How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race (/thread-16905.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race (/thread-16905.html)
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - winflop - 01-05-2019
I'm not sure if they pay attention to the "average fan" but I know that they paid attention to John Canzano's 4-part series on the Pac-12 operation. I reached out to both Muir and Tessier-Lavigne about this expose. I got a reply and follow-up exchange from Howard Wolff who manages alumni relations that was more than a form letter and talking points. It was clear that not only did Stanford take the expose seriously but that there were discussions with multiple AD's and Presidents at other schools about it.
My inference is that they weren't fully aware of the issues Canzano raised and that the bigger picture is not a good one. I have to believe that the more recent actions (loss of U-Verse, the PR firm, and floating the equity fiasco) only reinforce the problems with current leadership.
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - chrisk - 01-05-2019
(01-05-2019, 03:34 AM)winflop Wrote: I'm not sure if they pay attention to the "average fan" but I know that they paid attention to John Canzano's 4-part series on the Pac-12 operation. I reached out to both Muir and Tessier-Lavigne about this expose. I got a reply and follow-up exchange from Howard Wolff who manages alumni relations that was more than a form letter and talking points. It was clear that not only did Stanford take the expose seriously but that there were discussions with multiple AD's and Presidents at other schools about it.
My inference is that they weren't fully aware of the issues Canzano raised and that the bigger picture is not a good one. I have to believe that the more recent actions (loss of U-Verse, the PR firm, and floating the equity fiasco) only reinforce the problems with current leadership.
I find it hard to believe that Canzano “exposed” anything to Muir and Tessier-Lavigne. It is more likely that they are getting blowback from a few hard-core sports fans. Stanford’s interests are not necessarily going to align with the other members of the PAC-12, so fixes to increase revenue may actually not work to Stanford’s benefit overall.
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - Spiny_Norman - 03-12-2019
John Canzano trying to keep the heat on Larry Scott.
https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/2019/03/canzano-the-view-from-the-pac-12-conferences-imperial-palace-lacks-visibility.html
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - 76lsjumb - 03-12-2019
I read somewhere that Scott was booed when introduced at the post-game ceremony of the Women's Tournament [those of us watching on TV, of course, didn't get to see that given that the deal Larry worked out with ESPN apparently included a whiplash-inducing switch from the basketball tournament to the all-important Canadian Axe-throwing Open]. As I recall, he was roundly booed [this time it WAS on TV] at the post-game ceremony of the last Pac-12 Football Championship. I imagine he may very well get the same treatment at the post-game ceremony of the men's basketball tournament in a few days.
I wonder what he's thinking when that happens over and over and...
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - oldalum - 03-12-2019
(12-02-2018, 09:14 AM)82lsju Wrote: Scott said. “… We go through a very rigorous process internally with our members, athletics directors, university CFOs, our presidents and chancellors. We have an audit and finance committee that regularly reviews our expenses, compared to other conferences, vis-a-vis conference operations. Separately we look at the costs of running a TV network, and compare that to information and data that we have with peers that run TV networks.This does not seem consistent with Canzano's description of the interaction with the A.Ds. Whom should we believe?
“What I can say with absolute confidence is: Not only are we comparable with other conferences, in terms of conference operations, but we’re very, very efficient. What we do for the amount of expense to run the TV network compared to peers is admirable.”
But bottom line, I don't understand the supposed powerlessness of the A.Ds. The university presidents have the power, they are presumably competent administrators, they have a lot on their plates, and one would think they rely heavily on their A.D. for opinions.
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - chrisk - 03-12-2019
(03-12-2019, 02:02 PM)oldalum Wrote:(12-02-2018, 09:14 AM)82lsju Wrote: Scott said. “… We go through a very rigorous process internally with our members, athletics directors, university CFOs, our presidents and chancellors. We have an audit and finance committee that regularly reviews our expenses, compared to other conferences, vis-a-vis conference operations. Separately we look at the costs of running a TV network, and compare that to information and data that we have with peers that run TV networks.This does not seem consistent with Canzano's description of the interaction with the A.Ds. Whom should we believe?
