There's a big reason why we've reached another conference realignment crossroads. It centers around a 51-year-old media executive who has been pulling the strings behind the scenes for a while.

No matter how this round of reorganization ends, Mark Shapiro will have a significant stake. The president of Endeavor -- a powerful global sports, entertainment and content company -- is currently advising the Big 12 on its next media rights deal after its current agreement expires ahead of the 2025 season.

You already know the Big 12 is in the middle of rearranging itself for the second straight summer as it gazes westward to possibly grab some Pac-12 members. At the same time, college athletics is anticipating the Big Ten's new media rights contract, expected to be announced any day. It could be the largest in history.

Those two things are not unrelated. Back in 2004, Shapiro, then an ESPN executive, offered prior Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany a take-it-or-leave it deal to renew with the Worldwide Leader. Delany refused amid what he perceived to be a lowball offer.


"You are rolling the dice," Shapiro infamously told Delany.

"Consider them rolled," Delany responded.

Delany further monetized his conference's rights by taking some of them in-house and starting his own channel. The Big Ten Network has been wildly successful, to the point that subsequent conference expansions to Nebraska, Maryland and Rutgers contributed to that success. Those moves provided more content for the network as well as linear cable partners Fox and ESPN.

Delany then made another brilliant move that got us to this moment. In 2017, he signed a short six-year, $2.64 billion deal with Fox and ESPN that has landed the Big Ten in the advantageous place it now finds itself: on the brink of signing a $1 billion-plus annual media rights deal.

The circle is almost complete. Shapiro is among those waiting for a Big Ten announcement that will almost assuredly reshape conference alignment and possibly college athletics. The size of the deal could compel further movement, force Notre Dame into the Big Ten and/or further consolidate power within the Big Ten (and SEC).



Perhaps none of it would have been possible without Delany's vision being accelerated by Shapiro's lowball bid. Thus far, Shapiro is getting high marks for his work with the Big 12. In fact, conference athletic directors are giddy at what Endeavor has already accomplished by positioning the Big 12 ahead of the Pac 12 -- if only slightly -- in terms of earning power.

Without Texas and Oklahoma, the Big 12 is valued north of $30 million annually per school, CBS Sports reported last week.

"The numbers look like they favor us," one Big 12 AD said. "Not by a huge amount. This is not like comparing Texas to Texas State. But there seems to be a noticeable difference."


Conference realignment notebook
Further expansion could create legal problems
The only conference commissioner to run a 16-team league in the modern era has a warning for the SEC and Big Ten: Beware of the legal ramifications of expanding beyond 16 teams.

Karl Benson, former commissioner the old WAC, presided over 16 members from 1996-98 before the league collapsed on itself because -- surprise -- the money didn't stretch far enough. When BYU was left out of the Bowl Alliance (the precursor to the BCS) despite becoming the first Division I-A (now FBS) team to win 14 games, Senate hearings were convened. The word "collusion" was tossed around as it related to the college football's powers holding other programs at bay. That word could pop up again.

"Maybe the reason Washington and Oregon didn't go with USC and UCLA [to the Big Ten] at the same time is the fear of collusion," the now-retired Benson told CBS Sports. "That's a legitimate concern of the damages that one conference does to another."


The stakes are higher this time. The SEC and Big Ten have a chance to monopolize the sport. Perhaps that has already happened. Administrators within both leagues are treading lightly out of an awareness of antitrust issues. Well, sometimes. SEC commissioner Greg Sankey has said he could stage a playoff with his own league.

"[No one has] ever gone in and gutted a conference," Benson added. "If the Big Ten gutted a conference and took Washington and Oregon, [if I was Pac-12 commissioner] George Kliavkoff, I might pursue antitrust action there."

Big Ten interest has cooled in Pac-12 teams
After the anxiety caused last week regarding further Big Ten expansion, industry sources have indicated the Big Ten is no longer as interested in adding California, Oregon, Stanford and Washington. Rightsholders were balking at paying the same amount for those schools as the 16 Big Ten schools going forward ($80 million-$100 million).


While those four programs may eventually have options, the Big Ten is concentrating on its new deal in 2023 while trying to lure Notre Dame, which has an open invitation. More and more stakeholders now believe the Fighting Irish will ultimately stay independent.

