The Hotline mailbag publishes weekly. Send questions to wilnerhotline@
In case you missed it, last week’s mailbag examined the disappointing state of non-conference scheduling, particularly as it involves Washington, Oregon and USC.
If the Pac-12 was forced to add at least one football school and the only options were New Mexico, Air Force and Hawaii, which would you take? These are the only options, and you must take one. — @HPup2238072
The Hotline is perfectly comfortable being put on the spot, but be warned: The answer will come with a significant amount of context.
Also, we couldn’t help but notice UNLV isn’t an option. Is that because the Rebels are presumed to be the obvious first choice? Or because they have shown no interest in leaving the Mountain West? Either way, the exclusion adds nuance to the discussion.
Of the three schools listed, we would immediately eliminate Air Force. The Falcons aren’t an ideal institutional fit for the Pac-12 and don’t add much media value to a conference that has Colorado State. (The American makes far more sense as a destination because they could team up with Army and Navy.)
Hawaii is an intriguing option, partly because the Rainbow Warriors have produced bowl-caliber teams over the years but mostly because of their location in a talent-rich region — not just Hawaii itself but the Pacific Islands.
That said, our choice would be New Mexico.
If we knew coach Jason Eck would remain with the Lobos for the next five years, they would be a no-brainer expansion target for the Pac-12. He’s one of the best at the sub-Power Four level.
But our presumption is that Eck, whose team won nine games last season, will leave for a Big Ten job sooner than later. (He was an offensive lineman for Wisconsin.) What becomes of the Lobos at that point? It depends, to a great extent, on the identity of Eck’s successor.
Additionally, Albuquerque is a top-50ish media market, and New Mexico has a quality basketball tradition. In some ways, the Lobos actually make more sense for the Pac-12 as a basketball-only member that would pair well with Gonzaga, San Diego State and Utah State.
From our vantage point, New Mexico falls just behind UNLV in the Pac-12 expansion pecking order if both were interested and the conference had to expand.
But the Pac-12 isn’t facing an expansion imperative. It can thrive over the next five years with its current membership structure — yes, despite the scheduling issues that stem from having just eight football schools.
As deputy commissioner Rick Hart told reporters at Fresno State this summer: Pac-12 executives “have been very thoughtful and deliberate about, ‘You don’t solve operational problems through membership.’”
Our bottom line: None of UNLV, New Mexico, Hawaii or any other individual school will materially alter the Pac-12’s financial or competitive trajectory.
The conference’s media partners (CBS, The CW and USA Network) have the inventory and schedules they want. There is no wave of budget-altering revenue coming if the Rebels make the move. Or the Lobos.
In fact, our hunch is that a ninth football school would not generate any additional media revenue. Instead, expansion would force the current members to divide the existing pot by an extra mouth.
The only scenario likely to produce a significant change in valuation requires a handful of American schools (e.g., Memphis, Tulane and USF) to join the Pac-12. And that endgame doesn’t appear remotely realistic.
“The Pac-12 should ride it out for five years with what it has,” an industry source with expertise in the media rights space told the Hotline recently.
We concur.
The SEC and Big Ten seem set on a super league. If the Protect College Sports Act were to pass with their blessing, the money will flow to them via media deals and future expansion. If the PCSA fails, they just create a league that has the best brands. Why doesn’t Congress just give in? — Brady B
There is a lot to unpack here, so we’ll attempt to summarize the key points without getting sucked into the weeds, because the Protect College Sports Act (PCSA) has some skull-crushing weeds.
All is currently quiet on Capitol Hill because the Senate is on recess for August and not set to return until the week of Sept. 14. At that point, in theory, there will be a vote on the PCSA.
The question posed is accurate in that anything short of a law regulating college sports will accelerate a breakaway by the SEC and Big Ten. Initially, their new model will be limited to self-governance while they continue to compete against other conferences. Eventually, the breakaway could take the form of a super league.
What if the PCSA passes? That depends on the conference expansion provision in the bill, which effectively blocks realignment at the top of the food chain.
We suspect that component will be removed if the bill moves to the House of Representatives. Too many schools, including Miami and Florida State, are opposed to anything that prevents them from joining the SEC or Big Ten.
All of which leaves us with this: The legislation will only pass if the realignment door is allowed to remain open, and if it fails, the realignment door will … remain open.
Either way, SEC and Big Ten schools will have a path to expanding or the motivation to create a super league.
Why doesn’t Congress give them what they want? Because politics.
There are plenty of votes aligned with schools that don’t want the Big Ten and SEC to get what they want — or, at least, that don’t want to make it easy for them to get what they want.
With Nike’s stock troubles and change in strategy over the last decade and Phil Knight’s advanced age, what happens to Oregon (and to a lesser extent, other Nike schools) over the next five or 10 years? — Niall A
The scoreboard looks bleak for The Swoosh and its footwear and apparel empire.
Nike’s stock price a year ago: 77.4
Nike’s stock price today: 39.2
Nike’s market cap a year ago: $111 billion
Nike’s market cap today: $58 billion
Has there been any tangible impact on the company’s business arrangements with partner schools? Not that we have noticed.
In fact, the Hotline asked an industry source familiar with college apparel deals, and the answer was: “I have seen no impact whatsoever.”
Granted, that’s a small sample size. And granted, two Adidas schools, Miami and Indiana, played for the national championship in January. But we have seen no tangible evidence that Nike’s stock price is impacting school budgets and NIL dollars.
Has Phil Knight’s support of Oregon diminished in any fashion? Same response: Not from where we sit.