“What I can say with absolute confidence is: Not only are we comparable with other conferences, in terms of conference operations, but we’re very, very efficient. What we do for the amount of expense to run the TV network compared to peers is admirable.”
But bottom line, I don't understand the supposed powerlessness of the A.Ds. The university presidents have the power, they are presumably competent administrators, they have a lot on their plates, and one would think they rely heavily on their A.D. for opinions.
How would more money help Stanford's competitiveness? That does not seem to be what is holding Stanford back.
In fact, more money to all schools might put Stanford at a competitive disadvantage.
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - stupac2 - 03-12-2019
(03-12-2019, 01:50 PM)76lsjumb Wrote: I wonder what he's thinking when that happens over and over and...
Probably the same thing Roger Goodell thinks when he gets booed.
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - 2006alum - 03-12-2019
(03-12-2019, 02:02 PM)oldalum Wrote: I don't understand the supposed powerlessness of the A.Ds. The university presidents have the power, they are presumably competent administrators, they have a lot on their plates, and one would think they rely heavily on their A.D. for opinions.I've never understood this either. BobK, do you have any insights here? The best I can gather it that it's a coordination problem because no one university president cares enough to make the effort to get everyone together to seriously consider a change. But if the ADs are willing to do it, I have to imagine the presidents would defer to them.
(03-12-2019, 02:23 PM)chrisk Wrote: How would more money help Stanford's competitiveness? That does not seem to be what is holding Stanford back.This is why I am somewhat sanguine about how things play out regarding media deals. Yes, it hurts us when other conferences are getting more money than we are, but we're one of the few schools to run our AD in the black thanks to the wealth and generosity of our alumni donors. Among our PAC-12 peers, everyone getting brobdingnagian media checks will level that comparative advantage, and given our strict admissions standards, no amount of fancy equipment and locker rooms is going to improve our recruiting base in a meaningful way.
In fact, more money to all schools might put Stanford at a competitive disadvantage.
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - winflop - 03-12-2019
So in light of Canzano's latest missives about Limousine Larry's profligate spending and the actual (pathetic) net revenues being paid out to the schools from the Pac-12 Network, I dropped Howard Wolf another note today and was much less pleased with his response. Essentially his answer was that the ivory tower knows better but was unwilling to provide any further insight or explanation.
I think these matters have become sufficiently serious that President Tessier-Lavigne needs to explain where he stands on Larry Scott and why. According to Wolf there are significant number of alumni who like me are furious about Larry Scott's failed leadership and frustrated that the University presidents/chancellors aren't doing anything about it. So why does MTL not explain himself to the Stanford community that he supposedly represents...
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - fullmetal - 03-13-2019
(03-12-2019, 02:23 PM)chrisk Wrote: How would more money help Stanford's competitiveness? That does not seem to be what is holding Stanford back.
In fact, more money to all schools might put Stanford at a competitive disadvantage.
Maybe to the Pac-12, but Stanford has been doing ok within the Pac-12 as of late, current season notwithstanding. I don't think any of us should be satisfied with starving the entire Pac-12 just to gain an edge over Pac-12 teams. We should be thinking about the annual game vs. Notre Dame as well as building a team capable of winning it all.
Also, if you have a few more million dollars in the budget, a lot of that goes to football, and that's less fundraising/shmoozing the coaches have to do, and that's more time for the coaches to be planning/coaching/recruiting. It's more money for anything--recruiting flights, equipment, etc. It's all a zero-sum game at that level.
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - 82lsju - 03-13-2019
the last AD "annual report" I could find from 2016-17
https://www.daperdevelopment.com/athletics-report-on-annual-giving-201617
our ~$30m endowment payout that year is a big help
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - GK3 - 03-13-2019
(03-13-2019, 12:59 AM)fullmetal Wrote:(03-12-2019, 02:23 PM)chrisk Wrote: How would more money help Stanford's competitiveness? That does not seem to be what is holding Stanford back.