Opportunity lost
Let's not forget the Pac-12 had its chance to bolster its ranks last year when the Big 12 was wounded by the exits of Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC. Sources told CBS Sports this week the Pac-12 vote was 8-4 against taking any Big 12 schools. It would sure be interesting to be find out those Pac-12 schools who voted for expansion a year ago. We already know USC president Carol Folt "shut down" interest in expansion.

"We all would have jumped," one Big 12 AD told CBS Sports in reference to the Pac-12's interest in getting into Texas.


Pac-12's future may hinge on a time zone
Late-night West Coast games are referred to as occurring the "Fourth Window" -- after 10 p.m. ET. As much ribbing as the Pac-12 has received for those games (#Pac12AfterDark), there is no way around them. They are valuable programming that fills late-night TV slots with guaranteed ratings.

That's why the late window is key for the Pac-12. It may be why ESPN could remain engaged with the conference beyond Thursday's reported expiration of an exclusive 30-day negotiating window. Without the Pac-12, ESPN may not have late-night football. Fox is already set there with its Mountain West contract.

One industry course speculated: If ESPN doesn't get a piece of the Big Ten, does it go all-in with whatever is left of the Pac-12? More importantly, if ESPN does get a portion of the Big Ten, does the Pac-12 continue to market without either of the two biggest college football rightsholders (ESPN, Fox) having interest?


"That's a huge advantage for us to basically get what we want in expansion with [the Pac-12]," one Big 12 source told CBS Sports. (Cue the vultures.)

Big 12 remains well-positioned
Fox and the Big 12 disagreed five years ago when the conference was adding back its championship game. Figures weren't available, but sources said Fox didn't want to pay the value deemed for the game by the Big 12's media consultant. Last summer, former Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby issued as strident a takedown of ESPN as any of us had experienced. But when it comes to the nitty of the gritty of the business – media rights – bygones can always be bygones.

The Big 12 continues to be engaged with both Fox and ESPN for its new right deal, which will begin in 2025.

PAC-12 FRONT: There’s a real shortage of sourced, in-depth reporting when it comes to the Pac-12 Conference and its media rights conundrum. I’m only giving you what I can verify with multiple, well-placed sources for that reason. I appreciate you being here for it.

Three things:

• The 30-day exclusive negotiating window with ESPN and Fox is closing (or already closed) today. I think the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors have a solid idea of the early media rights valuation, but several ADs told me on Wednesday that they hadn’t yet seen numbers. I believe them. I don’t think the conference wants that information out there yet, and I expect the Pac-12 to slow play this. They’ll get ESPN’s first offer, but not its best offer. The rest of the market needs a chance to bid and that won’t come until after the Big Ten finalizes its media package. Any numbers you hear or see are just guesses until you hear and see them from a sourced entity.

• There were erroneous reports that originated from media members, particularly in Arizona, about the conference’s four corners schools meeting with the Big 12 Conference. I’ve talked with high-level sources at all four of those institutions (Utah, Arizona, ASU and Colorado). No meetings were even scheduled. It was all smoke and no fire. One of the ADs from those universities told me at the time, “No meeting with Big 12 and George (Kliavkoff) is kicking ass.”

Those who reported the meetings as fact, whiffed. They’re spitballing and guessing or just listening to the wrong people. As I wrote in a column on Wednesday, there is (and always has been) only one threat to the Pac-12 — the Big Ten. It remains the lone threat.

• I’m more interested in the “kicking ass” part of that AD’s quote, aren’t you? Kliavkoff fashions himself a problem solver. I want to see if he’s as good as advertised. On that front, I keep circling back to a potential “loose partnership” with the ACC, which the Pac-12 began exploring a few weeks ago.

If the Pac-12 is looking for creative and new revenue, inviting ESPN to enhance the value of the ACC isn’t a bad play. Not talking about a merger here. That would require the ACC’s grant of rights to be unwound and free some restless members. I’m talking about some creative early-season football and men’s basketball games and seeded crossover games during championship-game week in Las Vegas. Also, ESPN could combine the ACC Network with the Pac-12 Networks to generate a pile of fresh content for ESPN+. It makes sense for all parties and adds some value to what the Pac-12 is shopping.

