Board. Kliavkoff was ordered to go back to ESPN and counter the $30m offer with $50m. If the university presidents/chancellors had accepted $30m, they'd have matched the Big 12 and Colo et al. wouldn't have fled.
-The Big 12 Presidents are so much scrappier, and they found a Commissioner in Yormark who was their equal: willing to do anything to keep their League alive, including go out and proactively beat the Pac 12 to the punch. Arguably, Kliavkoff should have done the same, and in retrospect, that's clear as day. But I just don't think any of the Pac 12 university Presidents/Chancellors were realistic/scrappy enough.
Was Kliavkoff the hire we needed? In retrospect, clearly not. But I don't think the Board would have hired who, in retrospect, we needed. The same governing board that allowed Larry Scott to fiddle (and count his money) while the Pac 12 burned clearly didn't see how bad their collective position had become.
And honestly, are you surprised? Has anything about MTL and Muir's comportment during the relevant period (negligence related to Shaw's/his assistants' retention, Haase, dropping 11 varsity sports for dubious and easily-refuted reasons) suggested EUTM for securing Stanford Athletics' long-term future.
Knowing what I know about how the Pac-12 was managed, Kliavkoff at best shares blame with the Board.