In fact, more money to all schools might put Stanford at a competitive disadvantage.
Maybe to the Pac-12, but Stanford has been doing ok within the Pac-12 as of late, current season notwithstanding. I don't think any of us should be satisfied with starving the entire Pac-12 just to gain an edge over Pac-12 teams. We should be thinking about the annual game vs. Notre Dame as well as building a team capable of winning it all.
Also, if you have a few more million dollars in the budget, a lot of that goes to football, and that's less fundraising/shmoozing the coaches have to do, and that's more time for the coaches to be planning/coaching/recruiting. It's more money for anything--recruiting flights, equipment, etc. It's all a zero-sum game at that level.
I wonder how much "fund raising" Stanford Football coaches really need to do now days? This year we are ranked by some pundits as having the most difficult schedule in all of college football and USC and UCLA are often ranked with us in the top 10 of tough schedules. With this kind of schedule, the possibility of making the CFP is probably very low, even with an outstanding team. Lose one game and you probably still make it, unless another member of the conference is unbeaten. Lose 2 and no matter if you win the conference, you are not going to get in.
While I think Larry Scott is a clown and should be given the opportunity to find new employment, I simply don't see how the amount of money distributed to each school, or his expenses has an significant impact on whether a school in the conference makes the college playoffs. If we want to have any chance to make the CFP, ever, first thing we need to do is load our non-conference schedule with nothing but cream puffs, year in and year out. There are not any gimmies in the conference anymore. Why make it so difficult and load up the non-conference schedule too.
(01-02-2019, 01:45 PM)Beeg_Dawg Wrote: "The brand isn’t broken because of public perception. It’s busted because of results."
What? Isn't the bottom line the same? How is rebranding and more money going to improve on the field/court results?
I am with you BD, I don't see how more money helps, unless we can start offering bonuses to each recruit who signs with us, plus they won't have to go to class either.
One more comment,
When you open the season with Northwestern, UCF, and USC in first 3 your asking for it. Win them, and you still have to beat Oregon, Washington, WSU, UCLA, Cal and ND among others. You are looking at a schedule where 7 or 8 teams are top 30 teams. If Oregon State ever turns it around, things in the North will be impossible.
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - BostonCard - 03-13-2019
We should not structure our schedule to try and outsmart the system to make the college football playoffs. Most of the time, our schedule will not make a difference between making the CFP and not making it, because, to be frank, we are unlikely to be good enough to be in consideration for a playoff spot.
Secondly, while it is certainly possible that a hard schedule will mean a second loss that would leave us out of the playoffs, there is a chance of the opposite, namely that we are one of several teams with only one loss, and that a weaker strength of schedule is used as an excuse not to have us go to the playoffs. That happened in the inaugural playoff (in 2014/15), where two Big-12 teams (Baylor and TCU) had one loss but were passed over in favor of tOSU because of the lack of a conference championship and weaker schedules.
So, instead of worrying about an unpredictable impact of our out of conference schedule, we ought to just schedule games we want to watch. I'm not particularly interested in watching three body bag games and non-descript opponents. I would rather watch exciting games against good opponents, even if they increase the probability of a loss.
BC
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - Mick - 03-16-2019
(03-13-2019, 02:50 PM)BostonCard Wrote: We should not structure our schedule to try and outsmart the system to make the college football playoffs. Most of the time, our schedule will not make a difference between making the CFP and not making it, because, to be frank, we are unlikely to be good enough to be in consideration for a playoff spot.
Secondly, while it is certainly possible that a hard schedule will mean a second loss that would leave us out of the playoffs, there is a chance of the opposite, namely that we are one of several teams with only one loss, and that a weaker strength of schedule is used as an excuse not to have us go to the playoffs. That happened in the inaugural playoff (in 2014/15), where two Big-12 teams (Baylor and TCU) had one loss but were passed over in favor of tOSU because of the lack of a conference championship and weaker schedules.