• Expansion is still out there, too. San Diego State is interesting because it brings 1.1 million TV households in Southern California. Also, it would allow the conference to play some “home” games in Los Angeles at SoFi Stadium, potentially. I think SMU is a potential No. 2 target, if the conference expands. I also think Houston is interesting, depending on whether it can wiggle out of its Big 12 commitment.

After that, Fresno State, UNLV and Boise State have some selling points. However, I expect the presidents and chancellors of the conference won’t make an expansion move unless it’s a no-brainer. They’re not risk takers. Beyond San Diego State, I’m having a difficult time finding a great fit. I wonder if the better short-term plan is to try and retain UCLA and pair it with San Diego State. It’s a long, long shot. I don’t expect it to happen. But it’s absolutely what I’d try before moving on.

I’ll have more as this develops.

Another college football season is approaching. There’s a pile of uncertainty. Re-alignment has sparked fears and doubts in the Pac-12 Conference. The loss of USC and UCLA to the Big Ten was a gut punch. The conference is now trying to pull itself together while angling for media rights money and access to the College Football Playoff.

The Big Ten and SEC are busy chasing new revenue and monopolizing the playoff. The sports world is shifting. Loyalty, tradition and geography don’t seem to matter. And I wonder what happens to fan interest if large swaths of the Pacific and Mountain Time Zones are shut out of the sport.

Apathy, probably.

Frustration, for sure.

I’ve talked with more than half of the Pac-12 Conference athletic directors since the defection of USC and UCLA to the Big Ten was announced.

Maybe I’m naive, but none of them sound imminently concerned about the Pac-12 being further poached. Not two weeks ago. And not earlier this week. But I reached out to one of the South Division ADs on Friday to check in anyway. In the course of conversation, I asked whether the Big 12 had ever made contact.

Was that ever a thing?

Is it still?

The answer came back: “We’re focused on our task, working with incumbent media, and other nine schools, that I don’t have time nor attention for the Big 12 noise.”

What about the University of Arizona?

Are they a candidate to be poached?

“They are right there with us,” the AD told me.

Again, I could be a sucker. But I’m here to serve as a conduit between the entities I cover and my readers. I’m only going to give you sourced, in-depth reporting and analysis. I’ll tell you what I know. And right now, I have a multitude of Pac-12 ADs all essentially saying the same thing — they are galvanized and believe the conference has good options. Like you, I’m eager to learn what those are.

It may prove that Oregon, Washington and Stanford one day become targets of another round of expansion in the Big Ten. But nothing feels imminent and nobody is sitting by the telephone, waiting to see what happens.

There is some strategizing going on, however.

The SEC and Big Ten members are going to receive distributions from their conferences that dwarf what Pac-12 members receive. The SEC distributed nearly $55 million to each member in the last fiscal cycle (2021). That figure will grow, year over year. Meanwhile, the Pac-12 doled out $33.6 million to each member in 2020. And estimates of the Big Ten’s future distributions fall between $70 million to $100 million a year.

How will the Pac-12 members stay competitive?

Said one North Division AD: “Like we always have. We’ll just have to spend a larger percentage of what we receive on football and men’s basketball. We’ll make a larger investment, percentage-wise. That’s what UCLA was going to have to do if it stayed in the conference. That’s what we’ll all do — go heavy in football — because that’s where the biggest returns will always be.”

The University of Oregon, for example, spent $24.5 million on football in the last fiscal year (2021). That figure was skewed by the pandemic, but I’ll be curious to see if the Ducks and some other contenders ramp up spending in pursuit of the College Football Playoff. Also, I’ll follow where Oregon, and other Pac-12 universities, might cut back — Olympic sports.

Had UCLA stayed in the Pac-12, it would have been faced with that exact dilemma. I don’t think the Bruins would have dropped its prestigious track and field program. But I doubt UCLA would have funded the program as well as it will after the defection to the Big Ten.