The Ducks are one of the mega-spenders on the talent acquisition market, and Knight’s personal fortune stands at roughly $25 billion. He is 88 and is slowing down, based on what we saw (in person) last year in Eugene. But it stands to reason that his alma mater is well positioned for many years.
That said, Nike vs. Adidas is absolutely a topic worth monitoring over time.
Will the Pac-12 speak up about not allowing former NFL players to play for a school in the conference? — @CelestialMosh
As of Friday morning, the Pac-12 was continuing to discuss the five-for-five eligibility matter but had no plans to vote on a policy or issue a statement — at least, there were no plans that it was willing to share with the Hotline.
As many readers are probably aware, the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten and SEC have taken forceful action and public stances against allowing NFL players back to college football.
At the Group of Six level, the Mountain West has adopted a policy preventing pro football players from returning to college. The Sun Belt reportedly did the same through a vote of the athletic directors.
So far, there’s no movement from the Pac-12, which certainly makes you wonder if the member schools would, in fact, accept former NFL players.
The issue is comparable to the Brendan Sorsby situation in a ludicrous fashion: Of course you can’t gamble on your own team; and of course, NFL players cannot play college football.
And yet, here we are.
How truly asinine is it that college players, who declared for the draft or signed pro contracts, think they can un-ring the bell and return to college athletics? — Ed H
Don’t forget, the NCAA created the situation by arbitrarily deciding to begin the five-for-five clock with athletes in the high school class of 2023.
That meant players who competed as fourth-year seniors in the 2025-26 academic year — and turned pro last winter or this spring — were excluded.
Had they known, some might have opted to remain in college. Predictably, they are trying to claw back that year of eligibility with the help of LSU coach Lane Kiffin and attorneys who are happy to profit off the situation.
Some believe the NCAA did this on purpose — that it excluded the class of 2022 players knowing the policy would lead to lawsuits that would lead to chaos and potentially convince Congress to pass limited antitrust protection.
That is giving a lot of credit to an organization that has made all the wrong moves for decades.
Do you have any journalistic integrity remaining? Why do you despise Texas Tech? — @BrettAlldredge
The question could be rooted in one of three areas:
— Our criticism of the Red Raiders for their attempt to play quarterback Brendan Sorsby, who gambled on his own team while at Indiana.
The Hotline stands by every word we published on the topic: Texas Tech was in the wrong, the Big 12 was in the right, and everyone outside of Lubbock knows it.
Sorsby broke the one unbreakable rule in every spot on every continent. Any attempt to let him on the field was laughable.
— The position of the Red Raiders on my AP preseason ballot: No. 23, which is 11 spots lower than they are ranked in the AP poll itself.
As noted previously, my preseason ballot reflects where I believe teams will finish in the final AP poll. I envision a few hurdles surfacing that prevent Texas Tech from replicating the success it had last season.
— My criticism on social media of coach Joey McGuire’s comment that it’s “amazing” Sorsby cannot compete this year while players who turned pro might take the field (for LSU and perhaps other schools).
Those are two starkly different issues. McGuire’s choice to conflate them is yet another indication of Texas Tech’s wholly misguided view of the Sorsby situation.
He broke a longstanding NCAA rule — the most important NCAA rule of them all: Don’t gamble on your own team.
The former pros are seeking to return to college because the NCAA arbitrarily implemented an eligibility rule this summer that left them on the outside looking in. It’s preposterous, yes. But they have a stronger argument than Sorsby by a factor of seven bajillion.
I see how successful Jedd Fisch has been with recruiting at Washington. Is this more about his selling the program or the effect NIL has on recruiting? — @BolfMike
The data doesn’t necessarily support your conclusion.
The Huskies are relying more on high school prospects than transfers, which is smart strategy — the rough equivalent of NFL franchises building through the draft rather than by free agency.
But in 2025, Washington’s high school recruiting class was merely No. 6 in the Big Ten, according to the 247Sports database, and in 2026, it was No. 5.
While successful on an absolute scale with the quantity of blue-chip talents, the Huskies have ranked below the Big Ten powerhouses.
And that, after all, is the question looming over Montlake during the Fisch era: Can the Huskies field a roster capable of winning the conference– or at least challenging Ohio State, Oregon, Indiana and Michigan for supremacy in a given year?
We should add this caveat: The recruiting rankings can be, and often are, misleading. Indiana was proof of that in 2025-26.
Also, Fisch is not a strong recruiter; he’s an elite recruiter. But that only goes so far when high school prospects and transfers alike are weighing the financial benefits of various offers.
It’s difficult to recruit championship-caliber rosters without having $35 million or $40 million available.
And to the best of our knowledge, the Huskies are not quite at that level.
Will new Cal money help pay off the Memorial Stadium debt? — @howiemationg
Cal’s fundraising is thriving, thanks in large part to chancellor Rich Lyons. His support of athletics creates a permission structure for the university community to contribute to NIL and scholarship endowments.
Whatever revenue flows into the athletic department helps cover an array of expenses, including coaching salaries, event operations and even the stadium debt.
But for all the focus on the expenses, the Bears — as we have addressed numerous times — have a revenue problem that is made worse by their partial-share status in the ACC.
Winning on the field is the best pathway to generating new revenue. Success leads to more ticket sales and to happier fans who are then more likely to contribute to NIL efforts that support the roster and produce even more wins, all neatly packaged in a virtuous circle.
The stadium debt service is not what it used to be. Former chancellor Carol Christ took approximately half of the annual cost (in raw dollars, about $9 million) and placed it on the university’s books.
It was the right thing to do given how much of the stadium remodel was tied directly to the earthquake retrofit.
*** Send suggestions, comments and tips (confidentiality guaranteed) to wilnerhotline@
*** Follow me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline
Leave a Reply