So, instead of worrying about an unpredictable impact of our out of conference schedule, we ought to just schedule games we want to watch. I'm not particularly interested in watching three body bag games and non-descript opponents. I would rather watch exciting games against good opponents, even if they increase the probability of a loss.
BC
I wouldn't mind if we had one body bag game a year. I think it should be San Jose State, every year, just like in the good old days.
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - BostonCard - 03-16-2019
A reminder that when we scheduled them, UCF was the body bag game. They were 0-12 the year we first played them.
BC
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - JeffInCorvallis - 03-16-2019
(03-16-2019, 08:38 AM)BostonCard Wrote: A reminder that when we scheduled them, UCF was the body bag game. They were 0-12 the year we first played them.
BC
This. Schedules are made 6-10 years in advance. It's a crap shoot to figure out who's gonna be good or not good that far out unless you are scheduling Ohio State or Alabama. UCF was a nobody before Scott Frost got there. I'm sure Stanford was thinking that Northwestern is a Power 5 that, on average, isn't in the AP top 25, and is a top academic school that we can get warm fuzzies playing.
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - JohnR34231 - 03-16-2019
(03-16-2019, 10:53 AM)JeffInCorvallis Wrote:(03-16-2019, 08:38 AM)BostonCard Wrote: A reminder that when we scheduled them, UCF was the body bag game. They were 0-12 the year we first played them.
BC
This. Schedules are made 6-10 years in advance. It's a crap shoot to figure out who's gonna be good or not good that far out unless you are scheduling Ohio State or Alabama. UCF was a nobody before Scott Frost got there. I'm sure Stanford was thinking that Northwestern is a Power 5 that, on average, isn't in the AP top 25, and is a top academic school that we can get warm fuzzies playing.
it seems like our strategy has been for some time to schedule a team we feel we can almost always beat, a good academic school that we can usually beat, and ND. Unfortunately the first two didn't work out so well this year,
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - BostonCard - 03-16-2019
(03-16-2019, 11:52 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote: it seems like our strategy has been for some time to schedule a team we feel we can almost always beat, a good academic school that we can usually beat, and ND. Unfortunately the first two didn't work out so well this year,
We haven't played the games yet!
BC
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - JohnR34231 - 03-16-2019
(03-16-2019, 12:36 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(03-16-2019, 11:52 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote: it seems like our strategy has been for some time to schedule a team we feel we can almost always beat, a good academic school that we can usually beat, and ND. Unfortunately the first two didn't work out so well this year,
We haven't played the games yet!
BC
Hey, if you want to declare a moratorium on all the complaining and groaning about what a difficult schedule we have this year, that's perfectly fine with me.
RE: How Larry Scott and Pac12 lose ground in football arms race - winflop - 03-17-2019
(03-16-2019, 11:52 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote:(03-16-2019, 10:53 AM)JeffInCorvallis Wrote:(03-16-2019, 08:38 AM)BostonCard Wrote: A reminder that when we scheduled them, UCF was the body bag game. They were 0-12 the year we first played them.
BC
This. Schedules are made 6-10 years in advance. It's a crap shoot to figure out who's gonna be good or not good that far out unless you are scheduling Ohio State or Alabama. UCF was a nobody before Scott Frost got there. I'm sure Stanford was thinking that Northwestern is a Power 5 that, on average, isn't in the AP top 25, and is a top academic school that we can get warm fuzzies playing.
it seems like our strategy has been for some time to schedule a team we feel we can almost always beat, a good academic school that we can usually beat, and ND. Unfortunately the first two didn't work out so well this year,
We don't know that yet. UCF has had two great years but in that time has lost many of the players that made them great. Northwestern is good, but not great.
Then again, with all the starters we have lost, I'm not sure that Stanford is even good.