Q: What are the odds the Big Ten or SEC adds more schools that fit as institutions and good markets, even if not great football of late? Colorado, ASU, Washington, Stanford may not raise Big Ten profits just yet, but they’re great fits otherwise. If Rutgers and Maryland did it, why not? — @cjmfour

A: The Big Ten added Rutgers and Maryland years ago to capture New York (7.45 million television households) and Washington, D.C. (2.45 million). Any expansion candidate would now have to generate $70 million-plus in projected media rights revenue for justification. Of those you mentioned, Stanford is the most interesting. Academically attractive, great brand, and 2.65 million TV households in the Bay Area. However, the projected media value of Stanford only falls somewhere around $38 million, according to the experts and analysts I consulted with. The other Big Ten members would have to be OK with subsidizing Stanford.

Q: Is the Big Ten playing hardball to get the likes of UW/UO/Cal/Stanford to get desperate and agree to an unequal revenue sharing deal below their fair value? — @TomeiTyler

A: The Big Ten already gobbled up UCLA and USC and it’s full… for now. It’s also finalizing its media rights packages (which cause a pause) and it will wait to see what Notre Dame does in the next 12-18 months (independent or no?). I think the Irish will stay independent as long as they believe they have access to the playoff and a good TV deal with NBC. I suspect those programs you mentioned would love to be with the “haves.” Maybe this process softens them up from a negotiating standpoint, but it’s more likely that the Big Ten is just going to exhale for a bit and see how this works out.

Q: While admittedly not at UW or UO level why is WSU considered a “have not”? Metrics like 1 million+ viewed games and average viewership put them third highest among the remaining Pac-12 schools, yet they are always lumped in with OSU (who they’ve beaten 8 straight btw). Perception? — @Smittytheclownn

A: Pullman (35,000 population) is a close approximation with Corvallis (58,000). The WSU and OSU campuses are located in true college towns. Both are state universities, both immediate TV markets are modest in size, and both fancy themselves agricultural schools. Also, both programs finished 7-6 last season on the field. You’re right, though, WSU won 61 games in the decade that ran 2010-2019. OSU only won 43 games in that same span. Head to head, it was a TKO. Still, those two get lumped together for the list of aforementioned reasons.

Q: Oregon is a household name in college football. Aren’t these experts being short sighted here? Shouldn’t they be looking at the opportunity here? If Oregon joined the Big Ten and got another $20-30 million per year, how much more relevant would they be? — @jbeam22

A: The math doesn’t work right now. The Big Ten members are going to receive $70 million to $100 million in distributions from their conference. If the Big Ten took Oregon, it would have to do it at a deep discount to justify it. The Ducks need to continue to invest heavily in football and make the playoff in football. I’m told by Pac-12 sources that an uneven distribution of bowl game revenue and units from the men’s basketball NCAA Tournament is on the table. Basically, if you win big in football and basketball, you get a larger share of the proceeds generated by your success. Previously, those winnings were split evenly among members. Oregon would benefit greatly from this new model, if it happens.

Q: A few weeks ago a alliance between the Pac-12 and the ACC sounded like the best option for both conferences going forward. I haven’t heard any talk of the alliance lately and heard no mention at Pac-12 media day of the ACC. — @dpstang

A: I’m told a “loose partnership” is still very much on the table. It solves financial problems for the ACC and Pac-12 and allows ESPN to get the Pacific Time Zone and a pile of new content for ESPN+.

Q: What are you reporting on Pac-12 valuations? And compared to the Big 12? Also status update on the negotiation window? — @vakaviti

A: The Pac-12’s 30-day, exclusive negotiating window with ESPN and Fox expired Aug. 4. Industry experts did not expect a deal to be announced in the early window. Former Fox Sports Networks president Bob Thompson told me, “I think the conference will be wise and want to see who is on the outside looking in when the Big Ten option ends. There’s going to be some folks who expressed an interest in collegiate football who aren’t going to get it in the Big Ten deal.”

The Pac-12 will slow play this, then eat what’s leftover in the market. I believe the Pac-12 has some advantages over the Big 12 right now. Kickoffs in the Pacific Time Zone are especially attractive to ESPN, for example. Also, the current Pac-12 Network content is coveted by ESPN+. I think the Pac-12 will eclipse the Big 12 for those reasons. But ideally, you’d like both conferences to do well on the media rights front to ensure the overall health of college football.