11-26-2018, 03:31 PM
(11-26-2018, 02:35 PM)2006alum Wrote: Thus, I would put forward that the better measure is what we have now versus what we had prior to his negotiation of the conference's media and bowl packages. On that metric, the PAC-12 is in much better shape, especially since the product on both the football field and the basketball court has dropped off significantly over the last few seasons. There's a reason why the university presidents are quite happy with him.
That's not quite the right metric either, as it has ignored secular trends going on in college football since 2009 when Scott took over. The real question is how much more Scott would have been able to negotiate over a "replacement commissioner", which is not entirely clear. I agree that a lot of the criticism of Scott is overwrought, but I could have negotiated a better package now than what we had back before Scott took over.
With the value of sports product decelerating and perhaps even reversing, the real value of a commissioner will become apparent. It's easy to make money when the pie is enlarging; we'll see what happens when the pie is stable or shrinking.
BC
